#97800 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun May 10, 2009 1:34 am Subject: [dsg] Vesak Discussions with Lodewijk, part 2. nilovg Dear friends, Lodewijk: It is depressing and sad to note how certain moods are totally uncontrollable. When I drop something to the floor, I am cursing immediately, I have dosa. It just happens all the time and I cannot prevent this. There is so much akusala in a day and I see no way to lessen it. -------- Nina: There is clinging to an idea of self who wants to prevent akusala. This will not help. You want to control in particular dosa, because dosa is accompanied by unhappy feeling and that is so unpleasant. You are not worried about attachment to pleasant objects, such as nice food, beautiful paintings or music. However, it is attachment and ignorance that condition dosa. When things are not the way we want them to be there are conditions for dosa. Only the anaagaami who has reached the third stage of enlightenment has eradicated dosa. The development of understanding of all realities of our life will lead to the decrease of dosa and eventually to its eradication. We can begin to see it as a mere conditioned dhamma. We read in "Human Types" (Puggala Pa~n~natti), the Threes, no 9: "What sort of person may be compared to a mark on stone? Here, a certain person becomes repeatedly angry and that anger endures for along time, just as a mark inscribed on a stone is indelible that it cannot be effaced soon either by wind or by water, but lasts long... What sort of person may be compared to a mark on earth? Here a person gets angry repeatedly, but his passion does not last for a long time; for instance, a mark on earth disappears quickly either by wind or by water and does not last long.... What sort of person may be compared to a mark on water? Here, a certain person who, even if he is spoken to in a strong and harsh and unpleasant manner, is connected and coherent, and makes himself agreeable. Just as a mark on water disappears quickly and does not last long..." It depends on the degree of understanding whether dosa is strong or weak, or does not appear anymore. If you try to suppress dosa with an idea of self, this is counteractive. The remedy is understanding of whatever appears, be it akusala, kusala, pleasant or unpleasant, as a conditioned dhamma, not self or belonging to a self. First the wrong view of self has to be eradicated before the other defilements can be eradicated stage by stage. The sotaapanna has eradicated wrong view, biut he still has clinging and aversion. He does not take them for self anymore and defilements do not motivate anymore akusala kamma that leads to an unhappy rebirth. At the following stages of enlightenment defilements are subsequently eradicated until all defilements are eradicated at the stage of arahatship. **** Nina. #97801 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun May 10, 2009 2:12 am Subject: [dsg] Dhamma with Khun Bussabong, no 3. nilovg Dear friends, Khun Bong wanted to help others who had Dhamma questions. She was wondering how she could help. Acharn: Help them to understand this moment. People remember names of realities, and they think about realities, but they do not understand the reality appearing at this moment. They should understand seeing appearing at this moment. Seeing-consciousness is an element that knows something and it is dependent on eyesense. What arises must fall away and then the image, the nimitta, remains. We perceive the image of visible object, and this is the world of dreams. However, each reality that arises falls away and nothing remains. We are misled by the world of thinking because of ignorance. Those who are born must die, and where is a self who goes somewhere? Kh. Bong: I know the difference between kusala and akusala, but is this by thinking of them afterwards? Acharn: Is lobha kusala or akusala? Kh. Bong: I can answer this: akusala. Acharn: We do not really understand lobha, we merely think of a concept we have of lobha. Lobha has many degrees, it can be coarse or more subtle. When we are seeing, lobha follows immediately but we do not realize this. Throughout our whole life lobha follows the experiences through the six doors. We understand only a concept of lobha, not the reality of lobha.When lobha arises and performs its function we do not know that there is lobha. When sati and pa~n~naa arise the characteristics of dhammas appear. We heard about naama and ruupa which are different types of realities. We understood this by listening to the Dhamma. When sati and pa~n~naa arise the charactreistics of naama and ruupa appear and there is no need to name them or to think about them. There is no need to think that there are two kinds of dhamma: one kind of dhamma that knows or experiences an object and one kind that does not know anything. Ruupa and naama appear now, but when sati and pa~n~naa do not arise they are not known. However, right understanding can be accumulated. --------- Nina. #97802 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun May 10, 2009 3:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) sarahprocter... Hi Rob Ep, (I overlooked this message #97706, so the qus may have already been answered....) --- On Sun, 3/5/09, Robert Epstein wrote: >Hmn....well I am happy to hear about the javana cittas working in groups of 7 and accumulating understanding, as well as vitakka and other factors. That gives a bit of the structure of what I was thinking of. Thanks. >On the working of vitakka w/panna, how would the repeated actions of vitakka accumulate? .... S: The 'laying hold' of the particular object make it easier for further 'laying hold' of that same kind of object. For example, when a baby is told enough times who 'Daddy' is, the association is made and the baby starts calling out 'Daddy'. Similarly, when vitakka 'lays hold' of visible object often enough with panna, such (right) vitakka accumulates and arises more often. ... >Is there a way for me to get a better picture of this? The image I have of it is that vitakka takes a hit at the dhamma and feeds its finding to panna at that moment, then in a successive moment hits at the dhamma again and adds this to the current moment of panna; ie, there's been an accumulation passed on of a bit more knowledge to panna between the first arisen vitakka factor and the next. Would that make sense of the operation? ... S: Yes, when vitakka 'takes a hit' it conditions all accompanying mental factors, including panna in this case. Similarly, panna conditions the vitakka and other mental factors. They all condition each other by sahajata paccaya (conascence condition. Also, each citta, with all its accompanying mental factors, conditions the subsequent citta and mental factors by anantara paccaya (proximity condition). Furthermore, the vitakka and panna now can condition vitakka and panna in the future, even aeons into the future, by pakatupanissaya paccaya (natural decisive support condition). So, in brief, the way that they condition each other and successive occurrences of each occurs according to many different complex conditions. So, I think you're on the right track, but the picture is a little more complex. Needless to say, the important point is that we're talking about various dhammas conditioning each other without any self or atta involved. Hope this clarifies a little.... Metta, Sarah ======= #97803 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun May 10, 2009 4:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 24 sarahprocter... Dear Nina (Ken H, Lodewijk & all), I think the following is important and the same point I was trying to make in the other discussion with the example of someone absorbed in their work: --- On Thu, 7/5/09, Nina van Gorkom wrote: >.....When there is still wrong view, we may think that > we cannot > be aware while doing complicated things. We may think that > at such > moments awareness is more difficult than when we are > walking or doing > things which do not require much attention. In reality > there is no > difference. If one believes that there is a difference, one > does not > know what right awareness is. If there is less of a > preconceived idea > that in particular situations awareness is impossible, > there can be > awareness also while doing complicated things. We may be > absorbed in > what we are doing, but that doesn’t matter. Being > absorbed is a > reality, it can be known as only a type of nåma. Realities > appear > already because of their own conditions, and gradually we > can learn > to study their characteristics. ... S: The more understanding develops, the less concerned one is about what the situation is with regard to the development of right understanding and right awareness. Never mind whether one has dropped something and is cursing (!) or whether we're enjoying the fine weather or absorbed in a complicated task -- just different namas and rupas arising to be known when they appear without any special effort or 'doing' of any kind. Metta, Sarah ======== #97804 From: "gazita2002" Date: Sun May 10, 2009 4:29 am Subject: Re: Vesak Discussions with Lodewijk, part 2. gazita2002 hallo Nina and Lodewijk, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear friends, > > Lodewijk: It is depressing and sad to note how certain moods are > totally uncontrollable. When I drop something to the floor, I am > cursing immediately, I have dosa. It just happens all the time and I > cannot prevent this. There is so much akusala in a day and I see no > way to lessen it. azita: I think all moods are uncontrollable, not just dosa, but how quickly it can change. On the nite of Vesak I had to do nite shift which starts at 10.30pm. As I was getting ready to go, having dosa cos it was wet, misty and cold outside. I turned the radio on and there was some monks chanting in Pali, very rarely heard on aussie radio :-), so dosa changed to delight and off I wet into the cold, wet nite thinking of the Buddha. Kusala, akusala, vipaka, avayakata, all day, all nite, what to do? Just have patience, courage and good cheer, azita #97805 From: "gazita2002" Date: Sun May 10, 2009 4:50 am Subject: [dsg] Re: effort. gazita2002 hallo Sarah, that little book and I appear to have parted company, I cant find it, it cant find me :-) however, I do recall the good thief/bad thief discussion. Good thief picks the lock, creeps in, takes only what he/she came for, does not make a big mess eg graffiti all over the walls, broken furniture; leaves and shares the gains with friends. Bad thief busts in with a sledge hammer, messes up the whole place, takes everything or breaks what he/she cant carry, spits at the family foto, leaves and does not share anything. Please no one ask for the sutta for that story, its my imaginative workup, as you have probably guessed as there were no fotos in the Buddha's day!!!! patience, courage and good cheer, azita --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > > Hi Rob Ep, (Connie or Azita) > > --- On Fri, 8/5/09, Robert Epstein wrote: > > >J: Conventionally speaking, of course, that would be so. But in terms of moment-to-moment dhammas, there may be kusala (or akusala) arising at any time. For example, stealing can be done with or without restraint as to the use of force or violence. > ... > R:>My mother had that idea as well; she thanked a mugger who took her money for not hurting her. Don't know if he fully appreciated it or not, but I will let my Mom know that she is unknowingly a Buddhist. :-) > ... > S: I'm always impressed when people like your mother manage to look on the bright side at such times and in this case to even show her appreciation. I'd like to hear more such stories about your mother's good example. > > There is a sutta in Anguttara Nikaya about skilful and unskilful thieves. Perhaps Connie or Azita can find it - I seem to recall Azita reading it out and asking about it once... > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======== > #97806 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun May 10, 2009 5:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) -2b sarahprocter... Dear Scott, I forgot to give the reference for the quote: --- On Sat, 9/5/09, sarah abbott wrote: "By 'consciousness' (citta) is meant that which thinks of its object, is aware variously. Or, inasmuch as this word 'consciousness' is common to all states or classes of consciousness, that which is known as worldly, moral, immoral, or the great inoperative, is termed 'consciousness. ' because it arranges itself in a series (cinoti, or, its own series or continuity) by way of apperception in a process of thought. And the resultant is also termed 'consciousness' because it is accumulatd (cito) by kamma and the corruptions. " .... Expositor (Atthasaalinii), Analysis of Terms, p.84 Metta Sarah ======== #97807 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun May 10, 2009 5:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sacca Yamaka sarahprocter... Dear Chew & all, --- On Fri, 8/5/09, Chew wrote: >Yes, all mundane sankhara dhammas are included in sankhara dukkha. >(The explanation I got it from here: The Great Discourse on the Wheel of Dhamma http://web.ukonline .co.uk/buddhism/ dhamack4. htm) 3. sankhara dukkha: In addition to this equanimous feeling (upekkha vedana), all the other formations of nama and rupa of the mundane sphere are also called sankhara dukkha as they need constant conditioning. ... S: Like Nina, I'd rather say that all the other namas and rupas of the mundane sphere are included in sankhara dukkha because *they are also conditioned* and fall away. I think that *need constant condtitioning* can be misunderstood. Just a minor detail. ... >Feeling of happiness also requires constant conditioning for its maintenance .... S: The point is that even sukkha (happy feeling) is sankhara dukkha because it is conditioned and falls away instantly. It is not *maintained* and isn't *constantly conditioned* as I understand the terms. What do you think? ... >and as such should be classified as sankhara dukkha, but the commentators left it out of this classification as it had been given a separate name as viparinama dukkha. Nevertheless, it should be regarded as sankhara dukkha too since it is very plain that considerable application is needed for its maintenance. .... S: I would put it that it is to be regarded as sankhara dukkha because it is impermanent like all other sankhara dhammas. Any clinging to it thereby leads to grief. .... >The three types of dukkha explained above should be well understood as a complete grasp of these types will help in understanding the Truth of Suffering. ... S: I agree that it's helpful to understand these three types. Usually people just think of dukkha as dukkha dukkha, the first type - the unpleasant feelings. ----- >And the number below in fact was given by Sayadaw U Nandamala in his Sacca Yamaka talks, which I listened to: Sankhara dukkha: (55 upekkhasahagatam citta) + dukkha-dukkha (2 domanasasahagatam citta + 1 kaya dukkha = 3 mental states) + vaparinama dukkha (62 somanasasahagatam citta + 1 kaya sukha = 63 mental states) = 121 citta in total. .... S: In other words, sankhara dukkha refers to all mundane cittas accompanied by unpleasant, pleasant or neutral feeling. ... >As Sayadaw said, Magga and Phala citta also have the nature of change. (By nature , its rise and fall.) ... S: Yes, they are also sankhara dhammas, but are not included in the classification above under sankhara dukkha in Sacca Yamaka, I assume, because they cannot be clung to. Thanks again for all the interesting and helpful detail. Please keep sharing these passages. Metta, Sarah p.s Btw, I looked at the photos of your group on the past retreat - very nice indeed! What a good opportunity to study the Yamaka together. ======= #97808 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun May 10, 2009 5:51 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) sarahprocter... Hi Ken H (& Nina), --- On Fri, 8/5/09, kenhowardau wrote: >As you say, it's always 'better just to develop understanding which of course is very different from trying to have understanding and awareness.' >Now my turn: There is never anything wrong in reminding ourselves about the Dhamma. However, if we are thinking of it as 'things to do' then we are missing the point (the actual Dhamma) entirely. >So, how can we guard against thinking of the Dhamma in terms of 'things to do?' Well, the thing to do (ha, ha) is to remember the Dhamma is all about the present moment. If we are thinking about creating conditions for a "better" "future" moment then we are missing the point. How could the Dhamma be about something better, or something future, when there is only the present moment? ... S: Yes, (ha, ha!). It comes back every time to the understanding now of seeing and visible object and so on. Otherwise we're lost in speculations and questions about various situations of one kind or other, even if those situations are innocuous-sounding ones about 'whether to give someone an alcoholic drink', 'studying more Abhidhamma', 'having more right effort', 'having awareness' or ' more metta' in one's life. Self is always lurking in the background in one guise or other. ... >The present moment is composed entirely of conditioned dhammas. There is no self there. Therefore, the Dhamma can't be about the self doing anything. ... S: And therefore, the development of the path has nothing to do with the understanding, concentration, effort, awareness and so on of a self doing anything. It's just the development of the path factors, beginning with the right understanding of the naama or ruupa appearing now. Perhaps Lukas and others would also like to join in the thread. In any case, back in your court now! Metta, Sarah p.s. Nina, so glad you were able to share some of the thread inc. Ken H's great comments with Lodewijk. I'm interested to hear about your further discussion. ====== #97809 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun May 10, 2009 7:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vesak Discussions with Lodewijk, part 2. nilovg Dear Azita, What a good story to illustrate how quickly cittas change. Thank you, Nina. Op 10-mei-2009, om 13:29 heeft gazita2002 het volgende geschreven: > azita: I think all moods are uncontrollable, not just dosa, but how > quickly it can change. > > On the nite of Vesak I had to do nite shift which starts at > 10.30pm. As I was getting ready to go, having dosa cos it was wet, > misty and cold outside. I turned the radio on and there was some > monks chanting in Pali, very rarely heard on aussie radio :-), so > dosa changed to delight and off I wet into the cold, wet nite > thinking of the Buddha. > > Kusala, akusala, vipaka, avayakata, all day, all nite, what to do? > Just have patience, courage and good cheer, #97810 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun May 10, 2009 7:38 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 24 nilovg Dear Sarah and friends, Op 10-mei-2009, om 13:20 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > The more understanding develops, the less concerned one is about > what the situation is with regard to the development of right > understanding and right awareness. Never mind whether one has > dropped something and is cursing (!) or whether we're enjoying the > fine weather or absorbed in a complicated task -- just different > namas and rupas arising to be known when they appear without any > special effort or 'doing' of any kind. ------- N: People stumble over not doing anything. But they forget that when understanding understands that whatever appears is a conditioned dhamma which cannot be changed by anybody, there is no hindrance to the development of pa~n~naa. Whereas if one worries about creating favorable conditions the idea of self hinders the development of pa~n~naa. Nina. #97811 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun May 10, 2009 12:09 pm Subject: Re: Actors on the stage. was: Are 'not-self' vs are not 'self' nilovg Dear Rob Ep, I was thinking of you when typing about actors and a play, a simile used by Kh Sujin to illustrate non-self. There is no self who directs the drame of life. Op 10-mei-2009, om 6:49 heeft Robert Epstein het volgende geschreven: > Instead, awakening to anatta must be the clear seeing or > understanding as each nama and rupa arise that "there is no self > and they are not part of self" that becomes apparent about every > arising dhamma. So, that is my view... ------- N: This is part of a quote from my "Dhamma in Egypt and Turkey" some twenty years ago, which I am typing out at this moment : I like the idea that seeing and the other cittas arising in its train have nothing to do with hearing. Different acts. And so short, how life flies! And we never know in life what will happen, life is full of surprises, may be happy ones or unhappy ones. It is all conditioned. **** Nina. #97812 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun May 10, 2009 12:19 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vesak Discussions with Lodewijk, part 2. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and Lodewijk) - -----Original Message----- From: Nina van Gorkom To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sun, 10 May 2009 3:34 am Subject: [dsg] Vesak Discussions with Lodewijk, part 2. Dear friends, Lodewijk: It is depressing and sad to note how certain moods are totally uncontrollable. When I drop something to the floor, I am cursing immediately, I have dosa. It just happens all the time and I cannot prevent this. There is so much akusala in a day and I see no way to lessen it. -------- Nina: There is clinging to an idea of self who wants to prevent akusala. This will not help. You want to control in particular dosa, because dosa is accompanied by unhappy feeling and that is so unpleasant. You are not worried about attachment to pleasant objects, such as nice food, beautiful paintings or music. However, it is attachment and ignorance that condition dosa. When things are not the way we want them to be there are conditions for dosa. Only the anaagaami who has reached the third stage of enlightenment has eradicated dosa. The development of understanding of all realities of our life will lead to the decrease of dosa and eventually to its eradication. We can begin to see it as a mere conditioned dhamma. --------------------------------- Howard: My opinion on this: The reaction of anger is due to past conditions - largely past kamma, but also present conditions - particularly including the absence of mindful attention. But with mindful attention, deconditioning can occur. The mindful attention can produce insight into the nature of whatever arises, including the about-to-blossom anger, revealing it as a source of distress, and relinquishment can result. Mindful attention to whatever occurs, without mental concocting - without thought and emotional proliferation, can serve to purify the mind. ------------------------------ We read in "Human Types" (Puggala Pa~n~natti), the Threes, no 9: "What sort of person may be compared to a mark on stone? Here, a certain person becomes repeatedly angry and that anger endures for along time, just as a mark inscribed on a stone is indelible that it cannot be effaced soon either by wind or by water, but lasts long... What sort of person may be compared to a mark on earth? Here a person gets angry repeatedly, but his passion does not last for a long time; for instance, a mark on earth disappears quickly either by wind or by water and does not last long.... What sort of person may be compared to a mark on water? Here, a certain person who, even if he is spoken to in a strong and harsh and unpleasant manner, is connected and coherent, and makes himself agreeable. Just as a mark on water disappears quickly and does not last long..." It depends on the degree of understanding whether dosa is strong or weak, or does not appear anymore. If you try to suppress dosa with an idea of self, this is counteractive. The remedy is understanding of whatever appears, be it akusala, kusala, pleasant or unpleasant, as a conditioned dhamma, not self or belonging to a self. First the wrong view of self has to be eradicated before the other defilements can be eradicated stage by stage. The sotaapanna has eradicated wrong view, biut he still has clinging and aversion. He does not take them for self anymore and defilements do not motivate anymore akusala kamma that leads to an unhappy rebirth. At the following stages of enlightenment defilements are subsequently eradicated until all defilements are eradicated at the stage of arahatship. **** Nina. =============================== With metta, Howard #97813 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun May 10, 2009 6:16 pm Subject: Object-Condition buddhatrue Hi Nina, I was reading your online book about the 24 Conditions of the Abhidhamma and I had a question about something you wrote: "Only one object can be experienced at a time. We may wonder why we experience a particular object and why we shift our attention from one object to another. The "Atthasalini" (Expositor II, Book II, part I, Ch III, 333,334) explains that the rupas which can be experienced through the senses become objects "by virtue of deliberate inclination" or "by virtue of intrusion". We should remember that even following our own inclination is conditioned, that there is no self who can decide about the experiencing of objects." To me, the last sentence seems contradictory. If an object is experienced through "deliberate inclination", that spells "control" to me. But then you give your own commentary to the Abhidhamma and state that "we should remember...that there is no self who can decide about the experiencing of objects." So, which is it: can we decide to experience a particular object or can't we? Metta, James #97814 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun May 10, 2009 7:56 pm Subject: Re: Alteration within a single moment (was, Not self vs. not-self) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > Just getting round to tackling this lengthy post of yours (97594) which covers a number of interesting topics, so will split it into parts. > > > ---------------------- > > Please describe how an "alteration" can be noted within a single moment? > > ---------------------- > > Each dhamma is said to have an arising, persisting and ceasing phase, within its single moment of "being", and that arising and ceasing can be known to (highly developed) panna. Such panna would see the dhamma's arising (from not having been), and it's falling away (to no longer being). A dhamma does not arise and fall away within one moment; it takes a number of moments; so how can panna see the arising and falling away in a single moment? This seems to be self-contradictory. It makes more sense to say that over the course of several cittas, panna re-arising and accumulating, being passed from one citta to the next, will pass on and note the phases of arising and falling away over several moments, in order to accumulate and understand the arising and falling away process. There is no reason why it all has to take place in a single moment. I think it is made clear that these processes are cumulative and since cittas have no problem passing on information from one citta to the next, through bhavanga cittas and other mechanisms, there is no reason why this should trouble anyone. > > ---------------------- > The only way that this could be so if within that same single moment is retained the comparison of the state of the dhamma in the preceding moment. I suppose this is possible through the cetasika responsible for memory of what has just occurred. Is that how this takes place? > > ---------------------- > > I don't think I can give a definitive answer to that. But bear in mind that panna is cumulative and so, as I understand it, each moment of arising panna includes what has become known to panna previously. Well this makes sense and if so, is a reasonable explication of the process. Perhaps it will be resolved! > > > ---------------------- > Does vipaka note the "alteration" from what has just occurred to the state of the dhamma now? > > ---------------------- > > Do you mean panna? Vipaka is the result of kamma. Perhaps I am thinking of vitakka, the knowing cetasika that "turns over" and "beats" the dhamma to get a confession out of it as to its true nature. :-) > > > ---------------------- > > "Mode of alteration" has to have a meaning, it cannot just be a blank term. > > ---------------------- > > Agreed :-) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #97815 From: "szmicio" Date: Sun May 10, 2009 9:09 pm Subject: Re: Vesak Discussions with Lodewijk, part 2. szmicio Dear Lodewijk > Lodewijk: It is depressing and sad to note how certain moods are > totally uncontrollable. L: They are not yours, so they are out of control. If they'd be yours you can change akusala for kusala,unpleasant feeling for pleasant one. I like anatta-lakkhana sutta. It's always a good reminders. Knowing that all dhammas are out of control(anatta), can be a condition for more metta to arise. When we realise that we cannot chose what we experience we have more patience to another people. when people kill or do another kind of akusala we can realize those are diffrent moments of consciousness that do that , not them. In the Metta Section in Visudhimagga there was said that first we have to wish metta for ourselves and that's mean that we should develop right understanding of citta, cetasika and ruupa within ourselves. >There is so much akusala in a day and I see no >way to lessen it. L: When there is less Self involved, there is less suffering. My best wishes Lukas. #97816 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon May 11, 2009 1:26 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Object-Condition nilovg Hi James, Op 11-mei-2009, om 3:16 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > The "Atthasalini" (Expositor II, Book II, part I, Ch III, 333,334) > explains that the rupas which can be experienced through the senses > become objects "by virtue of deliberate inclination" or "by virtue > of intrusion". We should remember that even following our own > inclination is conditioned, that there is no self who can decide > about the experiencing of objects." > > To me, the last sentence seems contradictory. If an object is > experienced through "deliberate inclination", that spells "control" > to me. But then you give your own commentary to the Abhidhamma and > state that "we should remember...that there is no self who can > decide about the experiencing of objects." So, which is it: can we > decide to experience a particular object or can't we? -------- N: I understand your question. The Atthaslin gives examples of experiencing an object with deliberate inclination: when the bowl (of a monk) is filled with food and offered to him, one who takes up a lump and examines whether it is hard or soft, is considering only the element of solidity, although heat as well as motion are present. -------- The Commentary gives examples first in a conventional sense, thus, taking the lump of food, in contrast to the other example of intrusion of object: falling down and knocking his head. But then, on closely examining the object, he speaks about the ultimates (paramattha dhammas) of rupas that are object. The four great Elements of solidity, cohesion, heat and motion always arise together, but only one rpa at a time can be experienced. Solidity, heat and motion are tangible object, but cohesion cannot be experienced through the bodysense, only through the mind-door. In both cases, the case of deliberately taking a lump of food, and the case of knocking his head, only one rupa at a time can be the object that is experienced. The experience itself is result of kusala kamma or akusala kamma of the past and nobody can direct what result kamma produces at a particular moment. When someone takes a lump of food, it may be very hot, he may burn himself. In that case the element of heat is experienced. Nobody can tell beforehand what will be the object that is experienced. He may deliberately take a lump of food, but what will appear? Solidity, or heat, only one object at a time and nobody can predict this. Thus, whatever we do, whatever we experience, the conditions that operate are most intricate and cannot be controlled by a self. Further on another example is given of changing an object by one's wish: But how does the mind shift from an object? In one of two ways:- by ones wish, or by excess of (a new) object. To expand: - one who goes to festivities held in honour of monasteries, etc., with the express wish of paying homage to the various shrines, to bhikkhus, images, and of seeing the works of carving and painting, and when he has paid his respects and seen one shrine or image, has a desire to pay homage to, and see another, and goes off. This is shifting by ones wish...." Even the wish is conditioned, thus, depending on other factors, accumulated inclinations. ------ J: So, which is it: can we decide to experience a particular object or can't we? --------- N: No, we can't. In conventional sense it may seem that we can decide this, we go somewhere and take a lump of food. But what is that lump of food? It consists of elements and only one element at a time is tangible object at a particular moment. When the Abhidhamma deals with object, this has a very precise meaning. It is different from what is meant in a more general, conventional sense. ******* Nina. #97817 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon May 11, 2009 1:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vesak Discussions with Lodewijk, part 2. nilovg Dear Lukas and Howard, thank you for your reactions and I passed them on to Lodewijk. Nina. Op 11-mei-2009, om 6:09 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > They are not yours, so they are out of control. If they'd be yours > you can change akusala for kusala,unpleasant feeling for pleasant one. > I like anatta-lakkhana sutta. It's always a good reminders. #97818 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon May 11, 2009 2:02 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Vesak Discussions with Lodewijk, part 3. nilovg Dear friends, Lodewijk: I think that progress in wisdom is not possible in this world today. In the Buddha's time it was different, there were not the same distractions as we have today in the form of T.V. , Internet or other forms of communication. Retiring from worldly life would be better. This was the ideal way the Buddha showed. A monk has less distractions. Laypeople could become arahats but these were exceptional cases. ------- Nina: Also at the Buddha's time people were full of defilements, they had lobha, dosa and moha. The Buddha showed the way to develop understanding of realities so that eventually defilements could be eradicated. Both monks and laypeople can develop right understanding of realities. It depends on one's inclinations whether one can follow the monk's life. If one goes forth without any understanding of realities, just with an idea of self who wants to reach the goal, he will not reach the goal. ------- L: Why is it that I cannot develop understanding? ------ Nina: First we have to understand that there is not an 'I' who can develop understanding. I quote from my Dhamma in Egypt and Turkey, where Kh Sujin said: We should not worry about enlightenment, but what about the understanding of this moment? Understanding will go on from moment to moment. There is no other way but the understanding of the reality of this moment. We read, consider and discuss Dhamma just in order to understand the reality of this moment. When we pay attention to this moment we do not worry about progress or lack of progress. Such thoughts are motivated by a self who wants progres or who wants to change the situation. It is because of conditions that one is in a particular situation, that one is monk or layperson. Quote from Vipassana Letter 4: Patience and perseverance are needed for the development of right understanding. Life passes so rapidly, we are advancing in years and we do not know what our next life will be. We do not know whether we shall have the opportunity to develop pa again, and therefore, should we not speed up our practice? We all may be inclined to think in this way, but are we aware of such a moment of thinking? If we are not mindful of it as a conditioned reality we are neglecting the Dhamma, not profiting from the treasures of the teachings in full. We are so absorbed in the stories we are thinking of and are forgetful of the reality of citta which thinks. Thinking is a reality arising because of conditions, it is non-self. Lokuttara citta cannot arise all of a sudden, insight has to be developed in stages, on and on. It has to be developed just now, not at some other time. Defilements are anatt, it is not possible to get rid of them quickly, they arise because they have been accumulated for aeons, they are conditioned. They can be realized as nma when they appear. If we get to know them as they are there is already a beginning of a cure, pa does its work. Pa is the most important factor because it is pa which can eradicate ignorance and wrong view. There is no need to think so much of effort, volition and concentration. Don't we usually think of effort, volition and concentration with an idea of self who wants to exert control? We should carefully examine ourselves as to this point because such an idea hinders the development of right understanding. We may not attain enlightenment in this life, but what has been learnt is never lost. It has been accumulated and it can appear in another life. A moment of right understanding now, of our natural life, is a precious moment. It is more valuable than thinking of the future.... Khun Sujin writes in her book "A Survey of Paramattha Dhammas" (Citta, Ch 16) : "... Someone may be unhappy and he may worry about it that he is growing older and that sati arises very seldom. When one worries the citta is akusala. We should not because of the Dhamma have akusala cittas, we should not be worried. The Buddha taught the Dhamma in order that people would be encouraged to apply it, develop it with perseverance and be inspired by it. Akusala arises when there are conditions , there is no self who can prevent its arising. When akusala citta has already arisen, we should not be downhearted, but we can take courage if there can be awareness of the characteristic of akusala which appears. We should not waste any opportunity to be aware. Then we shall know that also akusala dhamma which appears at such a moment is not a being, not a person or self. It can be clearly seen that at the moment of awareness there is no akusala, no downheartedness. One will not be troubled about akusala if one does not take it for self..." ****** Nina. #97819 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon May 11, 2009 2:14 am Subject: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 27. nilovg Dear friends, We read in the following section of the sutta, the section on clear comprehension: And again, monks, a monk when he is setting out or returning is one acting in a clearly conscious way; when he is looking in front or looking aroundwhen he has bent in or stretched out (his arm)...when he is carrying his outer cloak, bowl and robewhen he is obeying the calls of naturewhen he is walking, standing, sitting, asleep, awake, talking, silent, he is one acting in a clearly conscious way. Thus he fares along contemplating the body in the body internally...externallyinternally and externally If one thinks of the body as a whole the arising and falling away of rpas cannot be realized and one will continue to cling to the idea of my body. During all ones activities there can be the development of right understanding, so that wrong view can be eradicated. Sati is not: observing oneself in action. Sati arises with each beautiful (sobhana) citta and its function is being non-forgetful of what is wholesome. Sati is different from the cetasika sa, remembrance or perception, which arises with each citta. Sa recognizes or marks the object, so that it can be recognized later on. Sati of the Eightfold Path is mindful of the reality which presents itself at the present moment, and then right under-standing of it can be developed. We do not have to think of sati, it arises when there are conditions for it. When right understanding of a reality which presents itself is being developed, there is also sati which is mindful, non-forgetful, of that reality. For example, when the characteristic of hardness appears and it is realized as a kind of rpa, it is evident that there is sati. When we think, I am eating and we are not aware of different nmas and rpas which appear, there is a concept of self who is eating. When right understanding is developed the self is broken up into different nma-elements and rpa-elements. In order that right understanding can be developed there should be mindfulness of a characteristic of nma or rpa, not mindfulness without knowing anything. ******* Nina. #97820 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon May 11, 2009 3:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vesak Discussions with Lodewijk, part 2. nilovg Dear Lukas and Howard, Lodewijk said that he appreciated the posts of both of you. He found them most useful. Nina. Op 11-mei-2009, om 6:09 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > They are not yours, so they are out of control. If they'd be yours > you can change akusala for kusala,unpleasant feeling for pleasant one. > I like anatta-lakkhana sutta. It's always a good reminders. #97821 From: "jessicamui" Date: Mon May 11, 2009 5:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Questions regarding Asava & Yoniso Manasikara jessicamui Dear Nina et al, Thank you very much for the detailed and clear explanation of the asava. It is much appreciated. In the same sutta(MN2), the term yoniso manasikara are emphasized by the Buddha that it is the key to refrain and eridcate the asava. Regarding this term "yoniso manasikara", it is not clear to me w.r.t. the functions of other "similar" mental elements. Could you please explain their difference, and functions: 1. yoniso manasikara 2. sati 3. Sampajanna 4. dhammaavicaya Thank you very very much ! With Much Metta, Jessica. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Jessica, > It is a pleasure to see you here. > Op 9-mei-2009, om 13:29 heeft jessicamui het volgende geschreven: > > > While studying MN2 Sabbasava Sutta, I cannot quite understand the > > term "Asava". Some translate as mental effluents or influx. How > > does it actually work in terms of the unwholesome mental phenomena > > arsing and passing away? Also, why Dosa is not part of asava ? > -------- > N: I quote part from my Cetasikas: > > translated as canker, poison or intoxicant. There are four asavas > (Dhammasangani 1096-1100): > > the canker of sensuous desire, kamasava > the canker of becoming, bhavasava > the canker of wrong view, ditthasava > the canker of ignorance, avijjasava > > The Atthasalini (I, Part I, Chapter II, 48) explains that asavas > flow from the senses and the mind. In all planes where there is nama > arising asavas occur, even in the highest plane of existence which is > the fourth arupa-brahma plane. The asavas are like liquor which has > fermented for a long time, the Atthasalini explains. The asavas are > like poisonous drugs or intoxicants. The Visuddhimagga (XXIl, 56) > states that the asavas are exuding "from unguarded sense-doors like > water from cracks in a pot, in the sense of constant tricking". The > asavas keep on flowing from birth to death, they are also flowing at > this moment, Are we not attached to what we see? Then there is the > canker of sensuous desire, kamasava. Seeing experiences visible > object, and shortly after seeing has fallen away there are most of > the time akusala cittas rooted in attachment, aversion or ignorance. > When the object is pleasant there is likely to be attachment to the > object because we have accumulated such a great deal of attachment. > We are attached to visible object, sound, odour, flavour and tangible > object. We are infatuated with the objects we experience through the > senses and we want to go on experiencing them. Because of our foolish > attachment to what is actually impermanent we have to continue to be > in the cycle of birth and death. We have to be reborn again and again > until the cankers have been extinguished, The arahat has eradicated > the cankers, he does not have to be reborn again. We may not > understand that birth is sorrowful, but when fight understanding has > been developed we will see that all that is impermanent is sorrowful. > We cling to all we experience through the senses, we cling to life. > Clinging is deeply accumulated; even the first javana-cittas of our > life were lobha-mula-cittas, cittas rooted in attachment, and this is > the case for every living being. > > The canker of desire for rebirth, bhavasava, is another one of > the asavas. The Atthasalini (II, Book II, Chapter II, 370) explains > that this "arises by way of aspiring to rebirth in rupa and Arupa > forms of life". Even the anagami who has eradicated ail clinging to > sensuous objects, can still have clinging to rebirth which is the > result of jhana, So long as there is attachment to any kind of > rebirth one has to continue to be in the cycle of birth and death. > > The canker of wrong view, ditthasava, comprises, according to > the Dhammasangani (1009) the conceiving of all speculative theories > such as eternalism, annihilationism, theories about the world, the > soul and the body. So long as one has not attained enlightenment one > tends to cling to the concept of self and this is so deeply rooted > that it is extremely hard to eradicate it. > > The canker of ignorance, avijjasava, is moha cetasika. It is > ignorance of the four noble Truths, of the past, the future or both, > and of the "Dependant Origination" (Dhammasangani, 1100), We have > innumerable moments of ignorance. Ignorance is dangerous, at the > moment it arises we do not realize that there is ignorance.> > ------- > The same defilements are also classified as floods, oghas, and the > Atthasaalinii states: > (I, Part I, Chapter II, 49) that the "floods" submerge a person > again and again in the cycle of birth and death. > > They are also classified as yokes, they yoke us to the cycle. > > Three of the aasavas are connected with clinging and one with > ignorance. Actually, ignorance and clinging cause us to be in the > cycle of birth and death. Dosa is not classified as an aasava, but > clinging conditions dosa. When things are not the way we like them > to be there is aversion. When you study the Dependent Origination you > will see that dosa is not among the links of the D.O. > ------ > Nina. > > #97822 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon May 11, 2009 2:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Object-Condition upasaka_howard Hi, James (and Nina) - -----Original Message----- From: buddhatrue To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sun, 10 May 2009 8:16 pm Subject: [dsg] Object-Condition Hi Nina, I was reading your online book about the 24 Conditions of the Abhidhamma and I had a question about something you wrote: "Only one object can be experienced at a time. We may wonder why we experience a particular object and why we shift our attention from one object to another. The "Atthasalini" (Expositor II, Book II, part I, Ch III, 333,334) explains that the rupas which can be experienced through the senses become objects "by virtue of deliberate inclination" or "by virtue of intrusion". We should remember that even following our own inclination is conditioned, that there is no self who can decide about the experiencing of objects." To me, the last sentence seems contradictory. If an object is experienced through "deliberate inclination", that spells "control" to me. But then you give your own commentary to the Abhidhamma and state that "we should remember...that there is no self who can decide about the experiencing of objects." So, which is it: can we decide to experience a particular object or can't we? Metta, James ============================ My opinion: Something occurring due to deliberate inclination is precisely "control" (or, better, "influence"). At the same time, though, that deliberate action is not the action of an entity or self. It is a conglomerate of acts of cetana and other mental activities, all of which are conditioned. With metta, Howard #97823 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon May 11, 2009 4:37 pm Subject: Description or doctrine/instruction? (was, Re: effort.) jonoabb Hi Robert E (97719) > ---------------------- > > Satipatthana Sutta MN 10 > > > > "And how, O bhikkhus, does a bhikkhu live contemplating the body in the body? > > > > "Here, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu, gone to the forest, to the foot of a tree, or to an empty place, sits down, bends in his legs crosswise on his lap, keeps his body erect, and arouses mindfulness in the object of meditation, namely, the breath which is in front of him. ... Thus, also, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu lives contemplating the body in the body." > > What would be the purpose of describing all these details if those so described had already attained these skills, if it is just description - redundant of what will take place anyway? Why talk about it at all, except to teach others how to do the same? > ---------------------- It is description, but it is by no means redundant of what will take place. It was spoken for the benefit of those among the listeners, and in later generations, who were capable of applying what they heard. So it is both descriptive and instructive. My point was, however, that it is not a statement of doctrine proclaiming a specific relationship between anapanasati and enlightenment. It describes the further development of insight for those who (a) have already attained, or are within reach of attaining, jhana with breathing as object, and (b) have already developed satipatthana to a fairly high degree. This description is one of 14 ways mentioned in the sutta in which mindfulness of the body may be developed. Jon #97824 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon May 11, 2009 4:46 pm Subject: Dhammas (was, Re: effort.) jonoabb Hi Robert E (97772) > ---------------------- > Well, I would just say that personally I think that namas are more important than rupas. Seeing into the nature of sentience/consciousness seems to me to be the main area for insight into the nature of existence. However, I understand the point that if one cannot distinguish rupa from nama this is very difficult. > ---------------------- As far as I know, there is no statement in the texts to the effect that namas are more important than rupas as far as being the object of awareness/insight is concerned. Rupas are just as revealing of the nature of existence as are namas (anicca, dukkha and anatta, the 3 characteristics). Both have to be known, because if ignorance or wrong view about either remains, there can be no enlightenment. See for example the "mindfulness of the body" section of the Satipatthana Sutta we are looking at in another thread. Jon #97825 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon May 11, 2009 6:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhammas (was, Re: effort.) upasaka_howard Hi, Jon (and Robert) - -----Original Message----- From: jonoabb To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Mon, 11 May 2009 6:46 pm Subject: [dsg] Dhammas (was, Re: effort.) Hi Robert E (97772) > ---------------------- > Well, I would just say that personally I think that namas are more important than rupas. Seeing into the nature of sentience/consciousness seems to me to be the main area for insight into the nature of existence. However, I understand the point that if one cannot distinguish rupa from nama this is very difficult. > ---------------------- As far as I know, there is no statement in the texts to the effect that namas are more important than rupas as far as being the object of awareness/insight is concerned. ---------------------------------- According to the Dhammapada, mind "rules". Also, kusala and akusala are matters of mind, the defilements are matters of mind, guarding the senses is a matter of mindfulness of mind, and awakening is a matter of mind. The primary importance of taking namas as objects of consciousness is to directly see our craving and aversion and attachment etc. Mind is CENTRAL to the Dhamma. ------------------------------- Rupas are just as revealing of the nature of existence as are namas (anicca, dukkha and anatta, the 3 characteristics). Both have to be known, because if ignorance or wrong view about either remains, there can be no enlightenment. See for example the "mindfulness of the body" section of the Satipatthana Sutta we are looking at in another thread. Jon ============================ With metta, Howard #97826 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon May 11, 2009 7:16 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Object-Condition buddhatrue Hi Nina, Thanks for your very detailed response. I hope it wasn't too much bother for you. There is just one thing you wrote that I want to comment on: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > The experience itself is result of kusala kamma or akusala kamma of > the past and nobody can direct what result kamma produces at a > particular moment. This almost sounds like predestination to me. Yes, the experience is the result of kamma but that kamma varies. As the Buddha said: "If one says that in whatever way a person performs a kammic action, in that very same way he will experience the result - in that case there will be no (possibility for a) religious life and no opportunity would appear for the complete ending of suffering." But if one says that a person who performs a kammic action (with a result) that is variably experienceable, will reap its results accordingly - in that case there will be (a possibility for) a religious life and an opportunity for making a complete end of suffering." -- AN 3:110 So, I believe that there is an element of control available in the ability to choose what object to attend to. Metta, James #97827 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon May 11, 2009 7:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Object-Condition buddhatrue Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > ============================ > My opinion: Something occurring due to deliberate inclination is precisely "control" > (or, better, "influence"). At the same time, though, that deliberate action is not the action of an > entity or self. It is a conglomerate of acts of cetana and other mental activities, all of which are > conditioned. Of course. :-) Metta, James #97828 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue May 12, 2009 2:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Questions regarding Yoniso Manasikara etc. , part 1. nilovg Dear Jessica, Op 11-mei-2009, om 14:03 heeft jessicamui het volgende geschreven: > Regarding this term "yoniso manasikara", it is not clear to me > w.r.t. the functions of other "similar" mental elements. Could you > please explain their difference, and functions: > 1. yoniso manasikara 2. sati 3. Sampajanna 4. dhammaavicaya -------- N: quote from my Cetasikas:< Manasikaara, attention, is another cetasika among the universals which arises with every citta. There are aIso two kinds of citta which are called manasikaara (Atthasalini 133 and Visusshimagga XIV, 152). One kind of citta which is manasikaara is the panca-dvaravajana-citta (five-sense-door adverting- consciousness). The first citta of the 'sense-door process', which adverts to the object; it is called 'controller of the sense-door process'. The other kind of citta which manaasikara is the mano-dvara-vajana- citta (mind-door adverting-consciousness) which adverts to the object through the mind-door and is succeeded by the javana cittas and the mind-door adverting-consciousness performing the function of votthapana in a sense-door process and is succeeded by the javana cittas. It is called 'controller of the javanas'.> In this context yoniso manasikaara refers to the 'controller of the javanas'. When the javanacittas are kusala cittas, there is yoniso manasikaara, and when they are akusala cittas there is ayoniso manasikaara. Thus, in the case of daana, siila, samatha and vipassanaa there is wise attention to the object that is experienced. ---------- > J: 2. sati -------- N: Mindfulness, non-forgetfulness. There are many levels of sati: sati of daana, of siila, of samatha and of vipassanaa. Sati accompanies each kusala citta and it does not waste the opportunity for kusala that presents itself. There may be an occasion for helping others (a form of siila), but sometimes we are lazy or forgetful and let this opportunity go by. When sati arises, it is non-forgetful of kusala, and one is able to help, inspite of tiredness. Sati of vipassanaa: I quote from my Cetasikas: One will only gradually understand what mindfulness is. By listening to the Dhamma, considering it, understanding what the object of mindfulness is, remembering that also mindfulness is not a self, that it cannot be directed or forced, there can be conditions for its actual arising. Only then will one understand that sati is not the same as thinking about naama and ruupa. (to be continued) ****** Nina. #97829 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue May 12, 2009 2:42 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Object-Condition nilovg Hi James (and Howard), Op 12-mei-2009, om 4:16 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > Thanks for your very detailed response. I hope it wasn't too much > bother for you. ------- N: No, it was an opportunity for me to reflect further on the passage of the Atthasaalinii. Quite interesting for me. First he gives two situations in daily life: deliberately taking a lump of food, and then, falling down and hurting himself, so helplessly. But in both cases, what does he get? Here the Co. reverts to elements, thus, ultimate realities, no longer in the conventional world. What does he get? The tangible object experienced through the bodysense that are mere solidity, heat or motion. --------- > > James: N: > The experience itself is result of kusala kamma or > akusala kamma of > > the past and nobody can direct what result kamma produces at a > > particular moment. > > This almost sounds like predestination to me. Yes, the experience > is the result of kamma but that kamma varies. As the Buddha said: > > "If one says that in whatever way a person performs a kammic > action, in that very same way he will experience the result - in > that case there will be no (possibility for a) religious life and > no opportunity would appear for the complete ending of suffering." > > But if one says that a person who performs a kammic action (with a > result) that is variably experienceable, will reap its results > accordingly - in that case there will be (a possibility for) a > religious life and an opportunity for making a complete end of > suffering." -- AN 3:110 > > So, I believe that there is an element of control available in the > ability to choose what object to attend to. -------- N: Yes, the question of predestination or fate comes up. Recently I discussed this with Lodewijk, while revising my Conversations in Egypt and Turkey. Lodewijk helped me to formulate this question: < Question: When you believe that there is no self who can do anything, does this not lead to fatalism? Answer: There is no predestined fate ruling over our life. However, the different moments of our life are conditioned by the past and by the present. It is essential to know and understand the present moment as conditioned. Understanding the present moment will gradually lead to the eradication of the defilements that cause us to be enslaved. Understanding will evenually lead to liberation and to enlightenment. When understanding develops you see more and more the value of knowing things as they are. You gain more confidence in the teachings and this conditions a sense of urgency to continue to develop understanding of all realities. One will have less inclination to laziness or to fatalism.> Seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and experiencing tangibles are mere results of past kamma. But these results arise withitn a process of cittas, they are followed by wholesome or unwholesome cittas which react to the object: wisely or unwisely. When developing the way leading to the end of suffering, at those moments there is wise attention to an object that is experienced. Even wise attention is conditioned, by hearing true Dhamma, right consideration, good friendship, several favorable conditions. We are not helpless victims of fate, all the afore-mentioned favorable conditions lead to less enslavement by defilements. Howard wrote: Quite right. ******* Nina. #97830 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue May 12, 2009 2:57 am Subject: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 28. nilovg Dear friends, If one thinks that sati means keeping oneself under constant observation, one is bound to believe that it is impossible to be aware while doing things which require special attention. One may be urged to make special efforts in order to create conditions for a great deal of sati. Any speculation about creating conditions for the arising of sati distracts from the study of the reality appearing right at this moment. It is thinking of the future instead of being aware of aversion now, seeing now, thinking now. There is clinging to an idea of self who can control awareness, and in that way there will not be detachment from the concept of self. If we understand more clearly that our life consists of nma and rpa which arise because of conditions, we will be less absorbed in the idea of self while we do complicated things. Also at such moments there are only nma and rpa. We may believe that while we are talking there cannot be awareness, since we have to think about what we are saying. There is sound and can there not be awareness of it? It is citta, not self, which thinks about what we are going to say and which conditions sound. There can be awareness of realities in between thinking. I noticed that while I am writing the Chinese script (Kanji), it is possible to hear other people talking or to think of other things. This shows that there are many different types of cittas which succeed one another so rapidly that it seems that they occur all at the same time. Since there can be hearing or thinking in between the writing of Kanji, there can also be awareness in between. ******* Nina. #97831 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue May 12, 2009 3:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vesak Discussions with Lodewijk, part 2. sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, I liked your reminders to Lodewijk: --- On Mon, 11/5/09, szmicio wrote: >> Lodewijk: It is depressing and sad to note how certain moods are > totally uncontrollable. >L: They are not yours, so they are out of control. If they'd be yours you can change akusala for kusala,unpleasant feeling for pleasant one. I like anatta-lakkhana sutta. It's always a good reminders. Knowing that all dhammas are out of control(anatta) , can be a condition for more metta to arise. When we realise that we cannot chose what we experience we have more patience to another people. when people kill or do another kind of akusala we can realize those are diffrent moments of consciousness that do that , not them. ... S: Very true and this also relates to Rob Ep and his mother's examples with the thieves... ... >In the Metta Section in Visudhimagga there was said that first we have to wish metta for ourselves and that's mean that we should develop right understanding of citta, cetasika and ruupa within ourselves. ... S: It's true that we can only ever have right understanding of the namas and rupas experienced. I think the example given in the section of 'metta for ourselves' means that just as we like to experience kindness and friendliness, so do others. So we treat others accordingly. .... >>There is so much akusala in a day and I see no >way to lessen it. >L: When there is less Self involved, there is less suffering. ... S: Very true! Metta, Sarah ====== #97832 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue May 12, 2009 3:57 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 24 sarahprocter... Dear Nina & all, --- On Sun, 10/5/09, Nina van Gorkom wrote: >>s: The more understanding develops, the less concerned one is about > what the situation is with regard to the development of right > understanding and right awareness. Never mind whether one has > dropped something and is cursing (!) or whether we're enjoying the > fine weather or absorbed in a complicated task -- just different > namas and rupas arising to be known when they appear without any > special effort or 'doing' of any kind. ------- >N: People stumble over not doing anything. But they forget that when understanding understands that whatever appears is a conditioned dhamma which cannot be changed by anybody, there is no hindrance to the development of pa~n~naa. Whereas if one worries about creating favorable conditions the idea of self hinders the development of pa~n~naa. ... S: Very true! This is why again it always comes back to the understanding of dhammas. Metta, Sarah ====== #97833 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue May 12, 2009 5:31 am Subject: Re: Skillful thieves (was: [dsg] Re: effort.] sarahprocter... Hi Rob Ep, --- On Sun, 10/5/09, Robert Epstein wrote: >Thank you; she actually did get attacked more than once, as did I - I don't mean to negatively advertise New York City, but....well, things happen sometimes. My mother had the same attitude at least one or two other times - she said on one of those occasions "He was a nice young man - he didn't hurt me," and she would never be angry at the people who robbed her. She also said "He obviously needed money, so I told him to take whatever he needed," and offered him the bills that she had. ... S: Please tell her that I appreciate her examples. I remember reading that is said that tanha is like a thief groping in the dark to steal while upadana is like the actual stealing. So, we're all thieves in this sense whenever tanha and upadana arise. Considering that you've had your mother's inspiring examples, not surprising to hear of your own great stories! >Another weird mugging story from Robert! :-) ... S: They were both amazing accounts and I loved reading them - beautifully told. ... >I have a couple of other skillful mugging stories [unfortunately. ..?] Maybe I'll tell them sometime! ... S: Oh, please do.....I appreciate the dhamma twists and think you have a book in the making: "Tales from the Epstein Mugging Archives". I'm sure your mother can help search around in her archives for a few more. I was about to say, I can't match any of this, when I recalled for the first time (literally!) in decades a couple of incidents of being attacked and to my amazement, calmly and quietly suggesting to my attackers it would not be in anyone's interest to hurt me and actually being allowed to walk free, unharmed and unrobbed in both cases. One occurred as I was walking along a long track to a kibbutz in Israel, with a large back-pack on my back, containing all my worldly possessions including passport and the very modest sum of money which I was to live on for the next 18 months en route to and in India. I was small, with long fair hair and wearing sandals and a tall Arab man came up behind me and pushed me into the bushes off the track. I couldn't have run and there was no one to call out to, so quiet negotiation was the only hope. I was amazed when he just ran off without taking anything or harming me. I turned up at the kibbutz and never mentioned the scary incident. The second incident actually occurred in Bodh Gaya when I was walking back to my basic Tibetan accommodation, across a field with no lighting, after visiting the shrine in the evening. Again, I was fortunate to have the chance to quietly talk to my assailant and explain that such an attack was not according to his religion or mine! We actually parted on quite friendly terms and again, I never mentioned the occurrence to anyone. I've been very fortunate, of course. Akusala and kusala vipaka, unfortunately, fortunately, as you say.... So, it's not just New York.... .... > >There is a sutta in Anguttara Nikaya about skilful and unskilful thieves.... >I'd like to read that. I remember the story about the zen Master who was robbed of almost everything by thieves and when they were leaving called out to them, "Come back, you forgot the silverware!" ... S: That's a good one. I'm sure I'll come across the AN one I'm thinking of. And here's a thief story you'll like which Connie posted before: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/69655 It's the account of Therii Bhaadaa who formerly became infatuated with a thief, married him, but ended up pushing him over a cliff. Incredibly, she became an arahant in that same lifetime with all the highest attainments.... I liked the reminders Nina quoted about the actors on the stage and how we never know what act will be performed from moment to moment. The acts change rapidly with moments of seeing, hearing, thinking, like and dislike. As she said, "how life flies!" and we never know what will happen next. Even when attacked, there are just moments of seeing, hearing, bodily experience and mind door activity, like now. We think of the big dramas of life, but when we understand more about the paramattha dhammas, we begin to see that there are only the worlds appearing through the different senses, with so much thinking about these experiences. It's always helpful sharing these anecdotes and discussing Dhamma with you, Rob! Look forward to more:-) Metta, Sarah ====== #97834 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue May 12, 2009 5:39 am Subject: Cittas and cetasikas (was, Re: effort.) jonoabb Hi Robert E (97774) > Marlon Brando was once asked why he was dismissive of his own brilliant acting, when others said he was a genius in his field. Brando answered "In the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man is King." I wonder if anyone around here has a half an eye open, so they can tell us if we're on the right track... > ---------------------- ;-)) An interesting question to consider ... > ---------------------- > In any case, it's kind of hard for the blind or half-blind to assess each other, or the truth, is it not? :-) > ---------------------- (Well, we are not here to assess each other ;-)) ) As far as assessing the truth is concerned, I agree we are all among the blind. That's why it's important to be guided by the teachings rather than our own intuition, and even then to consider anything in the teachings carefully before coming to any conclusion about the path. > ---------------------- > While I take your point that the only important knowledge is 'the way things are,' rather than 'how they work,' if one does not have a coherent basic model of 'how they work,' it is hard to take it for granted that their vision of 'how things are' is accurate. > ---------------------- We are not asked to take for granted what appears in the texts. That would not be of any help in the development of the path. Indeed, we are not asked to come to any firm conclusion about what is contained in the teachings, but only to be open to the possibility of things being as are there explained. So I would question the usefulness of delving to the nth level on details of how things work. > ---------------------- If I told you that flying pink elephants rule the stratosphere and cause the various types of weather to arise by how they blow their trunks to create air currents, you would want me to tell you how that works, and how I know it to be true. If I just said 'Well that's just the way it works' you might not believe me. > ---------------------- Well as I said above, it's not a matter of coming to a belief as to whether or not things are the way they are said to be. But on the general question of knowing *how* things work, I don't see how this is really possible except as and to the extent that direct understanding is developed. There's only so much we are capable of comprehending, even at an intellectual level. Jon #97835 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue May 12, 2009 5:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) sarahprocter... Dear Rob Ep, --- On Sun, 10/5/09, Robert Epstein wrote: > >>R:I'd like to find out in any case. I have an instinctive idea of how this can work, but I can't convince anyone I'm right. :( > ... >>S: Join the club! R: >ha ha ha, that is good; that gave me a good chuckle. >Gee, sometimes I feel like I'm having a little too much fun around here. ... S: :-) Oh, you took such a long break, you're allowed to have fun round here;-). We don't need to be so serious all the time... Looking forward to more Skilful Mugging Tales from the Big Apple.... Metta, Sarah ====== #97836 From: "szmicio" Date: Tue May 12, 2009 8:31 am Subject: Re: Vesak Discussions with Lodewijk, part 2. szmicio Dear Sarah, > >L: In the Metta Section in Visudhimagga there was said that first we have to wish metta for ourselves and that's mean that we should develop right understanding of citta, cetasika and ruupa within ourselves. > ... > S: It's true that we can only ever have right understanding of the namas and rupas experienced. I think the example given in the section of 'metta for ourselves' means that just as we like to experience kindness and friendliness, so do others. So we treat others accordingly. L: Yes. But when we experience akusala within ourselves we can realise how fleeting and beyond control it is. Then there can be more conditions for kusala. For now there is nothing in the world that can suprise me ;> When people kills, prefer diffrent sexual activities or anything else. Those are just diffrent moments of consciousness. They are totally out of control. No one can change akusala for kusala. Even there is occasion for reading and listening to Dhamma or association with wise friends. When someone is saying an unpleasant words to me, that's because diffrent cittas(in him) experience their objects. why sholud we get anger? There is moha which conditions sankhara and sanhkara conditons citta....and it ends in jatimarana. That's how this all suffering comes to be real. hearing about citta, cetasika and ruupa can be a condition for right understanding to arise. best wises Lukas #97837 From: "connie" Date: Tue May 12, 2009 9:28 am Subject: Sangiiti Sutta Fours (10) nichiconn Dear Friends, continuing on from #97682 Fours (9) (cy: #97759, #97781): CSCD 310. < peace, connie, Scott, Nina. #97838 From: "colette" Date: Tue May 12, 2009 9:19 am Subject: Citta ksheri3 Come play with me Alex. What is Chaos? What is Order? <....> Where is Chaos, Alex? Where is Order, Alex? Where is the Supply, Alex? Where is the Demand, Alex? ARe you not already dead and have no care for retribution if you mock the living since it's already proven that you are dead? <...> Ven. Jimpathemonk, I am ready to do business with slackards and sloths who mock me. They have done nothing but manifest the situation, the climate, in which this grizzly business is to be done and therefore I DO NOT WANT TO HOLD ONTO SOMETHING THAT THEY ASKED TO RECIEVE, ESPECIALLY SOMETHING LIKE THIS, which means that the delivery agent should not be kept waiting and wondering why they are not performing their task. Let us bring forth FRUIT and MANIFESTATION. toodles, colette #97839 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Tue May 12, 2009 10:22 pm Subject: Re: Actors on the stage. was: Are 'not-self' vs are not 'self' epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: Each time when the curtain opens there is a new act going > to be played. One never knows beforehand what kind of act will be > played, it is a surprise. The acts change with great rapidity: seeing > arises, then hearing, then thinking. They seem to occur all at the > same time, but in reality there are different �acts� separated by > bhavanga. They have no connection with each other. Each act is so > short, it is already over before we realize it. This reminds us that > there is no self who could direct the drama of life. > > We attach great importance to what we experience, but it only lasts > for a moment.> > > I like the idea that seeing and the other cittas arising in its train > have nothing to do with hearing. Different acts. And so short, how > life flies! And we never know in life what will happen, life is full > of surprises, may be happy ones or unhappy ones. It is all conditioned. Thanks for sharing that Nina. The metaphor of the different acts of the play is a nice one. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = #97840 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Tue May 12, 2009 10:37 pm Subject: Dhammas (was, Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (97772) > > ---------------------- > > Well, I would just say that personally I think that namas are more important than rupas. Seeing into the nature of sentience/consciousness seems to me to be the main area for insight into the nature of existence. However, I understand the point that if one cannot distinguish rupa from nama this is very difficult. > > ---------------------- > > As far as I know, there is no statement in the texts to the effect that namas are more important than rupas as far as being the object of awareness/insight is concerned. > > Rupas are just as revealing of the nature of existence as are namas (anicca, dukkha and anatta, the 3 characteristics). Both have to be known, because if ignorance or wrong view about either remains, there can be no enlightenment. That makes sense. Best, Robert E. = = b= = = = = #97841 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Tue May 12, 2009 10:39 pm Subject: [dsg] Dhammas (was, Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Howard, and Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Jon (and Robert) - > > -----Original Message----- > From: jonoabb > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Mon, 11 May 2009 6:46 pm > Subject: [dsg] Dhammas (was, Re: effort.) > > > > Hi Robert E > > (97772) > > ---------------------- > > Well, I would just say that personally I think that namas are more important > than rupas. Seeing into the nature of sentience/consciousness seems to me to be > the main area for insight into the nature of existence. However, I understand > the point that if one cannot distinguish rupa from nama this is very difficult. > > ---------------------- > > As far as I know, there is no statement in the texts to the effect that namas > are more important than rupas as far as being the object of awareness/insight is > concerned. > ---------------------------------- > According to the Dhammapada, mind "rules". Also, kusala and akusala are matters of mind, the > defilements are matters of mind, guarding the senses is a matter of mindfulness of mind, and awakening > is a matter of mind. The primary importance of taking namas as objects of consciousness is to directly > see our craving and aversion and attachment etc. Mind is CENTRAL to the Dhamma. > ------------------------------- Thanks, that really helps to explicate what I was driving at. Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - #97842 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed May 13, 2009 12:47 am Subject: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 29. nilovg Dear friends, You mentioned that you could not be aware while learning a foreign language. Learning a foreign language can teach us about reality. When we learn a foreign language such as Japanese we cannot in the beginning translate quickly. Later on we acquire skill and it seems that we do it automatically. When we hear a Japanese word we immediately know the meaning, it seems that hearing and knowing the meaning occur at the same time. However, we know that they are different moments of citta. Also when we hear words spoken in our own language there is hearing and then translating going on, we interpret the sounds so that we understand the meaning. The process of translation goes on very rapidly, it goes on the whole day. When there is seeing, visible object is experienced, but immediately we translate what we see, we interpret it, and then we discern people and things. If we consider the process of translation we can understand more clearly that seeing and hearing are different from thinking. The moments that we do not translate seeing and hearing can be studied. Thus, no matter whether you learn a foreign language or whether you are merely thinking after seeing or hearing, there is translating going on time and again. No matter what we do, there are nma and rpa, and sometimes sati can arise and be aware of them. We cannot control the cittas which arise. They arise and perform their own functions. So long as we believe that we can create conditions for the arising of sati, the right awareness will not arise. One may believe that there is sati when there is only ignorance of realities. Awareness can arise if there are conditions for it. The conditions are listening to the Dhamma and considering it. We may believe that we have listened and considered enough, but, when there are still misunderstandings about the Eightfold Path it is evident that our listening and considering have not been enough. We should not assume too soon that we studied enough. We have accumulated ignorance for aeons and therefore it will take aeons before it can be eradicated. This should not discourage us, but we should continue to listen, to read and to study, and we should consider thoroughly what we learnt. We should consider the Dhamma with regard to our own experiences in daily life. ******* Nina. #97843 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed May 13, 2009 1:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Questions regarding Yoniso Manasikara etc. no 2. nilovg Dear Jessica, Now we are at items 3 and 4. Op 11-mei-2009, om 14:03 heeft jessicamui het volgende geschreven: > Could you please explain their difference, and functions: > 1. yoniso manasikara > 2. sati > 3. Sampajanna > 4. dhammaavicaya -------- N: Sampaja~n~na: it is another word for wisdom or understanding. It is sometimes translated as clear comprehension. quote from Buddhist Dictionary: According to the Com., 'clarity of consciousness' is of 4 kinds: regarding the purpose, the suitability, the domain (gocara), and non- delusion as to the object. Explained in detail in Com. to Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta. ------ N: Purpose: one may go somewhere to listen to the Dhamma in order to have more understanding. Suitability: where one goes should also be suitable. An example is given of a bhikkhu who goes to a shrine crowded with people. The domain: the right object for vipassanaa: a naama or a ruupa. He knows what the object is, not a concept such as a person, a tree. Non-delusion: he has right understanding of the object of vipassanaa. Sati sampaja~n~na: rhese two are used together. There is sati sampaja~n~na in samatha: sati and pa~n~naa know the right meditation subject and they realize it when the citta is kusala, and when akusala. There is sati sampaja~n~na in vipassanaa. Sati and pa~n~naa know the right object: any dhamma presenting itself at this moment through one of the six doors. Above an example is given: in coming and going, in all actions there are only nama and rupa that can be objects of sati and pa~n~naa. -------- > 4. dhammaavicaya: Buddhist Dictionary: N: I agree with Ven. Nyanatiloka. The development of the enlightenment factor of dhamma vicaya is being aware and developing right understanding of whatever reality appears. They are all dhammas, conditioned realities. We have to see them as mere dhammas so that the idea of self can eventually be eradicated. ******** Nina. #97844 From: "atomicmonky" Date: Wed May 13, 2009 12:06 am Subject: New to group and Buddhism atomicmonky Greetings, everyone. My name is Mona for short. My full name is a mouthful, Ramona Maria de la Torre. So please call me Mona for short. I'm a 39-year-old Court Reporting Student living in California. I'm also planning to transfer to a University to pursue a double-major in English and Splanish literature --once I start working in court, that is. I'll probably graduate when I'm 90. But I'll die trying! I will be the keeper of the Record as a Court Reporter, and I will live the literary and writing life. I do that now. Why do I need a degree? Oh yeah. To prove to myself at 90 that I could do it. More importantly, I want to live life as a Buddhist. Should I even call myself a Buddhist? As a student of Buddha? As Mona. That's it. You now have someone who was raised Catholic in your group. "I can run but I cannot hide" is my private joke with my parents since I am hispanic and belong to a family of devout Catholics. Of course, I myself am agnostic. Used to be atheist until I realised that's also a belief system I didnt' want to adhere to. And now, I'm in love with the historical Buddha. I told my parents, "Even Jesuits can be Buddhists!" And they frown but accept me. Awe. Love my parents. Anywho. While I find Buddhist Cultural and Religious studies interesting, my own interests rest in the philosophical and spiritual pursuit of Buddhism in the Theravada tradition. I'm not interested in Mahayana or Tibetan for my own path, though I am open to learning about everything and anything for learning and appreciation's sake. I sincerely seek a path that encompasses the study of the original pali texts because I pursue the original teachings of the historical Buddha (as close as I can get to them since his discourses were in the oral tradition. But I'm reassured about Pali Text study since Pali was the language of the Buddha himself). Anywho. I truly believe that Buddhism will continue to evolve and thrive in the West because of its non-denominational and philosophical assistance in self-enlightment (though there is no self in the ultimate reality of things; only in the historical reality of things. [Insert star-trek theme here as I am delving into too much for what's supposed to be a brief introduction]). 2 weeks' ago, I went to Bodhi Tree Bookstore on Melrose to buy a condensed version of the Pali Canon. Not finding what I needed, I brought the following titles home: "Beginning Mindfulness," "Awake at Work" (I need that one), "Buddhism Without Beliefs" (This book was dipped in water by my BF's little girl. I plan to continue reading it once the pages dry), and a set of "Dharma Cards" (to assist in my meditation). I'm interested in Visspasana Meditation. But I don't have the time to participate in a ten-day SN Goenka retreat. So I do my own thing. While the Dharma Cards are really cool, I sure don't know what the heck I'm doing in my Meditation. To be honest, I felt right down stupid. Yet relaxed. Wish me luck with that. I get scared just thinking about it. I'd like to thank Sarah and Jonothan Abbott for creating and moderating this site and for allowing me to join the group and giving me the opportunity to belong to a community dedicated to the study of the Pali texts. Can I say I belong to a sangha now? Argh. I don't know what the heck I'm doing. Maybe things will fall into place as I go along. I welcome any fellow members to contact me and share their insights with me if they have the time. And thank you for reading my intro. It was a doozie. -Mona #97845 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed May 13, 2009 1:51 am Subject: [dsg] Dhamma with Khun Bussabong, no 4. nilovg Dear friends, Acharn Sujin: When sati sampaja~n~na (sati and pa~n~naa) arises, and there is awareness of hardness, this has a characteristic different from all other characteristics. We cannot help thinking of hardness. Thinking does not have to be avoided, but pa~n~naa can know the difference between awareness and thinking. At the moment of thinking, the characteristic of hardness is not known. Hardness has disappeared already when one thinks of the word hardness. When sati is naturally aware of the characteristic of hardness, it can be known as a mere dhamma, different from naama, the reality that knows or experiences. When the dhaatu, the element, that experiences hardness appears, there is no need to name it. Thinking about it does not need to be avoided, we are used to thinking and therefore, we think. But at the moment of thinking of a name, we do not understand the reality that knows or experiences, that knows hardness, or that knows a name. The realities of naama and ruupa arise and fall away very rapidly. The realities of kusala and akusala are not known yet. When naama appears, it can be known as an element that experiences something. If it is kusala it does not change into akusala, but pa~n~naa has not developed to the degree of knowing the reality of kusala that arises and falls away very rapidly. It just discerns the dhaatu that experiences something. -------- N: My own reflection: when we believe that we are aware of kusala or akusala, it is not yet direct awareness of their characteristics. If the first stage of insight, distinguishing the difference between the characteristics of naama and ruupa, has not been attained, there cannot yet be a precise understanding of kusala and akusala. ******* Nina. #97846 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed May 13, 2009 1:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] New to group and Buddhism nilovg Dear Mona, welcome here. Thanks for your introduction. I am glad you are interested in vipassanaa. It can be developed in daily life. We discuss a lot about this subject here. When you read the messages you may get some idea. Questions are always welcome. Nina. Op 13-mei-2009, om 9:06 heeft atomicmonky het volgende geschreven: > I'm interested in Visspasana Meditation. But I don't have the time > to participate in a ten-day SN Goenka retreat. So I do my own thing. #97847 From: "Scott" Date: Wed May 13, 2009 4:47 am Subject: Re: New to group and Buddhism scottduncan2 Dear Mona, Welcome to the list. M: "...[Insert star-trek theme here as I am delving into too much for what's supposed to be a brief introduction])..." Scott: I went to the new movie and it was excellent. I like the sound when the ships go into warp drive. M: "...Can I say I belong to a sangha now? Argh. I don't know what the heck I'm doing..." Scott: I've been reading on the list for a couple of years now. I don't know what the heck I'm doing either. I really appreciate the 'hearing of the Dhamma' that can occur while studying with the group. I don't think that this is a 'sangha' in the normal sense of the word. You might like to delve into words by considering some of the definitional opinions found here: http://dsal.uchicago.edu/dictionaries/pali/ Scott: The Pali Text Society Pali/English Dictionary suggests some of the following for the term: "Sangha...1. multitude, assemblage...2. the Order, the priesthood, the clergy, the Buddhist church...3. a larger assemblage, a community..." Scott: You might also appreciate the following site: http://www.tipitaka.org/ Scott: I've been reading in the 'Useful Posts' section lately (studying 'natural decisive-support condition' (pakatuuppanissaya-paccaya). You can click on 'files' on the home page and then consider the various subjects. For instance, consider the following, culled from the stacks of Useful Posts: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/68361 Scott: Or this one, regarding the term 'kalayanamitta' (good/admirable friends): http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/2531 Scott: I hope you will enjoy your studies on the list. I've appreciated the sound consideration of the Dhamma here and have learned to sidestep much that is confusing and irrelevant about 'buddhism in the west.' Sincerely, Scott. #97848 From: "jessicamui" Date: Wed May 13, 2009 5:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Questions regarding Yoniso Manasikara etc. , part 1. jessicamui Dear Nina, Thank a lot for the detailed reply.It will take me a while to digest the information. Question regarding the messages in MN2, Buddha is saying that with yoniso manasikara, upraising asava will not arise, and arisen asava will be abandon. In your explanation, yoniso manasikara co-arise with wholesome citta, and ayoniso manasikara co-arises with unwholesome citta. If yoniso manasikara cannot use the unwholesome citta, ie. the five hindrance as object, how can it abandon the arisen asava ? Or it uses the previous arisn unwholesome citta as object for attention? Same goes for sati. I remember reading that sati co-arise with wholesome citta, in that case, how can it takes the 5 hindrance as object when practicing Satipatthana ? From reading the sutta, I found that yoniso manasikara seems to have similar function as sati as they both conditions panna to arise. From the defination of the Pali dictionary of Yoniso:"down to its origin or foundation," i. e. thoroughly, orderly, wisely, properly, judiciously ..". It seems to be a strong/mature "grade" of sati to me. Thanks in advance for your comments. With Much Metta, Jessica. #97849 From: "Raghunath Awachar" Date: Wed May 13, 2009 4:46 am Subject: Re: New to group and Buddhism raghunath_aw... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "atomicmonky" wrote: > > Greetings, everyone. My name is Mona for short. My full name is a mouthful, Ramona Maria de la Torre. So please call me Mona for short. I'm a 39-year-old Court Reporting Student living in California. I'm also planning to transfer to a University to pursue a double-major in English and Splanish literature --once I start working in court, that is. I'll probably graduate when I'm 90. But I'll die trying! I will be the keeper of the Record as a Court Reporter, and I will live the literary and writing life. I do that now. Why do I need a degree? Oh yeah. To prove to myself at 90 that I could do it. More importantly, I want to live life as a Buddhist. Should I even call myself a Buddhist? As a student of Buddha? As Mona. That's it. <....> Hi, I am Raghunath I am also interested in learning vipassana but I found difficult to spend 10 days. I would like learn and practice it at home I would like to share your experiences with me. Regards raghunath_awachar@... #97850 From: "jessicamui" Date: Wed May 13, 2009 6:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Questions regarding Yoniso Manasikara etc. no 2. jessicamui Dear Nina, Thank you for providing the simple answer for sampajanna. Regarding dhamma vicaya, unlike all the other 6 enlightenment factors, it is not a cetasika. It is not panna itself and not sati, does it have similar function as yoniso manasikara ? The reason that I'm asking is that there are so many "terms" with similar functions. I just want to know if the same one is called by two different names under different circumstance. Thanks again for helping me to understanding. With Much Metta, Jessica. #97851 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed May 13, 2009 7:21 am Subject: Re:Q. [dsg] Re: New to group and Buddhism nilovg Dear Raghunath and Mona, Let us share experiences. Op 13-mei-2009, om 13:46 heeft Raghunath Awachar het volgende geschreven: > I am Raghunath I am also interested in learning vipassana but I > found difficult to spend 10 days. I would like learn and practice > it at home I would like to share your experiences with me. ------- N: The aim is to lessen the wrong view of self. What do we take for self? Seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, experiencing tangible object through the bodysense, thinking, and all the objects that are experienced in a day: visible object, sound and all the other sense objects. First we have to understand what the objects of vipassana are: whatever appears now, such as seeing, hearing, attachment to what is seen, aversion, generosity. Nothing of our life is excluded. Seeing in a center or at home is the same. Attachment in a center or at home is the same. Circumstances change, but realities that appear through the senses or the mind have each their own characteristic that is unalterable. Just a few thoughts to begin with. Nina. #97852 From: "abhidhammika" Date: Wed May 13, 2009 8:48 am Subject: Condensed Pali Canon and Meditation Re: New to group and Buddhism abhidhammika Dear Mona How are you? You wrote: "2 weeks' ago, I went to Bodhi Tree Bookstore on Melrose to buy a condensed version of the Pali Canon." You can download such a work for free from the following link: http://www.buddhanet.net/ebooks_s.htm It is the very first book of the e-books library, and Its description is as follows. ______________________________________________________________ (633 KB) Guide to Tipitaka Compiled by U KO Lay. The Guide to the Tipitaka is an outline of the Pali Buddhist Canonical Scriptures of Theravada Buddhism from Burma. This is a unique work, as it is probably the only material that deals in outline with the whole of the Pali Buddhist Tipitaka. The Tipitaka includes all the teachings of the Buddha, grouped into three divisions: the Soutane Patch, or general discourses; the Vane Patch, or moral code for monks and nuns; and the Abhidhamma Pitaka, or philosophical teachings. An excellent reference work which gives an overview of the Pali Buddhist texts. It is recommended that you download the print version below as it is of higher quality. Print Version (1,314KB, zipped file) This print version is suitable for people who can print the pages duplex and they will have 2 A5 size pages on every Landscape oriented A4 page. This file is of higher quality with bookmarks and a hyper linked series of "contents" pages. _______________________________________________________________ Suan continued: You also mentioned in your message that you are into Buddhist meditation. That is good. If you explore the menu of the above link, you would also find books on Buddhist meditation. You can download them for free. Here is one on the same page. It is a Discourse on the Standard Practice of Buddhist Meditation with the Buddha's instructions on how to do it. Its description is as follows. _________________________________________________ (1,128 KB) Maha Satipatthana Sutta Translated by U Jotika & U Dhamminda. Practise in accordance with this Mahasatipatthana Sutta so that you can see why it is acknowledged as the most important Sutta that the Buddha taught. Try to practise all the different sections from time to time as they are all useful, but in the beginning start with something simple such as being mindful while walking, or the mindfulness of in and out breathing. Then as you practise these you will be able to practise the other sections contained within this Sutta and you will find that all the four satipatthanas can be practised concurrently. A Sutta should be read again and again as you will tend to forget its message. The message here in this Sutta is that you should be mindful of whatever is occurring in the body and mind, whether it be good or bad, and thus you will become aware that all conditioned phenomena are impermanent, unsatisfactory and not self. _______________________________________________________ Suan continued: One of the most important commentary works on Buddhist meditation is Maha Buddhaghosa's masterpiece "Visuddhimagga". Its translations are commercially available as "The Path of Puity" and The Path of Purification". Visuddhimago is a complete step-by-step instruction manual of Theravada Buddhist meditation, comprising Siila, Samatha and Vipassanaa, in line with the Buddha's standard Theravada Teachings. I am a Samathayaanika, meaning that I follow the Buddha's example by starting with Siila and Samatha, the practices of Right Behaviors and the practice of Right Concentration. Right Behaviors refer to Right Speech, Right Action, and Right Livelihood. As the Buddha repeatedly taught, the practice of Vipassanaa or Right View must be firmly based on Siila and Samatha. So, Visuddhimaggo is a very important textbook for the serious practitioners of Buddhist meditation. Best wishes, Suan Lu Zaw www.bodhiology.org #97853 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Tue May 12, 2009 10:34 pm Subject: Description or doctrine/instruction? (was, Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (97719) > > ---------------------- > > > Satipatthana Sutta MN 10 > > > > > > "And how, O bhikkhus, does a bhikkhu live contemplating the body in the body? > > > > > > "Here, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu, gone to the forest, to the foot of a tree, or to an empty place, sits down, bends in his legs crosswise on his lap, keeps his body erect, and arouses mindfulness in the object of meditation, namely, the breath which is in front of him. > ... > Thus, also, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu lives contemplating the body in the body." > > > > What would be the purpose of describing all these details if those so described had already attained these skills, if it is just description - redundant of what will take place anyway? Why talk about it at all, except to teach others how to do the same? > > ---------------------- > > It is description, but it is by no means redundant of what will take place. It was spoken for the benefit of those among the listeners, and in later generations, who were capable of applying what they heard. So it is both descriptive and instructive. Well I thought it was a point of contention that *anything* in the description of mindfulness practice could be instructive. If it can be an instruction it means that it can be practiced. If the only point is that one must have the prior training to engage successfully in such a practice, then there is not much contention except how one attains such prior training. [I think some prior practice may be involved.] > My point was, however, that it is not a statement of doctrine proclaiming a specific relationship between anapanasati and enlightenment. I do not understand this. Are you saying there is no relationship between anapanasati and enlightenment, even for those who have the capacity to do it successfully? > It describes the further development of insight for those who (a) have already attained, or are within reach of attaining, jhana with breathing as object, and (b) have already developed satipatthana to a fairly high degree. > > This description is one of 14 ways mentioned in the sutta in which mindfulness of the body may be developed. May we have the capacity to engage them! Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #97854 From: "szmicio" Date: Wed May 13, 2009 1:09 am Subject: siila szmicio Dear friends How can I make restraining cittas to arise? I dont like the way I speak. best wishes Lukas #97855 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Wed May 13, 2009 8:32 pm Subject: Skillful thieves (was: [dsg] Re: effort.] epsteinrob Hi Sarah. Such an interesting thread. In addition to the subject itself, it activates all sorts of memories of my mother when she was younger, and of my own young days. Interesting to note the nature of those arising dhammas as they come and cause some kammic reactions and then pass away again. Curious what kinds of namas such memory-events are? They must have their own interesting category. More below: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > > Hi Rob Ep, > � > --- On Sun, 10/5/09, Robert Epstein wrote: > > >Thank you; she actually did get attacked more than once, as did I - I don't mean to negatively advertise New York City, but....well, things happen sometimes. My mother had the same attitude at least one or two other times - she said on one of those occasions "He was a nice young man - he didn't hurt me," and she would never be angry at the people who robbed her. She also said "He obviously needed money, so I told him to take whatever he needed," and offered him the bills that she had. > ... > S: Please tell her that I appreciate her examples. Thank you. My mother is in her '80s with some health issues and doesn't have too much social contacts these days other than my Dad, who is 89, and my family. Luckily we live nearby and talk to and see them regularly. I think my Mom will find it interesting that I have discussed her handling of these situations with the group here. I will let you know what she says! :-) My 89-year-old Dad by the way does all the shopping and such, as well as taking care of my mother to a great degree. He also still has his apartment in New York and goes back and forth between apartments in NY and DC. My mom's mental life has changed quite a lot and much of the time she treats my Dad like a roomate. He is a good example of metta, taking care of her even when she is somewhat distant. Life is funny, is it not? > I remember reading that is said that tanha is like a thief groping in the dark to steal while upadana is like the actual stealing. So, we're all thieves in this sense whenever tanha and upadana arise. Well then I should be on probation, I guess. One positive thing is that when I am too busy clinging, I forget to crave as fully as usual. :-) > Considering that you've had your mother's inspiring examples, not surprising to hear of your own great stories! :-) > >Another weird mugging story from Robert! :-) > ... > S: They were both amazing accounts and I loved reading them - beautifully told. Thank you, Sarah. > ... > >I have a couple of other skillful mugging stories [unfortunately. ..?] Maybe I'll tell them sometime! > ... > S: Oh, please do.....I appreciate the dhamma twists and think you have a book in the making: "Tales from the Epstein Mugging Archives". ha ha; well here are two more stories - maybe not as interesting as the others, but a little bit different. When I lived in that same difficult neighborhood, once in a while a gang of guys would come through a beat everybody up. They would pass through our area with about fifty boys, and just hit whoever they caught or ran into, then move on. In a few minutes they would all be gone. I remember "picking" one of the guys who didn't seem too violent, and putting myself in front of him so he would "choose" me. He wasn't too enthusiastic about hitting anyone, but knew, as I did, that he would have to hit someone to be okay with his group. With eye contact we sort of established that we would act out the event, and he gave me a rather gentle punch to the stomach while I exaggerated the result and doubled over in "pain." We "almost" smiled at each other and he moved on. I stayed down in the grass until the group passed on, then got up, feeling that we had collaborated on a good performance. Another time, a bit more scary, I made the mistake of bicycling with my friend Richie in the back of the railroad tracks near our apartment building. Two big guys stopped us with a German Shepherd off the leash, and literally knocked us off our bikes. They asked for money, and I remember the German Shepherd coming over and panting and drooling right over my face. For some reason, I was not as frightened as I should have been, and stayed relaxed physically and did not try to move away. The big guys pulled us up to demand money more directly. Once again, we only had a few cents and they were angry again. But we stayed calm. I remember once again making some kind of eye contact with these guys and staying very relaxed, almost stupidly relaxed. The guys wound up being content to knock us back down and went away. To me, the significance was that I had the sensation of observing everything, rather than reacting to it. > > I was about to say, I can't match any of this, when I recalled for the first time (literally!) in decades a couple of incidents of being attacked and to my amazement, calmly and quietly suggesting to my attackers it would not be in anyone's interest to hurt me and actually being allowed to walk free, unharmed and unrobbed in both cases. > That's pretty incredible! > One occurred as I was walking along a long track to a kibbutz in Israel, with a large back-pack on my back, containing all my worldly possessions including passport and the very modest sum of money which I was to live on for the next 18 months en route to and in India. I was small, with long fair hair and wearing sandals and a tall Arab man came up behind me and pushed me into the bushes off the track. I couldn't have run and there was no one to call out to, so quiet negotiation was the only hope. I was amazed when he just ran off without taking anything or harming me. I turned up at the kibbutz and never mentioned the scary incident. > > The second incident actually occurred in Bodh Gaya when I was walking back to my basic Tibetan accommodation, across a field with no lighting, after visiting the shrine in the evening. Again, I was fortunate to have the chance to quietly talk to my assailant and explain that such an attack was not according to his religion or mine! We actually parted on quite friendly terms and again, I never mentioned the occurrence to anyone. > > I've been very fortunate, of course. I like these stories very much. I think it would be great to hear the conversations you had with these assailants. You do seem equally as capable as my mother of turning these folks into friends. :-) > Akusala and kusala vipaka, unfortunately, fortunately, as you say.... > > So, it's not just New York.... ... > And here's a thief story you'll like which Connie posted before: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/69655 > > It's the account of Therii Bhaadaa who formerly became infatuated with a thief, married him, but ended up pushing him over a cliff. > > Incredibly, she became an arahant in that same lifetime with all the highest attainments.... Wow. > I liked the reminders Nina quoted about the actors on the stage and how we never know what act will be performed from moment to moment. I enjoyed those too. > ... We think of the big dramas of life, but when we understand more about the paramattha dhammas, we begin to see that there are only the worlds appearing through the different senses, with so much thinking about these experiences. Very interesting. > It's always helpful sharing these anecdotes and discussing Dhamma with you, Rob! Look forward to more :-) Thanks, Sarah; it is fun! Best, Robert = = = = = = = = = = = = = = #97856 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Wed May 13, 2009 8:50 pm Subject: Cittas and cetasikas (was, Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > But on the general question of knowing *how* things work, I don't see how this is really possible except as and to the extent that direct understanding is developed. There's only so much we are capable of comprehending, even at an intellectual level. Fair enough. I guess it is just up to each of us what we relate to and can adopt as a possibility. Best, Robert E. - - - - - - #97857 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Wed May 13, 2009 8:52 pm Subject: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > S: :-) Oh, you took such a long break, you're allowed to have fun round here;-). We don't need to be so serious all the time... Well I am not really sure if I took a break - it seems like I mysteriously disappeared and then just as mysteriously came back. :-) > Looking forward to more Skilful Mugging Tales from the Big Apple....d Thanks, Sarah. Preferably not brand new ones! :-) Best, Robert E. - - - - - - #97858 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Wed May 13, 2009 9:01 pm Subject: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > S: Yes, when vitakka 'takes a hit' it conditions all accompanying mental factors, including panna in this case. Similarly, panna conditions the vitakka and other mental factors. They all condition each other by sahajata paccaya (conascence condition. Also, each citta, with all its accompanying mental factors, conditions the subsequent citta and mental factors by anantara paccaya (proximity condition). Furthermore, the vitakka and panna now can condition vitakka and panna in the future, even aeons into the future, by pakatupanissaya paccaya (natural decisive support condition). So, in brief, the way that they condition each other and successive occurrences of each occurs according to many different complex conditions. > > So, I think you're on the right track, but the picture is a little more complex. ... Thank you, that is exactly the level of detail that is right for me at the moment and it does make a lot of sense of the process. The fact that I seem to be able to partially understand this much is interesting, since it used to make no sense to me at all. Much thanks, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #97859 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Wed May 13, 2009 9:59 pm Subject: Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (97594 - B) > > ---------------------- > > > I think the description assumes that implicit in the idea of a "self" is the idea that anything that is part of that is within the control of the "self". > > > > It is not implicit in all ideas of the self. Our Western idea of self includes being out of control and moving towards greater control; having parts of self that are subconscious and are not controlled or which control us without our awareness, and many other factors. It is the Buddha's own definition of self, in the sense of "true self" which says that anything out of control is "not self." He is promoting this definition, not taking it as a given. > > ---------------------- > > I do not see the Buddha as attempting a definition of "self". There would be no point in defining something that is being rejected as not having any basis in reality. Well....why say that "this is not self, that is not self" rather than "self is illusory" which he never says. This has always mystified me. But he must have a reason for the program he does have. He says that which cannot be controlled, which changes and which is unsatisfying because of its changing and elusive nature, is anicca, not self. That is always his line of argument and he never states positively that self either exists or does not, but he rules out everything that is within samsara and bears the three marks. That is all. His teaching is to relinquish that which is not self, not that self is illusory. Of course there is nothing left that could qualify *as* self, except for nibbana, of course..... > On the other hand, there are plenty of definitions (or explanations or classifications) of "view of self", which is a mental factor, or a moment of consciousness accompanied by that mental factor. These definitions are well worth spending some time over. That may be, but when he talks about what is and isn't self, he does judge the things that people cling to in those terms. I think the conclusion is that there is no substantial and permanent self, but I think that Buddha works structurally by eliminating all that could be self, in order to draw this conclusion of the false view of selfhood. > This (wrong) view of self is one of the defilements that is eradicated at the first stage of stream entry. So if the path is to be developed, it must be seen and known as and when it arises (we can all safely assume that there are ample accumulations of this tendency yet to be eradicated). > > > ---------------------- > > In the world of the Buddha's time, self was defined as "eternal self," "personality self vs. higher self," "internal self or Atman," "Higher Self," or Brahman, etc., all of which had different characteristics. Atman/Brahman were seen as eternal, beyond control or change, but they themselves did not exercise control over anything at all, having nothing to do with illusory reality, and being the Hindu equivalent of Nibbana - unconditioned reality. > > ---------------------- > > I'm not in a position to comment on any of this, I'm afraid. As a matter of interest, what is your source for these views? They are not views for the most part, but reporting on those philosophies. They are common constructs in Hinduism. You want some specific sources? Patanjali's yoga sutra is a good one for some; then there are various Vedantic sutras and some interesting other sutras I have come across over the years - the Avadhut Sutra, the Siva Sutras, etc. And the modern writings of Advaita Vedanta masters such as Ramana Maharshi and Nisargardatta. The idea that the standpoint of wisdom is separated from apparent reality, and observes arising phenomena with detachment, is quite common. > > ---------------------- > > In other philosophical frameworks, the self is seen as the experiencer or observer, not something that has control, but which merely undergoes whatever arises. So, I don't think that such a definition can be taken as a "given" at all. > > ---------------------- > > As I said, I don't think a definition is being proposed or assumed. I would say the Buddha is pointing out that only something that is not subject to disappearance can be a refuge in the true sense. And that is only nibbana, nothing else. While Buddha refutes eternalism or a permanent soul or Self, Nibbana is both eternal and unchanging is it not? It always winds up somewhere... > > ---------------------- > > What Buddha is saying is that the self-concept which is dependent on keeping things under control, but cannot control anything in reality, is not a true self and should be abandoned, along with its clingings. > > ---------------------- > > I would consider it the Buddha's teaching that *all* self-concepts are to be abandoned. I would agree. But he emphasizes that which bears the three marks as being not-self; that is the central theme of anicca I think. Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - - - #97860 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Wed May 13, 2009 10:10 pm Subject: Re: Dukkha; anatta (was, Not self vs. not-self) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (97594 - C) > > ---------------------- > > So, if you are stuck by a thorn and this causes extreme physical suffering, and in addition you are reactive to this pain and go into a state of fear and anxiety, that has nothing to do with dukkha? > > ---------------------- > > There are different kinds of dukkha discussed in the teachings. The dukkha that is the characteristic of conditioned dhammas has nothing to do with conventional ideas of pain and suffering. Are you ever going to enlighten me about what the unconventional definition of dukkha is? And how it is different, or are you just going to leave me in ignorance? > > ---------------------- > > What about the parable of the two arrows which the Buddha delivered to show the difference between the suffering caused by physical pain and the additional suffering caused by akusala cittas arising around the pain? > > ---------------------- > > Yes, this describes dukkha of that kind/those kinds, but not the characteristic of dukkha. Which is.....? C'mon, Jon, help a guy out! > > ---------------------- > > If one says "I can see the quality of "change in a dhamma" in "a single moment during which nothing is changing" that is self-contradictory. It is simply not possible. One has to explain how that is even proposed on the level of pariyatti, or it is a wrong understanding. > > ---------------------- > > As mentioned already in an earlier part of my reply to your post, there is change within a single moment that is perceptible to developed panna. How exactly does that work? How does change occur in a single moment? > > ---------------------- > > If you tell me that there is a cetasika that is responsible for registering the former state and another that compares it to the present state, then at least that is plausible. > ---------------------- > > Well I would assume that this also happens, and that the knowledge thus gained is accumulated (in sanna and other mental factors). Well I can get together with you on that! Single-moment change I need a better explanation of. > > ---------------------- > But to say it "just knows it" with no idea how that can be, is not a viable understanding. > > ---------------------- > > Hope I've addressed this. Yes, for part II; comparative change; not Part I - single-moment change. > > ---------------------- > > Now if you say that anatta, as the "characteristic of self not existing" is a positive characteristic that can be perceived in a single moment, then tell me how it works. It has to be specified somewhere. Is there a cetasika which probes the dhamma for a "self" and registers that it is not there? Or does a cetasika note the changes that have been undergone and register via some quality of their change that control is impossible, thus understanding deeply that the dhamma is not-self because it cannot possibly be subject to control? If these things are said to actually take place, I would like to at least have some rudimentary idea of how they occur. > > ---------------------- > > Sorry, but I can't really add anything to what I've said already in the context of the characteristic of anicca. You haven't said anything descriptive of it so far; only made the claim. Are you telling me that it is simply asserted and nowhere described? > > ---------------------- > > K. Sujin says in her Survey [p.379] that understanding the characteristic of anatta is developed by investigating dhammas over and over again and realizing that a nama is "only an element which experiences, only a reality, not a being, person or self." I can understand this; I can understand coming to see that a nama has the characteristic of "only being an element" and nothing more, and that this would be a realization of anatta. > > ---------------------- > > The fact of dhammas being "only an element" is knowledge that supports the understanding of dhammas as not-self, but is not the same as the direct knowledge of that characteristic. So to investigate and realize is not direct knowledge? You mean there is a whole other process that is not described beyond this? I think she was indeed describing the process of how direct knowledge is gained. > > ---------------------- > But if you say that anatta is itself a "something" to be recognized, then you are making this lack of being anything other than "an element which experiences" into something. > > ---------------------- > > There is no suggestion of anatta being <>. I hope this is not a prelude to another round of the bogey-man of "reification/substantialization" ;-)) I'm still looking for an explanation of how a lack of self can be a discernible positive characteristic all by itself without comparing it to the false concept of having a self. So far: I've gotten nothing along these lines, just the naked assertion that it is so because it must be so. > > ---------------------- > To see that anatta is the fact that a nama is "only an element" and not a self, is perfectly understandable, as this does not make anatta a thing in its own right. It identifies the true characteristic of a nama, that it is "just this" and nothing more. > > ---------------------- > > As I see it, one aspect the "just this" in relation to dhammas is that of "not-self". yes, but what does that mean, other than what I have just described? Does it mean something more? Do you have a clear concept of what is referenced when you say that part of its "just this" is "not-self?" Maybe you don't question it on that minute a level, but I am asking what it actually is, so that I can have a clear understanding at least intellectually. > > ---------------------- > > > I think that the direct experience of the characteristic is of course dependent on a proper intellectual grasp of the nature of the characteristic, and this would include the fact of the nonexistence of the imagined self. > > > > And when you directly experience it, what do you experience? An absence? A gap? A nothingness? What? Pariyatti wants to know. :-) > > ---------------------- > > No use asking me ;-)) Seriously, whatever it is, it is experienced as a characteristic of the dhamma that is at that moment the object of awareness. So I'm confident that it wouldn't be any of those things you mention (an absence, gap, nothingness). So then, as a concept, what do you think it is? How does something that is a lack of self appear when you see it? Anyone report on this in the commentaries? Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - - - #97861 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Wed May 13, 2009 10:23 pm Subject: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > > Hi Rob Ep (& Ken H), > > Does this help? > > --- On Mon, 4/5/09, Robert Epstein wrote: > >>K: Your explanation is different from the Abhidhamma's, in which the whole > > world begins, persists and ends in a single moment. If there is no > > 'repeated striking' that begins, persists and ends in a single moment > > then there is no repeated striking at all. > > R:>Show me the quote from the Abhidhamma please, in which this is ever said. I don't see this kind of explanation anywhere. What begins persists and ends in a single moment? And how does this occur? Where is this claimed? Show me please. > .... > S: Visuddhimagga, VII, 39: > > "As to the shortness of the moment: in the ultimate sense the life > moment of living beings is extremely short, being only as much as the > occurence of a single conscious moment. Just as a chariot wheel, when > it is rolling, rolls [that is touches the ground] only on one point of > [the circumference of] its tyre, and, when it is at rest, rests only > on one point, so too, the life of living beings lasts only for a > single conscious moment. When that consciousness has ceased, the > being is said to have ceased, according as it was said: 'In a past > conscious moment he did live, not he does live, not he will live. In > a future conscious moment not he did live, not he does live. In a > present conscious moment not he did live, he does live, not he will live. > > "'Life, person, pleasure, pain - just these alone > Join in one conscious moment that flicks by. > Ceased aggregates of those dead or alive > Are all alike, gone never to return. > No [world is] born if [consciousness is] not > Produced; when that is present, then it lives; > When consciousness dissolves, the world is dead: > The highest sense this concept will allow' (Nd.1,42)." I can understand that life begins and ends with the passing of each moment, and it is indeed a core teaching; and that life only arises again with the arising of a new act of consciousness. However, the conclusion that Ken draws from this, that *the entire process* of "repeated striking" of the object by vittaka [I think that's the right cetasika...?] must take place within 'one moment' is not a correct conclusion. The process is stated to be cumulative and is passed on from one citta to the next. Although the whole world rises and falls in each moment, the thousands of processes and lifetimes of accumulations do not take place in each single moment. To think that is not just overly mystical, it is absurd; and I don't believe it is what is taught in the Abhidhamma or anywhere else. That is what happens when you mix up the overall reality of the moment with the specifics of different processes. Does the contact with a sense-object, the processing by various namas, the thinking about it and the recollection of the object all take place in the same single moment? of course not. So each time "the world arises" for that single moment, the content of that moment is quite different from the one before it. The single moment contains all of reality as it stands for that one moment, but when the next moment arises, it accesses and builds on the moment before. Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - - - - - #97862 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Wed May 13, 2009 10:28 pm Subject: Re: Characteristics vs. (observed) behaviour (was, Not self vs. not-self) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > ---------------------- > > > I would agree with "recognition as an inherent characteristic ... by panna". This would be a direct, rather than a deduced, recognition. > > > > Okay. > > ---------------------- > > This distinction -- direct, rather than deduced, recognition -- is an important one. It goes a long way towards answering some of the questions you've been raising. I think I will focus on this point out of the confusion of that last exchange. This is pretty clear and I am starting to see the picture of different levels of panna seeing the characteristics more or less directly as it increases. Thanks. Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - - - #97863 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu May 14, 2009 12:47 am Subject: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 30. nilovg Dear friends, Rhula, the Buddhas son, attained arahatship when he was only twenty years old. For him the conditions necessary for enlightenment were fulfilled: he associated with the right person, the Buddha, he listened to the Dhamma, he considered it and he developed the Eightfold Path. We read in the Middle Length Sayings (II, no. 62, Greater Discourse on an Exhortation to Rhula) that Rhula asked the Buddha how mindfulness of breathing, when it is developed and made much of, is of great fruit, of great advantage. The Buddha did not speak immediately about mindfulness of breathing, he first taught Rhula about the elements of solidity, cohesion, heat, motion and space. No matter whether these elements are internal or external, they should not be taken for self. The Buddha then said to Rhula: Develop the mind-development that is like the earth, Rhula. For, from developing the mind-development that is like the earth, Rhula, agreeable and disagreeable sensory impressions that have arisen, taking hold of your thought, will not persist. In the same way the Buddha told Rhula to develop the mind- development that is like water, fire, wind and space (air). What are we doing when there are agreeable or disagreeable sense-impressions that take hold of us? Do we take them for self, or can we realize them as only elements? Rhula had to be mindful of all realities appearing through the six doors in order to see them as only elements. Further on we read that the Buddha encouraged Rhula to the development of lovingkindness, compassion, sympathetic joy, equanimity, the contemplation of the foul and the perception of impermanence. It was only after the Buddha had taught all this to Rhula that he spoke about mindfulness of breathing. Rhula did not apply himself to this subject without knowing anything. While he applied himself to mindfulness of breathing he realized the true nature of all nmas and rpas appearing through the six doors. He had accumulated great wisdom and therefore he was able to develop mindfulness of breathing so that it was of great fruit, of great advantage. The Buddha said that if it was developed in that way the final in-breaths and out-breaths too are known as they cease, they are not unknown. ********** Nina. #97864 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu May 14, 2009 1:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] siila nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 13-mei-2009, om 10:09 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > How can I make restraining cittas to arise? I dont like the way I > speak. ------ N: When hiri (shame of akusala) and ottappa (fear of the consequences) do not arise, you may speak in an unpleasant way to others. Quote from Journey with Dhamma in Egypt and Turkey I am revising and typing out now: < Sla, morality, is one of the perfections; we have to develop the cetasikas which are abstention from unwholesome speech and unwholesome action (virati cetasikas), and we need patience to develop them. We may have an idea of I have sla, but in order to develop sla a precise knowledge of the different moments of kusala citta and of akusala citta is indispensable. We may be about to speak unpleasant words but pa can realize the disadvantage of akusala. Then the cetasika that is abstention can stop angry words, even if one has opened ones mouth already, Acharn said. When we give in to unpleasant speech and disagreeable behaviour we only think of ourselves, we are not considerate towards others. When we are with close friends, we are used to letting ourselves go more easily when we speak. Do we know when the citta is kusala and when it is akusala? I said to Acharn that I complain to my husband when I am tired or hungry, when I do not like something, that I let myself go more easily when I am with him. Acharn answered: We should develop wholesomeness. Nobody likes to hear unpleasant words. We can change our habits little by little. When someone is complaining he is thinking of himself first, whereas when he thinks of the other persons feelings he forgets about himself.> During this journey we received many practical lessons from Kh Sujin about problems in daily life. She often said that when one thinks of others, not of oneself, there are more conditions for kusala sla. Seeing the value of kusala is beneficial. The most effective way is developing understanding of naama and ruupa. When there is a lessening in the belief that persons exist, one will mind less what others say and not retort in a bitter way. What is heard is just sound, a rupa element. How can one be cross with sound. Here is another quote from the same text: < We often think with akusala citta about people. Acharn said: Where is that being? It is only a story in your mind. Previous experiences condition the thought of a being. Gradually we can come to understand what is meant by being alone with visible object at the moment of seeing, because there is nobody in the visible object. One can be alone at the moment of hearing sound, because there is no idea of anyone at that moment. When awareness arises of the visible object which appears, one is alone, there is no person there. At that moment one does not cling to an image or to details, there is no perversion. Visible object falls away and nothing is left; only the memory remains. Everything lasts just for a moment and in the next life everything is forgotten. We should often consider that we see visible object, no husband or wife, friend or relative. Acharn said to me: You assume that there is Lodewijk, but you just enjoy paatti, a concept. What is more beneficial: understanding that there is a reality, not Lodewijk, or thinking that he is Lodewijk?> As Sarah often emphasizes, right understanding of nama and rupa leads to more metta. ****** Nina. #97865 From: Rendal Mercer Date: Wed May 13, 2009 11:53 pm Subject: keep on acting... renmercer IF you act like you realize, you are acting.If you act that you are normal, then you are acting also.If you act that you know nothing, then you act.If tyou act that you are eveything, then you are....Remember, whatever your mind preceivevs is what you wish to see and whatrevere your mind does not see, is what you need to see.. SO what is it, that you see?..May you be well and may this weness lead to your enevitable joy, realization of silence and single-minded (samadhi) concentration.May all be well, healthy and happy.May you be as all are.Kindly,rm #97866 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu May 14, 2009 1:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Questions regarding Yoniso Manasikara etc. nilovg Dear Jessica, Op 13-mei-2009, om 14:44 heeft jessicamui het volgende geschreven: > Buddha is saying that with yoniso manasikara, upraising asava will > not arise, and arisen asava will be abandon. In your explanation, > yoniso manasikara co-arise with wholesome citta, and ayoniso > manasikara co-arises with unwholesome citta. If yoniso manasikara > cannot use the unwholesome citta, ie. the five hindrance as object, > how can it abandon the arisen asava ? Or it uses the previous arisn > unwholesome citta as object for attention? ------- N: As to , here we have to be more precise. The manodvaaraavajjanacitta (and in a sense- door process called votthapanacitta) is a kiriyacitta, and then it is followed by kusala cittas. It is according to accumulated conditions whether the manodvaaraavajjanacitta is followed by kusala cittas or akusala cittas. Thus, when we consider this kiriyacitta and the following javanacittas, it can be said that there is wise attention to the object that is experienced. This object can be a nama or rupa. When akusala citta is the object, it has arisen and fallen away in a previous process of cittas. but it can still be object of mindfulness. This brings me to your following question: ------ > J: Same goes for sati. I remember reading that sati co-arise with > wholesome citta, in that case, how can it takes the 5 hindrance as > object when practicing Satipatthana ? ------- N: Just the same, akusala that has just fallen away, and also kusala that has just fallen away, can be object of mindfulness and understanding in a following process. Cittas arise and fall away so rapidly, and the characteristic that appears is still the object of the present moment. In the satipatthaanasutta we see that also akusala citta and akusala cetasikas are objects of mindfulness and understanding. If akusala is not known as it is, how could it ever be eradicated? --------- > > J: From reading the sutta, I found that yoniso manasikara seems to > have similar function as sati as they both conditions panna to > arise. From the defination of the Pali dictionary of Yoniso:"down > to its origin or foundation," i. e. thoroughly, orderly, wisely, > properly, judiciously ..". It seems to be a strong/mature "grade" > of sati to me. -------- N: Wise attention refers to the attention (manasikaara which is inoperative citta) and the kusala cittas that follow. Kusala citta can be accompanied by pa~n~naa or without pa~n~naa. When there is wise attention it also refers to kusala citta without pa~n~naa. Each kusala citta is accompanied by sati. There need not be a high degree of sati. ------- J: Regarding dhamma vicaya, unlike all the other 6 enlightenment factors, it is not a cetasika. It is not panna itself and not sati, does it have similar function as yoniso manasikara ?The reason that I'm asking is that there are so many "terms" with similar functions. I just want to know if the same one is called by two different names under different circumstance. ------ N: It is pa~n~naa cetasika. Here under the aspect of enlightenment factor. Different names are given to the same cetasika in order to show different aspects. There are many names for pa~n~naa, many aspects. To return to your quote from the sabbaasavasutta: Here we have to think of right effort of the eightfold Path that is accompanied by right view (pa~n~naa) of the eightfold Path. In this case pa~n~naa has to accompany the kusala citta. Compare the notes in the translation of Ven. Bodhi for yoniso manasikaara. He quotes the co: the mode of attention to an object is the basis for kusala cittas or akusala cittas, not the object itself. We may experience a very unpleasant object such as sound, but this need not be a condition for akusala citta with aversion. It can be faced with wisdom. Helpful for daily life. ****** Nina. #97867 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu May 14, 2009 1:57 am Subject: Re: [dsg] keep on acting... nilovg Dear Rendal, Op 14-mei-2009, om 8:53 heeft Rendal Mercer het volgende geschreven: > SO what is it, that you see? ------ N: Very simple, just that which appears through the eyes, visible object or colour. At the moment of seeing it is not known whether it is a pleasant or an unpleasant colour, but it is conditioned by kusala kamma or by akusala kamma. We just believe that we see a person and we think a great deal about what was seen, mostly with akusala cittas. We do not see a person, nor a thing, just colour. For the development of insight it is important to know the difference between seeing and thinking of a concept such as a person. Nina. #97868 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu May 14, 2009 3:06 am Subject: Re: Dukkha; anatta (was, Not self vs. not-self) kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Epstein" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > . . . > I'm still looking for an explanation of how a lack of self can be a discernible positive characteristic all by itself without comparing it to the false concept of having a self. So far: I've gotten nothing along these lines, just the naked assertion that it is so because it must be so. . . . > How does something that is a lack of self appear when you see it? -------------------- Hi Robert E (and Jon), Excuse my interrupting, but this reminds me of a discussion you and I had on the same topic. I gave an example of inherent characteristics that were accepted by conventional science. The mass of an element is one of its inherent characteristics. So perhaps you could answer your own question: 'how does mass appear when you see it?' It doesn't appear to sight at all, does it? However, it is real and it can appear to (be an object of) scientific understanding. Similarly, anatta is real and can be an object of satipatthana-understanding. From my brief internet research, I gathered that another inherent characteristic of conventional elements was impenetrability. Because of their impenetrability characteristic, no two elements could occupy the same space. So the same question applies: 'How does impenetrability appear when you see it? Does the fact that you can't see it disqualify impenetrability from being an actual, inherent, characteristic of matter? Ken H #97869 From: "sprlrt" Date: Thu May 14, 2009 6:02 am Subject: Re: Questions regarding Asava & Yoniso Manasikara sprlrt Hi Jessica - I'm posting this exercise in pali translation in addition to Nina's posts on the subject of manasikara/considering - Alberto Dhammasangani nikkhepakandam; suttantika dukam: 1340. tattha katamaa manasikaarakusalataa? yaa taasa.m dhaatuuna.m manasikaarakusalataa pa~n~naa pajaananaa...pe... amoho dhammavicayo sammaadi.t.thi -- aya.m vuccati manasikaarakusalataa. Of these [dhammas], which is skill in considering? That which, of these [eighteen] dhatus, is skill in considering, paa, understanding ... etc... amoho dhammavicayo sammaadi.t.thi [all synonims of paa]; This is what is called skill in considering. Atthasalini: Skill in the elements applies to paa capable of discerning the 18 dhatus on hearing and keeping in mind, studying and considering Skill in considering applies to paa capable of studying & considering Skill in the spheres applies to paa capable of discerning the 12 ayatanas on hearing and keeping in mind, studying and considering Or, studying, considering, hearing, direct knowledge, attainment, reviewing, all come to full circle through these three skills. Of these, hearing, studying, reviewing are lokiya/mundane; attainment is lokuttara/supramundane; direct knowledge and considering are both, lokiya and lokuttara. 1340. A.t.thaarasanna.m dhaatuuna.m uggaha-manasikaara-savana-dhaara.na-pariccheda-jaananaka-paaa dhaatukusalataa naama. Taasaṃyeva uggaha-manasikaara-jaananaka-paaa manasikaarakusalataa naama. 1342. Dvaadasannam aayatanaana.m uggaha-manasikaara-savana-dhaara.na-pariccheda-jaananaka-paaa aayatanaana kusalataa naama. Tiisupi vaa etaasu kusalataasu uggaho manasikaaro savana.m sammasana.m pa.tivedho paccavekkha.naati sabba.m va.t.tati. Tattha savana-uggaha-paccavekkha.naa lokiyaa, pa.tivedho lokuttaro. Sammasana-manasikaaraa lokiya-lokuttara-missakaa. #97870 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu May 14, 2009 3:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) upasaka_howard Hi, Robert (and Jon) - In a message dated 5/14/2009 1:00:13 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, epsteinrob@... writes: Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (97594 - B) > > ---------------------- > > > I think the description assumes that implicit in the idea of a "self" is the idea that anything that is part of that is within the control of the "self". > > > > It is not implicit in all ideas of the self. Our Western idea of self includes being out of control and moving towards greater control; having parts of self that are subconscious and are not controlled or which control us without our awareness, and many other factors. It is the Buddha's own definition of self, in the sense of "true self" which says that anything out of control is "not self." He is promoting this definition, not taking it as a given. > > ---------------------- > > I do not see the Buddha as attempting a definition of "self". There would be no point in defining something that is being rejected as not having any basis in reality. Well....why say that "this is not self, that is not self" rather than "self is illusory" which he never says. This has always mystified me. But he must have a reason for the program he does have. He says that which cannot be controlled, which changes and which is unsatisfying because of its changing and elusive nature, is anicca, not self. That is always his line of argument and he never states positively that self either exists or does not, but he rules out everything that is within samsara and bears the three marks. That is all. His teaching is to relinquish that which is not self, not that self is illusory. Of course there is nothing left that could qualify *as* self, except for nibbana, of course..... --------------------------------------------- I think the Buddha operated as a skilled psychologist. It would do little good for the Buddha to just tell people "Hey, there's no such thing as a self!" What he did was to lead people to directly discover (or uncover) for themselves that there ain't no such thing. ============================== With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97871 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu May 14, 2009 11:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) nilovg Dear Rob Ep and Howard, Op 14-mei-2009, om 16:31 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Rob Ep: Of course there is nothing left that could > qualify *as* self, except for nibbana, of course..... > ---- N: all dhammas are anattaa, and this includes nibbaana. Nibbaana is not a self, a person, a place. > > --------------------------------------------- > Howard: I think the Buddha operated as a skilled psychologist. It > would do > little good for the Buddha to just tell people "Hey, there's no > such thing as > a self!" What he did was to lead people to directly discover (or > uncover) > for themselves that there ain't no such thing. ------ N: Well said, Howard. The Buddha taught in such a way that people could develop 'their own' understanding. They had to be an island, a refuge to themselves. That is much more convincing than just follow someone else. In that way confidence grows and one can become firmly established in the Dhamma. Nina. #97872 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu May 14, 2009 11:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions regarding Asava & Yoniso Manasikara nilovg Dear Alberto. thank you for a valuable post. I appreciate the Pali. Meanings depend very much on the context, like yoniso manaasikaara. Nina. Op 14-mei-2009, om 15:02 heeft sprlrt het volgende geschreven: > Of these [dhammas], which is skill in considering? That which, of > these [eighteen] dhatus, is skill in considering, paa, > understanding ... etc... amoho dhammavicayo sammaadi.t.thi [all > synonims of paa]; This is what is called skill in considering. #97873 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu May 14, 2009 11:36 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) nilovg Dear Rob Ep, Op 14-mei-2009, om 7:23 heeft Robert Epstein het volgende geschreven: > Although the whole world rises and falls in each moment, the > thousands of processes and lifetimes of accumulations do not take > place in each single moment. ------- N: I had to think this over. The lifetimes of accumulated inclinations are all contained in one citta and going on to the next one. But accumulations are not static, new accumulations are added all the time. For instance, your mother has taught you generosity and good morality, and these learning moments are accumulated, not lost. They influence citta today. Thus we can say: aeons of accumulations are contained in each citta. In that way the Bodhisatta accumulated all the perfections in endless lives. Nina. #97874 From: "colette" Date: Thu May 14, 2009 8:49 am Subject: Re: keep on acting... ksheri3 I was so captured by Nina's response here that I had to go back and see where this all started. I got to a point where you made it clear that a person needs this or that such as " a drunkard needs another drink of beer and a politician wants a vote." Charlie Danials Band, but you are suggesting something that has no chance of being existant unless humanity is reduced to being a battery (see THE MATRIX) Now I get why Nina was so profound, here. You mix a lot of different aspects together which do not mix in the same mixxing bowl the way you have them set up to be mixxed. Is all behavior an act? If we are acting then is there are script that has already been, pre-existing conditions, written that I am following and performing as the actor that you theorize I am and that you are? Now you enter into the mind-only school by theorizing that this hypothetical "act" which we are all supposedly performing through is the only reality which is existant. This throw out the window the Relative Truth and the Ultimate Truth but that's a different subject. "Remember, whatever your mind preceivevs is what you wish to see ..." That's good theory which can be verified. "...and whatrevere your mind does not see, is what you need to see.. " colette: that, my friend, is way out there. BTW, how did you do that? I mean you completely disappeared from the reality I see. I mean, did hyou suddenly become lost in space and in some other galaxy which I cannot comprehend and/or visualize? How is it possible that what my mind's eye does not perceive is THEN what I needed or need to see? How can you prove that I need to see anything? In fact, when I was in the Emergency Room waiting to see a doctor in the mid-90s while my face was swelling up, so swollen that my eyes closed and I could not see through them, I sat there and verbalized as though I was talking to myself, I verbalized the sensations that I was going through at that time and I clearly cognized and focused upon the lack of sight I had through my eyes and yet how clearly I could see without my eyes. That, is nothing more than a point of contact that my mind has with my body and it's functions (you can see any martial arts practicioner do this is their work through the Arts of War or Martial Arts, sensory deprivation is a testable skill) So, even if it were remotely possible for you to dictate to me what I do and do not NEED then I could simply fall back on this reality that I have experienced and know from it's occurance in the mid-90s. can you hear the overwhelming sound of a single hand clapping? toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Rendal Mercer wrote: > > IF you act like you realize, you are acting.If you act that you are normal, then you are acting also.If you act that you know nothing, then you act.If tyou act that you are eveything, then you are....Remember, whatever your mind preceivevs is what you wish to see and whatrevere your mind does not see, is what you need to see.. SO what is it, that you see?..May you be well and may this weness lead to your enevitable joy, realization of silence and single-minded (samadhi) concentration.May all be well, healthy and happy.May you be as all are.Kindly,rm > #97875 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu May 14, 2009 11:22 pm Subject: Re: New to group and Buddhism kenhowardau Hi Mona, Welcome from me too. I would be interested to know what you think of the group so far. You will have noticed that some of us are encouraging you to meditate, while others are encouraging you to study. That's because there are some very divergent understandings of the Dhamma here. Don't be too polite to point them out. :-) Ken H #97876 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri May 15, 2009 1:53 am Subject: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Fours (10) and commentary, part 1. nilovg Dear friends, sutta 10: Walshe DN 33.1.11(10) 'Four efforts: The effort of (a) restraint (sa'mvara- padhaana'm), (b) abandoning (pahaana-p.), (c) development (bhaavanaa- p.), (d) preservation (anurakkha.na-p,). What is (a) the effort of restraint? Here, a monk, on seeing an object with the eye, does not grasp at the whole or its details, ... he watches over the sense of sight and guards it (similarly with sounds, smells, tastes, tactile sensations, thoughts). --------- N: The co gives some word explanations. Padhaana: it clarifies this as padhaana utama: the highest effort. Subco: The effort of restraint that has arisen so that covetousness etc. do not arise. N: The highest effort arises together with right understanding of realities. -------- Sutta: What is (b) the effort of abandoning? Here, a monk does not assent to a thought of lust, of hatred, of cruelty that has arisen, but abandons it, dispels it, destroys it, makes it disappear. -------- N: These are the three kinds of wrong thinking. Their opposites are the three kinds of right thinking: thinking of renunciation, of non- illwill and of non-harming. -------- Sutta: What is (c) the effort of development? Here, a monk develops the enlightenment-factor of mindfulness, of investigation of states (dhamma vicaya), ...of energy, ...of delight, ...of tranquility, ...of concentration, ...of equanimity, based on solitude, detachment, extinction, leading to maturity of surrender. -------- N: This is effort that has arisen and develops the enlightenment factors. Co: As to the words based on solitude (viveka-nissita), detachment (viraago), extinction (nirodho), these three are names of nibbaana. Nibbaana is seclusion from the substratum of rebirth (upadhi). As to viraago, depending on this (nbbaana), there is detachment from desire etc. As to cessation (nirodho), there is the ceasing of desire etc. Based on solitude refers to the object that is experienced and to what should be attained, this is based on nibbaana. N: We read about the meaning of seclusion, viveka, in the Co to the Root of Existence (Mulapariyaya sutta, as tr. by Ven. Bodhi)that there are five kinds of seclusion, or abandoning: by substitution of opposite factors(tadanga pahaana), by suppression (in jhaana), by eradication (by the four paths), by tranquillization (by the four fruitions) and by escape (nibbaana). As regards abandoning by substitution of opposite factors (tadanga pahaana), this occurs during the development of the stages of insight. The personality view is abandoned by the first stage of insight: defining naama and ruupa, distinquishing their different characteristics, and by each of the higher stages there is abandoning by opposite factors. As to the words of the sutta, fading away (viraga) and cessation (nirodha), these have the same meaning as seclusion, viveka. --------- As to maturity of relinquishment (vossaga-pari.naamin), this is relinquishment as giving up (of defilements) and as entering into nibbaana. We read in the co: We read that also the path is called both relinquishment as giving up and relinquishment as entering into. He fulfills the development of vipassanaa and of the Path. The subco explains that the Path abandons the defilements by eradication and that it also abandons the khandhas. N: When all defilements have been eradicated, there will not be the arising of the khandhas at rebirth anymore. -------- (to be continued) Nina #97877 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri May 15, 2009 3:18 am Subject: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 31. nilovg Dear friends, The Buddha taught Rhula about the eye, visible object and seeing- consciousness, about all realities which appear through the six doors. He taught Rhula until he attained arahatship. We read in the Kindred Sayings ( IV, Salyatana-vagga, Kindred Sayings on Sense, Third Fifty, Chapter II, 121, Rhula) that it occurred to the Buddha, while he was near Svatth, at the Jeta Grove, that Rhula was ripe for the attainment of arahatship. He wanted to give Rhula the last teachings and he said to him that they would go to Dark Wood. We read: Now at that time countless thousands of devas were following the Exalted One, thinking: Today the Exalted One will give the venerable Rhula the last teachings for the destruction of the savas. So the Exalted One plunged into the depths of Dark Wood and sat down at the foot of a certain tree on the seat prepared for him. And the venerable Rhula, saluting the Exalted One, sat down also at one side. As he thus sat the Exalted One said to the venerable Rhula: Now what do you think, Rhula? Is the eye permanent or impermanent? Impermanent, lord. What is impermanent is that happiness or dukkha? Dukkha, lord. Now what is impermanent, woeful, by nature changeableis it fitting to regard that as This is mine. This am I. This is myself? Surely not, lord. (The same is said about the other phenomena appearing through the sense-doors and through the mind-door.) Thus spoke the Exalted One. And the venerable Rhula was delighted with the words of the Exalted One and welcomed them. And when this instruction was given, the venerable Rhulas heart was freed from the savas without grasping. And in those countless devas arose the pure and spotless eye of the Dhamma, so that they knew: Whatsoever is of a nature to arise, all that is of a nature to cease. ' When we read this sutta we may find it to be a repetition of so many suttas. We may read it countless times, but we may only have theoretical understanding of the truth. One day the truth may be realized but this depends on the degree of the development of pa. Is the eye permanent or impermanent? Is what is impermanent happiness or dukkha? Should we take it for self? Are the other realities permanent or impermanent? The Buddha spoke about all the realities which appear now. If we do not yet have a keen understanding of seeing and visible object which appear now, at this moment, if we cannot yet distinguish between the different characteristics of nma and of rpa which appear now, their arising and falling away cannot be realized. When the Buddha asked Rhula about the true nature of realities, would Rhula only have been thinking about nma and rpa, or did he at that moment realize their true nature? We know the answer. Rhula was mindful of realities appearing through the six doors, and thus his wisdom could be fully developed. Otherwise he could not have attained arahatship. --------- Nina. #97878 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri May 15, 2009 4:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] New to group and Buddhism sarahprocter... Dear Mona, Many thanks for your super intro and also for the nice pics you've put in the photo album. I hope your good example in both respects will encourage others to do the same! --- On Wed, 13/5/09, atomicmonky wrote: >You now have someone who was raised Catholic in your group. ... S: I think you might be surprised to find many others here who were also either raised as Catholics or who converted to Catholicism before becoming interested in Buddhism....many nationalities and many backgrounds, but we all share a sincere interest in understanding the Buddha's teachings as applied to our daily lives. >I sincerely seek a path that encompasses the study of the original pali texts because I pursue the original teachings of the historical Buddha (as close as I can get to them since his discourses were in the oral tradition. But I'm reassured about Pali Text study since Pali was the language of the Buddha himself). ... S: This is very interesting and I'm sure you'll feel very 'at home' here. I look forward to many discussions and sharings with you. As Scott mentioned, sometime you may like to look at 'useful posts' in the files section. You and others might like to look at a section there: "New to the list and new to Buddhism". ... >Anywho. I truly believe that Buddhism will continue to evolve and thrive in the West because of its non-denominational and philosophical assistance in self-enlightment (though there is no self in the ultimate reality of things; only in the historical reality of things. .... S: We'll see. Self-view makes it very difficult to really appreciate the Teachings - to understand the ultimate realities being experienced now. .... >I'm interested in Visspasana Meditation. But I don't have the time to participate in a ten-day SN Goenka retreat. So I do my own thing. ... S: We all do (our own thing), or rather mental phenomena do 'their own thing'. It all comes back to the present moment, no matter the situation, as others are saying. ... >I'd like to thank Sarah and Jonothan Abbott for creating and moderating this site and for allowing me to join the group and giving me the opportunity to belong to a community dedicated to the study of the Pali texts. .... S: This is very sweet and thoughtful of you, Mona. A group is only as good as its members, so we're very appreciative of all the contributions from our friends here - old and new, like yourself. .... >Can I say I belong to a sangha now? Argh. I don't know what the heck I'm doing. Maybe things will fall into place as I go along. I welcome any fellow members to contact me and share their insights with me if they have the time. And thank you for reading my intro. It was a doozie. -Mona ... S: You've joined and you've posted and you certainly belong:-) I'm rushing around to get ready for a flight in a few hours (actually 3 flights), from Hong Kong to Fiji, but wished to welcome you before closing down the computer... Look forward to reading more of your comments and reflections.. Metta, Sarah ========= #97879 From: "Christine Forsyth" Date: Fri May 15, 2009 12:58 pm Subject: Abhidhamma article by I.B. Horner 1941 christine_fo... Hello all, I'm not sure if this has been discussed previously on Dhammstudygroup ~ but would be interested in members opinions of this article: Abhidhamma Abhivinaya in the first two of the Pāli Canon I.B. Horner The Indian Historical Quarterly, Vol.17:3, Sep.1941 http://www.buddhanet.net/budsas/ebud/ebsut064.htm metta Chris ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- #97880 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Fri May 15, 2009 3:54 pm Subject: [dsg] Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) kenhowardau Hi Howard (and Jon), ---------- <. . .> J: > > I do not see the Buddha as attempting a definition of "self". There would > be no point in defining something that is being rejected as not having any > basis in reality. > > H: > Then what is it that is being rejected?! A concept that has no basis > in reality needs to be defined, else the denial is worthless. ------------ It has taken a while, but I think I am beginning to see what you mean, Howard. I say 'it has taken a while' because at first glance you are asking the impossible, aren't you? How can you expect anyone to define (give meaning to, show clearly, identify by a distinctive characteristic) something that does not exist (has no meaning, cannot be shown, has no characteristic)? But maybe there is a way I have just snipped three paragraphs of [what turned out to be] circular reasoning. :-) I thought if we could define the functions of wrong view we could define self. Self would then be a function. That would be all right as far as it went because a function of a paramattha dhamma (absolute reality) is not, itself, an absolute reality. But then why would we say 'there is no self?' Do we say there is no function? I give up, it's making my head spin! :-) Apologies if you have already answered this question, Howard, but do you have a definition of self? Ken H #97881 From: "glenjohnann" Date: Fri May 15, 2009 5:22 pm Subject: Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) -2b glenjohnann Hi Scott and Sarah: I am somewhat behind in my reading on the site - hence a reply today to something written almost a week ago. I am finding your discussion on "thinking" very interesting and useful. I had always put "thinking" into a little corner of its own, knowing that in many respects it was like the sense consciousness, however, also knowing that it was different because it's object is so often a concept and not a dhamma. I always thought that at some point this would be elaborated on (being content to think about the sense door processes more) and this discussion is the eye-opener that I have been waiting for. I will continue reading and catch up - soon, I hope. Thank you for thi discussion. Ann #97882 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri May 15, 2009 5:14 pm Subject: Going Upwards! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: There is many folly ways, but only One really good Way! The Blessed Buddha once said: Some priests postulate this as the way going upwards: "Get up early and walk facing east. Do not avoid a pit, or a cliff abyss, or a stump, or a thorny place, or a village or a cesspool! You should expect death wherever you fall. Thus, good man, with the breakup of the body, after death, you will be reborn in a good destination, in a heavenly world." This the praxis of the priests, Bhikkhus, is a foolish & stupid way, since it does neither lead to revulsion, to disillusion, to ceasing, to peace, to direct knowledge, to Enlightenment, nor to Nibbāna! However, Bhikkhus, I will explain the very way Going Upwards in the Noble One's Discipline, that way, which leads to utter revulsion, to disillusion, to ceasing, to peace, to safe knowledge, to Enlightenment, to Nibbāna: Any Noble Disciple possesses a sure confirmed confidence in the Buddha thus: Worthy, & perfectly self-Enlightened is the Buddha ! in the Dhamma thus: Perfectly formulated is the Buddha -Dhamma, visible right here & now, in the Sangha thus: Perfectly training is this Noble Sangha of the Buddha's disciples, and He possesses the morality liked by the Noble Ones, unbroken ... which leads to concentration! This, Bhikkhus & friends, is that way going upwards, which leads to utter revulsion, to disillusion, to ceasing, to Peace, to direct knowledge and experience, to Enlightenment, and to Nibbāna! Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samāhita, Sri Lanka * http://What-Buddha-Said.net Going Upwards! #97883 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri May 15, 2009 3:56 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Jon) - In a message dated 5/15/2009 6:55:16 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard (and Jon), ---------- <. . .> J: > > I do not see the Buddha as attempting a definition of "self". There would > be no point in defining something that is being rejected as not having any > basis in reality. > > H: > Then what is it that is being rejected?! A concept that has no basis > in reality needs to be defined, else the denial is worthless. ------------ It has taken a while, but I think I am beginning to see what you mean, Howard. I say 'it has taken a while' because at first glance you are asking the impossible, aren't you? How can you expect anyone to define (give meaning to, show clearly, identify by a distinctive characteristic) something that does not exist (has no meaning, cannot be shown, has no characteristic)? But maybe there is a way I have just snipped three paragraphs of [what turned out to be] circular reasoning. :-) I thought if we could define the functions of wrong view we could define self. Self would then be a function. That would be all right as far as it went because a function of a paramattha dhamma (absolute reality) is not, itself, an absolute reality. But then why would we say 'there is no self?' Do we say there is no function? I give up, it's making my head spin! :-) Apologies if you have already answered this question, Howard, but do you have a definition of self? Ken H =========================== I think there are several senses of 'self', all of which are denied validity in the Dhamma. Some of these you would take exception to, I think, but they are not the primary sense in any case, and I will skip discussion of them. The primary sense of 'self' relevant to the teaching of anatta is that of "personal self," which refers to an alleged independent and lasting core or essence (or "soul") within the aggregates. It is this notion that is the primary concept utterly denied any basis in reality in Buddhism. With metta, Howard Emptiness /He who does not find core or substance in any of the realms of being, like flowers which are vainly sought in fig trees that bear none — such a seeker gives up the here and the beyond, just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin./ (From the Uraga Sutta) #97884 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat May 16, 2009 2:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) nilovg Hi Howard, Op 16-mei-2009, om 4:56 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > The primary sense of 'self' relevant to the teaching of anatta is that > of "personal self," which refers to an alleged independent and lasting > core or essence (or "soul") within the aggregates. It is this > notion that is > the primary concept utterly denied any basis in reality in Buddhism. ------ N: Anattaa does not only refer to a personal self, also to a "thing" that seems to "exist" outside oneself. Ruupakkhandha refers to all ruupas, not just the ruupas of the body. Nina. #97885 From: "Phil" Date: Sat May 16, 2009 2:06 am Subject: Congratulations on Nina's new book philofillet Dear Nina and all Popping by to thank Nina for sending me her new book, and express congratulations. "The Buddhist Teaching on Physical Phenomena" is very good, I'm about halfway through it. I'll come back with questions if any come up. Metta, Phil p.s I've been enjoying a time away from Dhamma discussion, will come back to it some day, I'm sure. Hope you've all been well. #97886 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat May 16, 2009 6:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Congratulations on Nina's new book nilovg Dear Phil, I am so glad about your interest in the subject. Do come back with questions. Useful for everybody, including myself. Nina. Op 16-mei-2009, om 11:06 heeft Phil het volgende geschreven: > "The Buddhist Teaching on Physical Phenomena" is very good, I'm > about halfway through it. I'll come back with questions if any come > up. #97887 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat May 16, 2009 6:41 am Subject: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Fours (10) and commentary, part 2. nilovg Dear friends, (continuation of sutta 10 and commentary) Sutta: What is (d) the effort of preservation? Here, a monk keeps firmly in his mind a favourable object of concentration which has arisen, such as a skeleton, or a corpse that is full of worms, blue-black, full of holes, bloated. --------- N: As to a favorable subject, the co. states that this refers to the perception of a skeleton (a.t.thi). The subco: jhaana is attained by means of the perception of a skeleton. Jhaana is dealt with under the heading of sa~n~naa. The co. explains that samaadhi preserves in purifying from desire, aversion and ignorance. It refers to the ten subjects of foulness (the corpse in different states of decay), as explained in the Visuddhimagga. the subco explains that the perception of a skeleton is most beneficial in suppressing the hindrances and evil dhammas, and in destroying desire. -------- N: The four aspects of effort, viriya, refer to effort or energy arising together with right understanding of realities. We are inclined to think of 'my effort' but it is a conditioned dhamma, a cetasika arising with many types of cittas, also with akusala cittas. Right effort is a support for right understanding, it conditions perseverance with its development, which is called in the commentaries a development that takes a long time (ciira kala bhaavanaa). It takes aeons since we have accumulated ignorance and wrong view for aeons. When progress is so slow one might become disheartened, but right effort that accompanies right understanding performs its function so that there is perseverance. Even when listening again and again, considering dhammas again and again, effort or energy condition persevering with the development of right understanding. The second aspect, the effort of abandoning, this is the abandoning of sensuous thinking, thinking with aversion and thinking with cruelty. The whole day we think of sense objects and are attached to them. Right understanding of naama and ruupa leads to the opposite of sensuous thinking: renunciation or detachment. First there has to be detachment from the idea of self, and eventually there can be detachment from all sense objects. As to the third aspect, the effort of developing, this refers to the development of the factors leading to enlightenment. Through satipa.t.thaana these can reach fulfilment. They lead to solitude or seclusion, in fact, mental seclusion: defilements will be eradicated through the development of insight stage by stage, and when lokuttara cittas arise nibbaana is experienced. Nibbaana is seclusion from the substratum of rebirth (upadhi). As to the fourth aspect, the effort of preservation, this refers to the perception of a skeleton and with this subject jhaana can be attained. Again, this effort should be accompanied with right understanding of naama and ruupa. A skeleton can remind us that our body is like a skeleton. It consists of elements that are arising and falling away, thus, that are constantly decaying. The jhaanacitta that arises should not be taken for self, it is a conditioned reality. ****** (concluded) Nina. #97888 From: han tun Date: Sat May 16, 2009 6:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Congratulations on Nina's new book hantun1 Dear Nina (Phil), I join Phil in congratulating you for your new book The Buddhist Teaching on Physical Phenomena. I really appreciate it. Respectfully, Han #97889 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat May 16, 2009 4:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 5/16/2009 5:37:22 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, Op 16-mei-2009, om 4:56 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > The primary sense of 'self' relevant to the teaching of anatta is that > of "personal self," which refers to an alleged independent and lasting > core or essence (or "soul") within the aggregates. It is this > notion that is > the primary concept utterly denied any basis in reality in Buddhism. ------ N: Anattaa does not only refer to a personal self, also to a "thing" that seems to "exist" outside oneself. Ruupakkhandha refers to all ruupas, not just the ruupas of the body. Nina. ============================ I was adressing the *primary* notion of self relevant to the Dhamma, Nina. I thought I had made that clear. With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97890 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat May 16, 2009 11:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) nilovg Hi Howard, Op 16-mei-2009, om 17:24 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I was adressing the *primary* notion of self relevant to the Dhamma, > Nina. I thought I had made that clear. ---- N: Sorry, sorry, I overlooked *primary* ;-)) Nina. #97891 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat May 16, 2009 8:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 5/16/2009 2:51:01 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, Op 16-mei-2009, om 17:24 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I was adressing the *primary* notion of self relevant to the Dhamma, > Nina. I thought I had made that clear. ---- N: Sorry, sorry, I overlooked *primary* ;-)) ------------------------------------- No problem in the slightest. :-) ------------------------------------ Nina. ======================= With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97892 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sat May 16, 2009 2:14 pm Subject: [dsg] Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) kenhowardau Hi Howard, ----------- <. . .> H: > I think there are several senses of 'self', all of which are denied validity in the Dhamma. Some of these you would take exception to, I think, but they are not the primary sense in any case, and I will skip discussion of them. ------------ Oh yes, I remember now. I had been wondering where your discussion with Jon (about defining self) was headed to - or coming from. But now I remember. In fact, I think I have asked you the same question before, and you have answered. You believe 'self' means 'sabhava' or 'inherent characteristics.' And, as you say, we can skip that topic: it has already been done to death on other threads. :-) So I apologise for my forgetfulness. I was mainly trying to stir up a discussion; DSG was eerily quiet yesterday. Ken H #97893 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sat May 16, 2009 5:32 pm Subject: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) kenhowardau Hi Sarah, The ball is in my court; sorry for the delay. It's a good thing we're not playing tennis! :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > ... > S: And therefore, the development of the path has nothing to do with the understanding, concentration, effort, awareness and so on of a self doing anything. It's just the development of the path factors, beginning with the right understanding of the naama or ruupa appearing now. --------- And that nama or rupa has already fallen away! No idea of a self (even of a Roger Federer) could have got to it in time. Some people will say 'But you can get to another one in time. Just prepare your mind for (say) visible object to come along, and then, when visible object does come along, your prepared mind will grasp it.' But that's not the way it works. As some people here have been discussing, it is more like a series of one act plays. From moment to moment the curtain goes down and then goes up on a completely new scene - from a completely new play. There is no "preparer" in one moment who continues on to be the "prepared" in the next. Hope you arrived safely in Fiji; no floods this time. Ken H > > Perhaps Lukas and others would also like to join in the thread. In any case, back in your court now! > > #97894 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat May 16, 2009 4:40 pm Subject: Higher Release! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: The 4 Brahmaviharas deliver mind into a Higher State! The Blessed Buddha once said: The Noble Disciple, Bhikkhus & friends, freed from greed and grudge, unconfused, alert, attentive and clearly comprehending, with mind full of kind friendliness ... of compassionate pity ... of altruistic joy ... and of imperturbable equanimity, pervades first one direction, then the second, then the 3rd one, then the 4th one, just as above, so below, & all around! Thus sympathetic with all, embracing all, he pervades the whole world, & the entire universe with a vast mind, refined, infinite, freed from all hate and any ill-will. And he understands: Formerly my mind was limited and undeveloped. Now, however, is my mind unlimited and developed, and no limited behaviour based on a narrow intention will remain here or persist! What do you think, Bhikkhus & friends: If a boy from his early childhood develops kind friendliness, compassionate pity, altruistic joy, and quite imperturbable equanimity, will he then still be able to do bad evil deeds? No, Venerable One... But, if he no longer does bad deeds, will suffering then still attack him? Certainly not. Venerable One. How should anyone, doing no evil actions, still be attacked by suffering! Therefore should kind friendliness .. compassionate pity .. altruistic joy & imperturbable equanimity be developed, by all men, women & beings! No man or woman, on leaving this life, can keep this body. Any mortal has only his mind as base, mediator, creator, controller and protector! The Bhikkhu, however, knows: Whatever formerly I have done of bad deeds with this material body, all that I still have to atone for here, and after that, then nothing of it will follow me. So developed, the release of the mind by kind friendliness, by compassionate pity , by altruistic joy ... & by imperturbable equanimity, leads to Never-Return , unless the wise monk already during this life penetrates to a higher deliverance than that! Source: The Numerical Discourses of the Buddha. Anguttara Nikāya 10:208 http://What-Buddha-Said.net/Canon/Sutta/AN/Index.Numerical.htm More on the 3rd Noble State: Non-Return (Anāgāmi) http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/wtb/a/anagami.htm More these 4 Infinitely Divine States (Appamaññā Brahma-Vihāra): http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/wtb/b_f/brahma_vihaara.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/How_to_Cure_Anger_and_Irritation.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/The_Buddha_on_Noble_Frienship.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/Selfless_Friendship_is_Sweetest.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/IV/All-Embracing_Kindness.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/All_Embracing_Kindness.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/Rejoicing_Bliss_is_Mudita.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Blazing_Friendliness.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Anger_and_Irritation.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/IV/Subduing_Irritation.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/IV/The-Effective_Saw.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/United_in_Harmony.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/The_Good_Friend.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/IV/Good-Will_Again.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/IV/Hot_Hostile_Hate.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Goodwill_Encore.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Blazing_ &_Bright.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/Friendliness_Frees.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Kalyanamitta.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/Metta.htm Have a nice infinite day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samāhita, Sri Lanka * http://What-Buddha-Said.net The Higher Release! #97895 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat May 16, 2009 2:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 5/16/2009 5:15:04 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: So I apologise for my forgetfulness. I was mainly trying to stir up a discussion; DSG was eerily quiet yesterday. =========================== I hadn't noticed the quietness. That was a good thing on your part to do! :-) With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97896 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sat May 16, 2009 9:20 pm Subject: Re: Dukkha; anatta (was, Not self vs. not-self) epsteinrob Hi Ken. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Epstein" > wrote: > > > > Hi Jon. > > > . . . > > > I'm still looking for an explanation of how a lack of self can be a > discernible positive characteristic all by itself without comparing it > to the false concept of having a self. So far: I've gotten nothing along > these lines, just the naked assertion that it is so because it must be > so. > . . . > > > How does something that is a lack of self appear when you see it? > -------------------- > > Hi Robert E (and Jon), > > Excuse my interrupting, but this reminds me of a discussion you and I > had on the same topic. I gave an example of inherent characteristics > that were accepted by conventional science. The mass of an element is > one of its inherent characteristics. So perhaps you could answer your > own question: 'how does mass appear when you see it?' > > It doesn't appear to sight at all, does it? However, it is real and it > can appear to (be an object of) scientific understanding. Similarly, > anatta is real and can be an object of satipatthana-understanding. > > From my brief internet research, I gathered that another inherent > characteristic of conventional elements was impenetrability. Because of > their impenetrability characteristic, no two elements could occupy the > same space. > > So the same question applies: 'How does impenetrability appear when you > see it? Does the fact that you can't see it disqualify impenetrability > from being an actual, inherent, characteristic of matter? > > Ken H I did answer this challenge when you originally brought it up, but I will be happy to do so again. Perhaps you did not see my response the last time: Mass is describeable and measureable. You can say what it is as a positive characteristic. It has a definition - mass is the density of matter per unit. It not only applies to objects, but to digital pictures for instance. Pixels are also measures of density, and you can measure it easily by how many dots are within a square inch of space. So there is nothing mystifying about such a characteristic. Same with your other example - inpenetrability. Inpenetrability can be demonstrated by putting two objects in contact with each other and seeing clearly that they do not go through each other or intersect. Liquids are penetrable. Solids are not. So now you can answer the question I keep asking, in one form or another: how do you describe or demonstrate or measure anatta as a positive characteristic? What is its definition? If the definition is what everyone in the universe knows it to be - the absence of self or the fact of not being a self or part of self - it is not a positive characteristic, it is a negation of a characteristic, and that is how the Buddha defined it. So I await your counter-explanation. If you cannot specify it with a positive definition, then you do not actually know what it is, and if so I would then ask you - when you talk about the characteristic of anatta, exactly what are you referring to? Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = #97897 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sat May 16, 2009 9:23 pm Subject: [dsg] Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > I think the Buddha operated as a skilled psychologist. It would do > little good for the Buddha to just tell people "Hey, there's no such thing as > a self!" What he did was to lead people to directly discover (or uncover) > for themselves that there ain't no such thing. That may be so. In all my attempts, I have never personally discovered the elusive "self." It appears to be a concept. However, I would also reject the idea that anatta is a positive 'something,' rather than the understanding that there is no identifiable self and that things in the world that we attach to are not a 'part of self.' To me, that is the teaching of anatta, not that 'not-self' is a thingy that rides around on dhammas. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #97898 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sat May 16, 2009 9:29 pm Subject: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob Ep, > Op 14-mei-2009, om 7:23 heeft Robert Epstein het volgende geschreven: > > > Although the whole world rises and falls in each moment, the > > thousands of processes and lifetimes of accumulations do not take > > place in each single moment. > ------- > N: I had to think this over. The lifetimes of accumulated > inclinations are all contained in one citta and going on to the next > one. But accumulations are not static, new accumulations are added > all the time. > For instance, your mother has taught you generosity and good > morality, and these learning moments are accumulated, not lost. They > influence citta today. Thus we can say: aeons of accumulations are > contained in each citta. In that way the Bodhisatta accumulated all > the perfections in endless lives. > Nina. I would agree with this and thanks for discussing it. My point is that not every process has to 'take place' in a single moment, even though that moment may contain all past accumulations. We have been discussing the 'turning over' and 'beating' of the dhamma by right thinking, which gives this information to panna. Just as dhammas last for more than a single moment, but have a series of moments during which they come into being, persist and then fall away, and this process is not contained within a single moment, the process of 'beating and turning over' of the dhamma also takes place within a series of moments, with the accumulations of each moment of the investigation being accumulated and turned over to the citta of the next moment. Is this not correct, that this kind of process develops and accumulates over a series of moments as well? In this way I am trying to make a distinction between that which is *contained* with in the moment [which may be everything up to that point,] and that which *takes place* in a single moment, which may very well be part of a process that takes more than a single moment and is accumulated. Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - #97899 From: "szmicio" Date: Sat May 16, 2009 11:15 pm Subject: Re: siila szmicio Dear Phil, I wasn't capable to send you an off-list email. I received an failure-notice, that message cannot be deliver. So my replay is here: "Thank you for your kind encourage. It means a lot to me. As usuall I've got so many doubts. > I recommend reflecting on whether your behaviour is harmful to others. L: Yes, but isn't it better to know that this kind of thinking is conditioned also? For example for me it is very very hard to induce such thinking. Right thinking, thinking with compassion etc. >(My opinion is that it is within the shelter provided by non-harmful behaviour that the understanding that liberates from atta view can be developed but if we are obsessed by fears about atta from the beginning we won't get anywhere in weakening the power of gross defilements.) L: Yes, that's right. But also when there is right understanding, it conditions all elements of Eightfold Path. My best wishes Lukas P.s How do you manage pleasant feelings in your life. I am so attached to pleasant feeling. I dont like to have dosa." #97900 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun May 17, 2009 12:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Congratulations on Nina's new book nilovg Dear Han, I am always happy to see you here on the list, it means that your health is reasonably well, so that you can read and type. Perhaps you have a question or remark on my book? Even a few lines are welcome. Nina. Op 16-mei-2009, om 15:56 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > I join Phil in congratulating you for your new book The Buddhist > Teaching on Physical Phenomena. > I really appreciate it. #97901 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun May 17, 2009 12:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: siila nilovg Dear Lukas and Phil, A good thing you could not write offline, so that we all can share. Op 17-mei-2009, om 8:15 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > Yes, but isn't it better to know that this kind of thinking is > conditioned also? For example for me it is very very hard to induce > such thinking. Right thinking, thinking with compassion etc. ------ N: Yes, very important. You are attached to pleasant feeling, but who is not? We can come to understand that this attachment is conditioned, a mere dhamma. Gradually we may see it as less important. I reminded Lodewijk of your letter to him. He said again: in the present time there are too many distractions and he is disaouraged about developing right understanding. He gets confused when thinking of the Dhamma. Perhaps it is time for you to write another letter to him. #97902 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun May 17, 2009 1:42 am Subject: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 32. nilovg Dear friends, Letter 9. Tokyo, July 15, 1971 Dear Mr. G., You wrote: When I am aware of nma and rpa, I find that their appearance is not always followed by wisdom about them. We are bound to have doubts about the characteristic of sati and the characteristic of pa. Objects are experienced time and again without sati. We are absorbed in pleasant objects and we have aversion towards unpleasant objects; there are akusala cittas and there is no mindfulness of realities. Sometimes there can be conditions for awareness and then it arises just for a short moment. There can be study with awareness of realities, such as hardness which appears or feeling which presents itself. When there is the study of a characteristic of nma or rpa, there is a beginning of the development of pa, although pa is still weak. When you say that the appearance of nma and rpa is not always followed by pa you assume that there is first awareness and that pa follows later on. There can be sati without there being pa at that moment, but then there is no development of the Eightfold Path. Sati accompanies each kusala citta and there are many levels of sati. When there is awareness of a characteristic of nma or rpa there is development of understanding of that characteristic right at that moment. Pa of the Eightfold Path is not thinking about realities which have fallen away already. Right awareness of the Eightfold Path is difficult. There has to be awareness of one nma or rpa, of one object at a time. Do realities appear one at a time? It seems that there can be seeing and hearing or seeing and thinking at the same time. We may have begun to study what appears through the eyes, visible object, but is the characteristic of seeing known already? The nma which sees seems to be hidden, we cannot grasp it, it seems to escape us. It is only pa which can know nma and rpa as they are. Dont we take the study of realities for self? Then we are on the wrong way and nma and rpa will not be known as they are. We have an idea that they escape us. So long as we are not sotpanna we have to continue to take into account that we have wrong view and that we follow the wrong practice. ****** Nina. #97903 From: han tun Date: Sun May 17, 2009 1:49 am Subject: Re: Congratulations on Nina's new book hantun1 Dear Nina (Phil, Sarah), > Nina: I am always happy to see you here on the list, it means that your health is reasonably well, so that you can read and type. Perhaps you have a question or remark on my book? Even a few lines are welcome. Han: The age-related ailments are under control. But I have generalized weakness all over the body. If I walk the leg muscles get tired. If I do small things in the house I get tired easily. Even my jaw muscles get tired while chewing the food. If the weather is hot (which is hot in Bangkok now) I get easily tired in doing anything. Fortunately, I can still read and write, but not as much as before. -------------------- As regards your book, I have the hard copy that you sent. On top of that, I have downloaded from the internet through the following two links. http://www.abhidhamma.org/Rupa%201.htm http://www.abhidhamma.org/Rupa%202.htm There are slight differences here and there. I assume that some editing was done when the book was printed. My idea was to present the book to the DSG group in small installments. But I am not sure whether I can finish the task, so I have not yet asked your permission. If you have the latest on-line version, which is the same as the book, I will be grateful to have it. Respectfully, Han #97904 From: "szmicio" Date: Sun May 17, 2009 2:26 am Subject: Re: Congratulations on Nina's new book szmicio Dear Han > > Nina: I am always happy to see you here on the list, it means that your health is reasonably well, so that you can read and type. Perhaps you have a question or remark on my book? Even a few lines are welcome. > > Han: The age-related ailments are under control. But I have >generalized weakness all over the body. >If I walk the leg muscles get tired. If I do small things in the >house I get tired easily. Even my jaw muscles get tired while >chewing the food. If the weather is hot (which is hot in Bangkok >now) I get easily tired in doing anything. Fortunately, I can still >read and write, but not as much as before. L: Well, all is according to Reality. That's how it should be. If people and things doesnt get older , there would be something wrong with Dhamma. But Dhamma is perfect, that's why there is aging and dead. But remember Han, there is no you anywhere, just different dhammas arising and falling away. When there be more understanding of realities, it wil help you, to feel less suffering. Our Lord Buddha said: " 1. Avijja paccaya Sankhara: through Ignorance are conditioned the Sankharas 2. Sankhara paccaya vinnana: through the kamma formations is conditioned Consciousness. 3. Vinnana paccaya nama-rupam: through Consciousness are conditioned Mind and Matter. 4. Nama-rupa paccaya salayatana: through the physical and mental phenomena are conditioned the 6 Bases. 5. Salayatana paccaya phasso: through the 6 Bases is conditioned (sensorial) Impression. 6. Phassa paccaya vedana: through Impression is conditioned feeling. 7. Vedana paccaya tanha: through Feeling is conditioned Craving. 8. Tanha paccaya upadana: through Craving is conditioned Clinging. 9. Upadana paccaya bhavo: through Clinging is conditioned the process of kamma-formations and becoming (kammabhava and Upapattibhava). 10. Bhava paccaya jati: through the process of kamma formation (kammabhava) is conditioned Rebirth. 11. Jati paccaya jara-maranam-soka-parideva dukkha-domanassa-upayasa sambhavanti: through Rebirth are conditioned Old Age, Death, Sorrow, Lamentation, Suffering, Grief and Despair." My best wishes Lukas P.s Han, Your older series about aging and death( as far I remember), that you've posted helped me very much. I will appreciate if you share with as another one. What do you think? There is so many attachement in my life, and hearing about aging and dead is always such a good reminder to me. #97905 From: han tun Date: Sun May 17, 2009 3:40 am Subject: Re: Congratulations on Nina's new book hantun1 Dear Lukas, Thank you very much for your kind concern about my well-being. > Lukas: Well, all is according to Reality. That's how it should be. If people and things doesnt get older, there would be something wrong with Dhamma. But Dhamma is perfect, that's why there is aging and dead. But remember Han, there is no you anywhere, just different dhammas arising and falling away. When there be more understanding of realities, it will help you, to feel less suffering. Han: Thank you very much for your kind advice. No, I am not suffering really. It is true my body is deteriorating day by day, but I am still very strong mentally and spiritually. I am not afraid to die either. In my family, including my parents, and grand-parents, nobody lived longer than 84 years. If the family trend is to be taken seriously, I will have only a year or two to live. But it is alright. I am well-prepared for my death. I have worked it out to the smallest details. I have even told my wife my preferred Wat in Bangkok where my body is to be cremated. As regards [No Han Tun] I have completed my education on anatta doctrine after I have joined the DSG. So I know everything about anatta. But whether I practice what I know would be another matter! ------------------------------ > Lukas: P.s Han, Your older series about aging and death (as far I remember), that you've posted helped me very much. I will appreciate if you share with as another one. What do you think? There is so many attachement in my life, and hearing about aging and dead is always such a good reminder to me. Han: I thank you very much for your appreciation of my series on old age and death. But I do not want to talk on this issue any more. Please forgive me. It will be like an old gramophone record which was played for so many times that the grooves were deeply gouged and the needle would not go any further. Thank you once again, Lukas, I greatly appreciate your post. With best regards, Han #97906 From: "Phil" Date: Sun May 17, 2009 5:05 am Subject: Re: siila philofillet Hi Lukas > I wasn't capable to send you an off-list email. I received an failure-notice, that message cannot be deliver. So my replay is here: Ph: Thanks for the below. I didn't mean to send it to you off-list, but I think I sent it before my membership -re-application at DSG went through. > > > "Thank you for your kind encourage. It means a lot to me. > > As usuall I've got so many doubts. > > > > I recommend reflecting on whether your behaviour is harmful to others. > > > L: Yes, but isn't it better to know that this kind of thinking is conditioned also? For example for me it is very very hard to induce such thinking. Right thinking, thinking with compassion etc. Ph: Oh yes, absolutely helpful to understand that it is just dhammas at work, performing their functions etc. The compassionate, patient moments come and go beyond our control. But I personally find that thinking of people in conventional terms, whether they are being harmed by our behaviour or not in conventional terms is very helpful. When one gets closer to the truth there will be understanding that there are only dhammas performing their functions, but I find the conventional stories provide us with a lot of protective reflection. > > >(My opinion is that it is within the shelter provided by non-harmful behaviour that the understanding that liberates from atta view can be developed but if we are obsessed by fears about atta from the beginning we won't get anywhere in weakening the power of gross defilements.) > > > L: Yes, that's right. But also when there is right understanding, it conditions all elements of Eightfold Path. Ph: Yes, absolutely. But that kind of understanding takes many lifetimes to develop, I guess, and if we behave badly in the meantime, if we do not resist the accumulated tendency to behave badly, if we do not challenge the habits that drive "us" (so to speak, it is actually dhammas at work) to behave badly, it is far less likely that there will be rebirth in the realms in which understanding can develop. I have had an interesting time recently, because while there are many warnings about "wrong view" at DSG, warnings which refer to the wrong view of self, I have had a lot of experience with the REALLY dangersou forms of wrong view. Perhaps people here don't experience this, but there are plenty of times for me when I think "what is this Dhamma, this is just another religion concocted by frightened minds to chase away fear of death", this is just another concocted religion, there is no need to fear kamma, there are no results of deeds, I can do whatever I want and it makes no difference. THAT, my friend, is the really dangerous wrong view, and I live with it very close to me all the time. So when people tell me to be careful about atta view, it is hard for me to appreciate. I think atta view is in a way my saviour, because believing that there is a person who will suffer the results of bad behaviour is the best motivator I have for behaving well at those times when really dangerous wrong view is at work. > How do you manage pleasant feelings in your life. I am so >ttached to pleasant feeling. I dont like to have dosa." Ph: I was thinking about this the other day. We don't like dosa, so there is always a push to get away from anger, from hatred, and it's relatively easy to turn to the teachings for refuge from these hard feelings. But when it comes to pleasant feeling, to lust, to greed, we are just swept along by the currents because it is too pleasant for us to want to resist. And it is here that I disagree with A. Sujin's approach, or sense that it is dangerous, because I come across her teachings that say things like (paraphrase) "at the moment one knows there is lust, the citta is kusala", which is true, but I sense it can be used as a kind of justification to be lazy about akusala, to let oneself be swept along by saying "well, I know this is anatta, this is just accumulated akusala, there is panna to that degree" and one might feel quite wise as one carries on doing the lazy lustful thing. I think of pornography. Every two months or so there is a 3 or 4 day period where I fall into internet pornography, and often there is a sense "well, this is familiar, this accumulated habit, these dhammas at work, anatta, not self" and a kind of "I'll just look a little bit more, since it is anatta, and I understand that." I think this could go on for students of A. Sujin, possibly, those who are prey to that sort of thing. That's just one example. Yes, there is the teaching "one understands the disadvantage of akusala" and one therefore abstains. But I prefer the harder, tougher, stricter teachings, such as the one in a sutta I saw that says that if one dies when harnessed to lustful thoughts, the only rebirth that is possible is in the woeful realms. That is closer to the kind of "you're going to go to Hell if you keep doing this!" thinking of other religions, but it is there in the Dhamma, and is very helfpul for fellows like me who are drenched in akusala. Just some thoughts, Lukas. I will return to lurking, having enjoyed a chance to ramble a bit. When I drop by DSG I always enjoy the qustions you ask to Nina, your enthusiasm for Dhamma and the way your understanding of the teaching, of Abhihdamma, of Pali, are growing all the time. Cool! Metta, Phil #97907 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun May 17, 2009 5:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Congratulations on Nina's new book nilovg Dear Han, Op 17-mei-2009, om 10:49 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > There are slight differences here and there. I assume that some > editing was done when the book was printed. My idea was to present > the book to the DSG group in small installments. But I am not sure > whether I can finish the task, so I have not yet asked your > permission. If you have the latest on-line version, which is the > same as the book, I will be grateful to have it. -------- N: Yes the book version is the final one. I send you off list the online. A good idea to present it to dsg , and then very small portions will be best, like half a page or so. Or just a few alineas. Nina. #97908 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun May 17, 2009 5:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Congratulations on Nina's new book nilovg Dear Lukas and Han, Op 17-mei-2009, om 12:40 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > As regards [No Han Tun] I have completed my education on anatta > doctrine after I have joined the DSG. So I know everything about > anatta. But whether I practice what I know would be another matter! > > > Lukas: P.s Han, Your older series about aging and death (as far I > remember), that you've posted helped me very much. I will > appreciate if you share with as another one. What do you think? > There is so many attachement in my life, and hearing about aging > and dead is always such a good reminder to me. --------- N: A good reminder for all of us. We can focus more on ageing and death in the ultimate sense instead of the conventional sense. Whenever we read suttas about old age and death, or any subject, we have to consider the reality arising at this moment. The nama or rupa arising at this moment. Nina. #97909 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun May 17, 2009 6:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: siila nilovg Dear Phil (and Lukas), Op 17-mei-2009, om 14:05 heeft Phil het volgende geschreven: > But I personally find that thinking of people in conventional > terms, whether they are being harmed by our behaviour or not in > conventional terms is very helpful. When one gets closer to the > truth there will be understanding that there are only dhammas > performing their functions, but I find the conventional stories > provide us with a lot of protective reflection. --------- N: Thinking of people is natural and this is not to be avoided. We are with people all the time, and it is good to have metta and compassion, to help them when they need help. That is our life. When we have more understanding that metta is not my metta but a conditioned dhamma, metta will become purer. We shall not expect anything in return. Expecting to be a popular person, to be liked, that is lobha. As to the laziness as excuse, saying, 'it is all anattaa', this is not the right view at all. It will not be the effect of the development of understanding. Right effort of the eightfold Path accompanies right understanding. As I added to my Sangiitisutta study, I repeat: Thus, instead of laziness there can be more perseverance (viriya cetasika or energy) with the development of understanding. Nina. #97910 From: "szmicio" Date: Sun May 17, 2009 6:22 am Subject: Re: Congratulations on Nina's new book szmicio Dear Han, I am happy that you have such good and positive approach to death. Have you read Visudhimagga, Chapter VIII, Mindfulness of death? It's a really good reminder. But I am not always find time to read it. I spend so many times in my life to think about death, even I was 18. So many times I was worried about my own death. That I have to die. I was crying so many times that my grandma will die sooner or later. I had so many suffering. > Han: Thank you very much for your kind advice. No, I am not suffering really. It is true my body is deteriorating day by day, but I am still very strong mentally and spiritually. I am not afraid to die either. In my family, including my parents, and grand-parents, nobody lived longer than 84 years. If the family trend is to be taken seriously, I will have only a year or two to live. But it is alright. I am well-prepared for my death. I have worked it out to the smallest details. I have even told my wife my preferred Wat in Bangkok where my body is to be cremated. > > As regards [No Han Tun] I have completed my education on anatta doctrine after I have joined the DSG. So I know everything about anatta. But whether I practice what I know would be another matter! > > Lukas: P.s Han, Your older series about aging and death (as far I remember), that you've posted helped me very much. I will appreciate if you share with as another one. What do you think? There is so many attachement in my life, and hearing about aging and dead is always such a good reminder to me. > > Han: I thank you very much for your appreciation of my series on old age and death. But I do not want to talk on this issue any more. Please forgive me. It will be like an old gramophone record which was played for so many times that the grooves were deeply gouged and the needle would not go any further. L: I was wondering If I could re-post any of your older posts? My best wishes Lukas #97911 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun May 17, 2009 2:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) upasaka_howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 5/17/2009 12:24:22 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, epsteinrob@... writes: Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > I think the Buddha operated as a skilled psychologist. It would do > little good for the Buddha to just tell people "Hey, there's no such thing as > a self!" What he did was to lead people to directly discover (or uncover) > for themselves that there ain't no such thing. That may be so. In all my attempts, I have never personally discovered the elusive "self." It appears to be a concept. ------------------------------------- Yes, a concept, but one that has an experiential "feel" to it, so that there is a SENSE of "oneself," and, for that matter, with regard to everything, whether elementary or conglomerate, a sense in our mind of "itself" or "himself" or "herself." and of it being more than just a conventionally separate thing. That SENSE of self, due, I suppose to the tenacity of our having engaged in reifying "forever," is what makes that concept so powerfully delusive. We just don't see the seamlessness of reality, the conditionality operative within it, and the conventionality of "things." ----------------------------------- However, I would also reject the idea that anatta is a positive 'something,' rather than the understanding that there is no identifiable self and that things in the world that we attach to are not a 'part of self.' ------------------------------------- I hope I didn't seem to imply otherwise. Anatta is a negative, an absence, a denial. It is a crashing, deafening "NO!" to "self" as an actuality. -------------------------------------- To me, that is the teaching of anatta, not that 'not-self' is a thingy that rides around on dhammas. -------------------------------------- When people think there is a substantive property, called "not-self," they are, IMO, being fooled by language use. The term 'not-self' is an adjective with special usage as in "the not-self teaching", and not a noun. There is no property called "not-self" that things have. In fact, that all things are not self denies the very existence of any separate things to HAVE that property. The not-self teaching is the teaching that everything ever experienced, whether simple or complex, is not the core or essence or "soul" of anything and is *without* any core or essence or own-being or separate, substantive existence, but, in fact, in lacking separate, independent status, is only a conventionally isolated facet of seamless reality. ---------------------------------------- Best, Robert E. ========================= With metta, Howard Emptiness /He who does not find core or substance in any of the realms of being, like flowers which are vainly sought in fig trees that bear none — such a seeker gives up the here and the beyond, just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin./ (From the Uraga Sutta) #97912 From: "szmicio" Date: Sun May 17, 2009 7:19 am Subject: Re: siila szmicio Dear Phil Let me quote these beautiful words: "126. ``Dveme, bhikkhave, paccayaa micchaadi.t.thiyaa uppaadaaya. Katame dve? Parato ca ghoso ayoniso ca manasikaaro. Ime kho, bhikkhave, dve paccayaa micchaadi.t.thiyaa uppaadaayaati. 127. ``Dveme , bhikkhave, paccayaa sammaadi.t.thiyaa uppaadaaya. Katame dve? Parato ca ghoso, yoniso ca manasikaaro. Ime kho, bhikkhave, dve paccayaa sammaadi.t.thiyaa uppaadaayaati. There are, monks, these two conditions for the arising of wrong view. Which are two? Another's utterance and improper attention. These monks, are the two conditions for the arising of wrong view. There are, monks, these two conditions for the arising of right view. Which are two? Another's utterance and proper attention. These monks, are the two conditions for the arising of right view." *************************************** > > L: Yes, but isn't it better to know that this kind of thinking is conditioned also? For example for me it is very very hard to induce such thinking. Right thinking, thinking with compassion etc. > > Ph: Oh yes, absolutely helpful to understand that it is just dhammas at work, performing their functions etc. The compassionate, patient moments come and go beyond our control. But I personally find that thinking of people in conventional terms, whether they are being harmed by our behaviour or not in conventional terms is very helpful. When one gets closer to the truth there will be understanding that there are only dhammas performing their functions, but I find the conventional stories provide us with a lot of protective reflection. L: Yes, but in such moments there can be understanding of concepts impinging on mind door,isnt, it? There can be metta with right understanding of realities. What do you think about reading and hearing Dhamma? > > L: Yes, that's right. But also when there is right understanding, it conditions all elements of Eightfold Path. > > Ph: Yes, absolutely. But that kind of understanding takes many >lifetimes to develop, I guess, and if we behave badly in the >meantime, if we do not resist the accumulated tendency to behave >badly, if we do not challenge the habits that drive "us" (so to >speak, it is actually dhammas at work) to behave badly, it is far >less likely that there will be rebirth in the realms in which >understanding can develop. L: Arent those our concerns and doubts? When citta arises with doubt it can be very similar to kusala citta, but in real it is akusala. The function of doubt is that it wavers about realities. We are never sure until kusala citta with right understanding arises and performs its function. Then there is no doubt. Everything is clearly comprehended. > I have had an interesting time recently, because while there are >many warnings about "wrong view" at DSG, warnings which refer to the >wrong view of self, I have had a lot of experience with the REALLY >dangersou forms of wrong view. Perhaps people here don't experience >this, but there are plenty of times for me when I think "what is >this Dhamma, this is just another religion concocted by frightened >minds to chase away fear of death", this is just another concocted >religion, there is no need to fear kamma, there are no results of >deeds, I can do whatever I want and it makes no difference. THAT, my >friend, is the really dangerous wrong view, and I live with it very >close to me all the time. So when people tell me to be careful about >atta view, it is hard for me to appreciate. I think atta view is in >a way my saviour, because believing that there is a person who will >suffer the results of bad behaviour is the best motivator I have for >behaving well at those times when really dangerous wrong view is at >work. L: Sarah said recently, and I like it very much, that everything can be an object for understanding, even wrong understanding(diithi). So really no need to be concerned about that. > >L: How do you manage pleasant feelings in your life. I am so >attached to pleasant feeling. I dont like to have dosa." > > Ph: I was thinking about this the other day. We don't like dosa, so there is always a push to get away from anger, from hatred, and it's relatively easy to turn to the teachings for refuge from these hard feelings. But when it comes to pleasant feeling, to lust, to greed, we are just swept along by the currents because it is too pleasant for us to want to resist. And it is here that I disagree with A. Sujin's approach, or sense that it is dangerous, because I come across her teachings that say things like (paraphrase) "at the moment one knows there is lust, the citta is kusala", which is true, but I sense it can be used as a kind of justification to be lazy about akusala, to let oneself be swept along by saying "well, I know this is anatta, this is just accumulated akusala, there is panna to that degree" and one might feel quite wise as one carries on doing the lazy lustful thing. L: Yes, It can be a condition for lazziness. As Buddha said parato ghoso(reading or hearing Dhamma) is not sufficient and there sould be yoniso manasikara also to be strong enough to condition right understanding. parato ghossa and ayoniso manasikara cannot condition right understanding. But they can condition wrong understanding. Isnt it also a Dhamma? To know about akusala? >Ph: I think of pornography. Every two months or so there is a 3 or 4 day period where I fall into internet pornography, and often there is a sense "well, this is familiar, this accumulated habit, these dhammas at work, anatta, not self" and a kind of "I'll just look a little bit more, since it is anatta, and I understand that." L: Then it's akusala. >Ph: I think this could go on for students of A. Sujin, possibly, those who are prey to that sort of thing. That's just one example. L: Yes but does it mean that we should stop to listen Dhamma. I've rised similar question to Khun Sujin: "What if reading Dhamma leads to more akusala, should we stop reading?" And she said "And then what?" >Ph:Yes, there is the teaching "one understands the disadvantage of akusala" and one therefore abstains. But I prefer the harder, tougher, stricter teachings, such as the one in a sutta I saw that says that if one dies when harnessed to lustful thoughts, the only rebirth that is possible is in the woeful realms. That is closer to the kind of "you're going to go to Hell if you keep doing this!" thinking of other religions, but it is there in the Dhamma, and is very helfpul for fellows like me who are drenched in akusala. L: Yes, but I think right understanding is very subtle, no matter how tough we try to practice. Just few reflections. My best wishes Lukas #97913 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun May 17, 2009 11:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Congratulations on Nina's new book nilovg Dear Lukas and Han, Op 17-mei-2009, om 15:22 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > L to Han: I was wondering If I could re-post any of your older posts? ------ N: I have an idea. It would be best to repost very small parts at a time, otherwise it is too much for the readers. Then you could add your own reflections to these parts. In that way it will have a new look. Nina. #97914 From: han tun Date: Sun May 17, 2009 3:20 pm Subject: Re: Congratulations on Nina's new book hantun1 Dear Lukas and Nina, > Lukas: I am happy that you have such good and positive approach to death. Have you read Visudhimagga, Chapter VIII, Mindfulness of death? It's a really good reminder. But I am not always find time to read it. Han: Yes, I have read many times. -------------------- > Lukas: I was wondering If I could re-post any of your older posts? > Nina: I have an idea. It would be best to repost very small parts at a time, otherwise it is too much for the readers. Then you could add your own reflections to these parts. In that way it will have a new look. Han: The suggestion by Nina is very good. Yours truly, Han #97915 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun May 17, 2009 3:21 pm Subject: [dsg] Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: Robert wrote: > However, I would also reject the idea that anatta is a positive > 'something,' rather than the understanding that there is no identifiable self and > that things in the world that we attach to are not a 'part of self.' > ------------------------------------- > I hope I didn't seem to imply otherwise. Anatta is a negative, an > absence, a denial. It is a crashing, deafening "NO!" to "self" as an actuality. > -------------------------------------- > > To me, that is the teaching of anatta, not that 'not-self' is a thingy > that rides around on dhammas. > -------------------------------------- > When people think there is a substantive property, called "not-self," > they are, IMO, being fooled by language use. The term 'not-self' is an > adjective with special usage as in "the not-self teaching", and not a noun. > There is no property called "not-self" that things have. I agree. Unfortunately there seems to be an idea at large that not-self is a characteristic in its own right, to be discerned by the wise. I have no doubt that those with highly developed panna can discern the constant play of anicca and are clear that there is no eternal or unchanging self in the midst of that play. Somehow that ability to see the true nature of things has morphed into the concept of "not-self" being something other than the negation of an illusion. My guess is that when the arahats declared that 'not-self' was an inherent characteristic of all dhammas, they did not mean it to turn into an illusion in its own right, but only to point out the true nature of the selflessness of all things. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #97916 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun May 17, 2009 4:41 pm Subject: Some Side-Kicks! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: Self-Pity! The man was much worried over having no shoes, until he met the other man with no legs...! Pure Politics! The humanitarian needs an oppressed proletariat.. The professional saving angel lives of suffering... The Meek only shines, when abused by the angry! Cinderella Syndrome... They made a party inviting Charity as a guest of honour! However, she had only rags of humility to wear, and was dismissed, when she came bare footed to the entrance! Nobody ever noticed she was not there... Source of Inspiration: A Thinkers Notebook . Ñānamoli Thera 1950. Bhikkhu Ñānamoli (1905-1960) at the island hermitage . Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samāhita, Sri Lanka * http://What-Buddha-Said.net Some Kicks! #97917 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun May 17, 2009 9:37 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) sarahprocter... Hi Rob Ep & all, I'd like to go through your comments here carefully - --- On Thu, 14/5/09, Robert Epstein wrote: > S: Visuddhimagga, VII, 39: > > "As to the shortness of the moment: in the ultimate sense the life > moment of living beings is extremely short, being only as much as the > occurence of a single conscious moment. <...> R:>I can understand that life begins and ends with the passing of each moment, and it is indeed a core teaching; and that life only arises again with the arising of a new act of consciousness. .... S: So far, all agreed then.... .... R:> However, the conclusion that Ken draws from this, that *the entire process* of "repeated striking" of the object by vittaka [I think that's the right cetasika...? ] must take place within 'one moment' is not a correct conclusion. The process is stated to be cumulative and is passed on from one citta to the next. .... S: The point is that there is only ever the 'striking' now. What arises now is conditioned in many complex ways (as we've been discussing in another thread) and includes all past 'strikes', but there is only ever the citta now, accompanied by various cetasikas, experiencing their object. .... R:> Although the whole world rises and falls in each moment, the thousands of processes and lifetimes of accumulations do not take place in each single moment. ... S: Well, in an ultimate sense they do - one single moment at a time. So now, if there is thinking about past accumulations, the reality is just the present moment, the present thinking, like the point where the chariot wheel touches the ground. .... >To think that is not just overly mystical, it is absurd; and I don't believe it is what is taught in the Abhidhamma or anywhere else. That is what happens when you mix up the overall reality of the moment with the specifics of different processes. ... S: I think the purpose of understanding that there is only the reality 'now' is for the purpose of developing more understanding of what is real and appears now. Usually we're lost in thoughts about the past and future without any understanding of the present realities. I don't think there is any conflict with the understanding that there are processes and accumulations from aeons past. ... R:> Does the contact with a sense-object, the processing by various namas, the thinking about it and the recollection of the object all take place in the same single moment? of course not. ... S: As you say, of course not. However, what we're interested in is what can be known now at the present moment, and thus developing more understanding of dhammas as anatta. ... R:> So each time "the world arises" for that single moment, the content of that moment is quite different from the one before it. The single moment contains all of reality as it stands for that one moment, but when the next moment arises, it accesses and builds on the moment before. ... S: Yes, I agree with the gist, though I'd put it a little differently - 'Each time "the world arises" in a single moment, the consciousness and associated factors are quite different from the one before it. At that single moment of consciousness, there is no other consciousness and when the next moment of consciousness arises, it is conditioned by the previous one and many other past and present conditioning factors.' So the understanding of the path all comes down to the understanding of the reality now appearing, whether that be visible object, sound, thinking or any other dhamma. Actually, I think we're pretty much agreed here. I understand your point and I think it's just a matter of emphasis when we say there's just the present moment. Metta, Sarah ========== #97918 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun May 17, 2009 9:43 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) sarahprocter... Hi Rob Ep, --- On Thu, 14/5/09, Robert Epstein wrote: >> S: Yes, when vitakka 'takes a hit' it conditions all accompanying mental factors, including panna in this case. Similarly, panna conditions the vitakka and other mental factors. They all condition each other by sahajata paccaya (conascence condition. Also, each citta, with all its accompanying mental factors, conditions the subsequent citta and mental factors by anantara paccaya (proximity condition). Furthermore, the vitakka and panna now can condition vitakka and panna in the future, even aeons into the future, by pakatupanissaya paccaya (natural decisive support condition). So, in brief, the way that they condition each other and successive occurrences of each occurs according to many different complex conditions. > > So, I think you're on the right track, but the picture is a little more complex. ... R:> Thank you, that is exactly the level of detail that is right for me at the moment and it does make a lot of sense of the process. The fact that I seem to be able to partially understand this much is interesting, since it used to make no sense to me at all. Much thanks, ... S: It's helpful to study a little about the 24 conditions. This way we can see that it's not as simple as just thinking in terms of the last citta conditioning the next one, because there are so many other factors at work. It all helps break down the idea of a Self that is in control and can will any particular states to arise. Please let me/us know if there is anything else to be clarified. As you say, in the beginning, none of it makes any sense to us, but gradually like with a jigsaw puzzle, the picture becomes a little clearer when the pieces start slotting into place. Thanks for the discussion and your kind words. Metta, Sarah ======= #97919 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun May 17, 2009 9:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vesak Discussions with Lodewijk, part 2. sarahprocter... Dear Lukas & all, --- On Tue, 12/5/09, szmicio wrote: >> S: It's true that we can only ever have right understanding of the namas and rupas experienced. I think the example given in the section of 'metta for ourselves' means that just as we like to experience kindness and friendliness, so do others. So we treat others accordingly. ... >L: Yes. But when we experience akusala within ourselves we can realise how fleeting and beyond control it is. Then there can be more conditions for kusala. .... S: True. ... >For now there is nothing in the world that can suprise me ;> When people kills, prefer diffrent sexual activities or anything else. Those are just diffrent moments of consciousness. They are totally out of control. No one can change akusala for kusala. Even there is occasion for reading and listening to Dhamma or association with wise friends. When someone is saying an unpleasant words to me, that's because diffrent cittas(in him) experience their objects. why should we get anger? .... S: Yes, we see how right understanding of anatta leads to the development of patience and other paramis. ... >There is moha which conditions sankhara and sanhkara conditons citta....and it ends in jatimarana. That's how this all suffering comes to be real. >hearing about citta, cetasika and ruupa can be a condition for right understanding to arise. .... S: Yes, can be - depending on the accumulations at this moment.... especially whether there is detachment or attachment now when we hear about such dhammas. Metta, Sarah ====== #97920 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun May 17, 2009 10:04 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma with Khun Bussabong, no 4. sarahprocter... Dear Nina & all, --- On Wed, 13/5/09, Nina van Gorkom wrote: >Acharn Sujin: ......The realities of naama and ruupa arise and fall away very rapidly. The realities of kusala and akusala are not known yet. When naama appears, it can be known as an element that experiences something. If it is kusala it does not change into akusala, but pa~n~naa has not developed to the degree of knowing the reality of kusala that arises and falls away very rapidly. It just discerns the dhaatu that experiences something. -------- >N: My own reflection: when we believe that we are aware of kusala or akusala, it is not yet direct awareness of their characteristics. If the first stage of insight, distinguishing the difference between the characteristics of naama and ruupa, has not been attained, there cannot yet be a precise understanding of kusala and akusala. ... S: To add my reflections - I believe that in the development of samatha, kusala and akusala can be (have to be) understood very precisely, but they are still taken for self. If there is no understanding developed of namas and rupas, kusala and akusala will always be taken as belonging to 'Me' and 'Others'. Of course, the understanding (Ajahn refers to above) which realises the arising and falling away of namas and rupas is even more precise. A great series, thank you! Metta, Sarah ======= #97921 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun May 17, 2009 11:01 pm Subject: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 33. nilovg Dear friends, The development of the Eightfold Path is not different from developing understanding of the reality which appears right now. If there is awareness of visible object than that reality can be studied so that it can be known as only a rpa. If seeing is not the object of awareness that reality cannot be studied and we should not try to be aware of it. It depends on pa which types of realities are understood, it does not depend on us. When pa grows there will be conditions that more types of realities will be known. There is hearing time and again, and we can learn that when there is hearing only sound is heard, that words cannot be heard. There is thinking when we distinguish different words and know their meaning. There can be a beginning of understanding of different characteristics and this is the development of the Eightfold Path. We should not worry about the moments of sati and pa, but we should remember our goal: the understanding of realities which appear now. You wrote that when you do gymnastic exercises you can experience the difference between motion and seeing the motion. When we speak about seeing motion, what is the reality which can be experienced? What can be seen? Can motion be experienced through eyesense? When we use the word motion in conventional language we think of a whole situation, of people or things which move. We believe that we can see people and things move. Through eyes only colour or visible object is experienced, but seeing conditions thinking of people and things which move. If there were not the experience of visible object we could not think about concepts of people and things which move. Sa, remembrance, is the condition that we know that there are people and things and that we can observe their movements. As regards motion, this is a kind of rpa, the element of wind, which has the characteristic of motion or pressure. This type of rpa can be experienced through the bodysense. It is different from what we mean by motion in conventional language. ******* Nina #97922 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun May 17, 2009 11:09 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) nilovg Dear Rob Ep, Op 17-mei-2009, om 6:29 heeft Robert Epstein het volgende geschreven: > Is this not correct, that this kind of process develops and > accumulates over a series of moments as well? > > In this way I am trying to make a distinction between that which is > *contained* with in the moment [which may be everything up to that > point,] and that which *takes place* in a single moment, which may > very well be part of a process that takes more than a single moment > and is accumulated. ------- N: Each process of cittas has javanacittas, seven cittas that are either kusala or akusala (in the case of non-arahats). During these moments new accumulations take place, of either kusala or akusala. At the same time in each citta all former accumulations of kusala and akusala are contained. I am afraid to say too much, because all this is very complex. And, as Sarah said, we have to take into account different types of conditions. Nina. #97923 From: han tun Date: Mon May 18, 2009 12:39 am Subject: Physical Phenomena (01) hantun1 Dear All, I am going to present, in installments, The Buddhist Teaching on Physical Phenomena, written by Nina. I will be grateful if the Group members would make comments or ask questions on the presentations. It was learnt from Betty that the English class in Bangkok are currently reading this new book. So it will be very much appreciated if the Group members who are currently reading the book will give their views as my presentation progresses. The book has the following contents. Preface Introduction 1. The Four Great Elements 2. The Eight Inseparables 3. The Sense-Organs 4. Sense Objects 5. Subtle Ruupas and Kamma 6. Intimation 7. Ruupas from different Factors 8. Characteristics of all Ruupas 9. Groups of Ruupas 10. Conclusion I will start with Introduction. ------------------------------ The Buddhist Teaching on Physical Phenomena Introduction The Abhidhamma teaches us that in the ultimate sense our life is naama and ruupa that arise because of their appropriate conditions and then fall away. What we take for person or self is citta or consciousness, cetasika or mental factors arising with the citta, and ruupa or physical phenomena. Citta and cetasika are naama, they experience objects, whereas ruupa does not know anything. Citta experiences sense objects through the five senses. The sense objects as well as the sense organs are ruupas. The five senses by means of which cittas experience an object are called doors. When we think of something we saw or heard citta does not experience an object through a sense-door but through another door: the mind-door. Thus there are six doorways. Through the mind-door citta can experience ultimate realities, naama and ruupa, as well as concepts. Citta experiences only one object and then it falls away to be succeeded by the next citta. We may have thought that there is one consciousness that lasts, that can see, hear and think, but this is not so. Only one citta arises at a time: at one moment a citta that sees arises, at another moment a citta that hears and at another moment again a citta that thinks. In our life an unbroken series of cittas arise in succession. ------------------------------ metta, Han #97924 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon May 18, 2009 2:13 am Subject: [dsg] Dhamma with Khun Bussabong, no 5. nilovg Dear friends, Khun Bong: When sati is aware of a reality, it is not a matter of understanding terms we have heard. Reality can appear and the person who is aware knows that it is reality. We hear about the truth, but what is heard is not the same as what actually appears. What is the difference? Acharn: For someone who has not listened to the teachings there is dhamma, reality, but he does not know that it is dhamma. He clings to it as self and does not know the truth. When one has listened to the teachings one can understand that it is a reality that appears, no self. Each word he hears he should carefully consider, he does not have to believe blindly what he hears. What appears now is dhamma, we cannot choose what appears. Who could select the appearance of seeing or hearing? Dhamma does not stay, it falls away very rapidly. It disappears and does not return. Khun Bong: I do not see the difference between naama and ruupa. Acharn: This can only very gradually be understood. It seems that seeing and hearing can appear at the same time. Seeing is an element that is able to see. It is a citta or element that knows something. Sound appears and there is also en element that knows sound. Gradually there can be more understanding of realities. Khun Bong: Citta is an element, a reality that knows something. When one knows the characteristic of citta, one does not know the characteristic of the object that is known. Acharn: We cling to words. We do not have to use the word citta or object. Something appears now. When visible object appears, there must be a reality that sees and there is no need to use names. If there is no reality that sees how can colour appear? ---------- Nina. #97925 From: "Phil" Date: Mon May 18, 2009 2:51 am Subject: [dsg] Re: siila philofillet Hi Nina > Thus, instead of laziness there can be more perseverance (viriya > cetasika or energy) with the development of understanding. Yes, there can be, there is reason for optimism if we stay open to the Buddha's teaching. I like a line in your new book: "if one does not develop understanding of realities one will be enslaved by all objects experienced through the senses." While I prefer "dhammas" to "realities", I certainly agree with this. Sloth and torpor are compared to a prison, I think, in the commentary. If we (so to speak) develop the habit of challenging harmful habits, there will be better conditions for the virya that lifts us out of enslavement, out of imprisonment, and better conditions for understanding. If we are swept away by gross defilements again and again, if we do not challenge them in the hard way described by the Buddha (he who goes against the current is one who lives the holy life, albeit it with tears, for it is hard) there will not be understanding, there will only be a swamp of misery. I speak from the land of the grossly defiled, Nina - I have my doubts about whether you have ever been here! :) I will retreat again now, Nina. Nice touching bases with you. Metta, Phil #97926 From: "Phil" Date: Mon May 18, 2009 2:54 am Subject: Re: siila philofillet Hi Lukas Thank you for the below,and the reflections that followed! Metta, Phil > Dear Phil > Let me quote these beautiful words: > > "126. ``Dveme, bhikkhave, paccayaa micchaadi.t.thiyaa uppaadaaya. Katame dve? Parato ca ghoso ayoniso ca manasikaaro. Ime kho, bhikkhave, dve paccayaa micchaadi.t.thiyaa uppaadaayaati. > > 127. ``Dveme , bhikkhave, paccayaa sammaadi.t.thiyaa uppaadaaya. Katame dve? Parato ca ghoso, yoniso ca manasikaaro. Ime kho, bhikkhave, dve paccayaa sammaadi.t.thiyaa uppaadaayaati. > #97927 From: "Scott" Date: Mon May 18, 2009 5:36 am Subject: Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) -2b scottduncan2 Dear Ann (and Sarah), Sorry for the delay; regarding: A: "I am finding your discussion on 'thinking' very interesting and useful. I had always put 'thinking' into a little corner of its own, knowing that in many respects it was like the sense consciousness, however, also knowing that it was different because it's object is so often a concept and not a dhamma. I always thought that at some point this would be elaborated on (being content to think about the sense door processes more) and this discussion is the eye-opener that I have been waiting for." Scott: I've wondered about 'thought' and 'thinking' too. And concept as object. And one's own musings are not to be trusted too much, it seems. We know that the world exists in the moment and is gone. We know that each moment contains the accumulated aspects of the last (and long-past). The thinking I am aware of seems more or less continuous. We know from a study of the texts that this is only apparent, not actual, and due to the synthetic functions of many dhammaa. I imagine that, like, say, for walking from here to there, thinking a thought to its completion involves the coordinated action of concentration, sa~n~naa, and others. This makes sense to me. Walking is like thinking. Conceived of conventionally, walking from here to there and thinking an entire thought seem to be part of the same flowing act. I can recall many times where a thought about a concept leads to all sorts of other experience - feeling, more thinking, more stories (its happening again). The concept seems to 'arise' fully formed; it seems the same each time, more or less. I imagine that this is somehow a function of a concept being outside-of-time. Hopefully we can slowly continue a consideration of this. Sincerely, Scott. #97928 From: "Scott" Date: Mon May 18, 2009 6:07 am Subject: [dsg] Re: siila scottduncan2 Dear Phil, Nice to see you. Regarding: P: "...If we are swept away by gross defilements again and again, if we do not challenge them in the hard way described by the Buddha (he who goes against the current is one who lives the holy life, albeit it with tears, for it is hard) there will not be understanding, there will only be a swamp of misery. I speak from the land of the grossly defiled...I have my doubts about whether you have ever been here!..." Scott: Here's a small point, Phil, you know, to stimulate discussion: I don't think that thoughts about the next delicious meal differ in quality from thoughts about the next delicious woman. Do you imagine a need to be more strenuously opposed to the one over the other? Why differentiate? We all live in the 'land of the grossly defiled.' Do you think you live in a land somehow set apart from the rest of us? ;-) Sincerely, Scott. #97929 From: "Scott" Date: Mon May 18, 2009 6:09 am Subject: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) scottduncan2 Dear Rob Ep, Sarah, & all, Regarding: S: "...Yes, I agree with the gist, though I'd put it a little differently - 'Each time 'the world arises' in a single moment, the consciousness and associated factors are quite different from the one before it. At that single moment of consciousness, there is no other consciousness and when the next moment of consciousness arises, it is conditioned by the previous one and many other past and present conditioning factors.'..." Scott: I like the following, from the Maha-Nidesa 1, 42, Khuddakanikaaya (Visuddhimagga XX, 72): "Life, person, pleasure, pain - just these alone Join in one conscious moment that flicks by. Gods, though they live for four-and-eighty thousand Aeons, are not the same for two such moments. Ceased aggregates of those dead or alive Are all alike, gone never to return; And those that break up meanwhile, and in future, Have traits no different from those ceased before. No [world is] born if [consciousness is] not Produced; when that is present, then it lives; When consciousness dissolves, the world is dead: The highest sense this concept will allow. States happen as their tendencies dictate; And they are modelled by desire, their stream Uninterruptedly flows ever on Conditioned by the sixfold base of contact. No store of broken states, no future stock; Those born balance like seeds on needle points. Breakup of states is foredoomed at their birth; Those present decay, unmingled with those past. The come from nowhere, break up, nowhere to go; Flash in and out, as lightning in the sky." Sincerely, Scott. #97930 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon May 18, 2009 11:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Physical Phenomena (01) nilovg Dear Han and all, Thank you, Han. Op 18-mei-2009, om 9:39 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > We may have thought that there is one consciousness that lasts, > that can see, hear and think, but this is not so. Only one citta > arises at a time: at one moment a citta that sees arises, at > another moment a citta that hears and at another moment again a > citta that thinks ------- N: Just a few thoughts. We may believe that we understand this, but it is difficult to realize this truth. We may begin to pay attention to seeing or hearing, but, it still seems that seeing lasts a second, hearing lasts a second. In reality this is not so. When it seems to last, even a second, it shows that we just think of seeing, or of hearing. That is different from awareness of their characteristics when they appear. ------ Nina. #97932 From: "szmicio" Date: Mon May 18, 2009 1:54 pm Subject: Reflections on death szmicio Dear friends, Here is Upajjhatthana Sutta: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an05/an05.057.than.html ---------------------------------- Han wrote: In the second part of the sutta, the Buddha raised the question: on what line of reasoning should one reflect as above? "Now, based on what line of reasoning should one often reflect... that 'I am subject to aging, have not gone beyond aging'? There are beings who are intoxicated with a [typical] youth's intoxication with youth. Because of that intoxication with youth, they conduct themselves in a bad way in body... in speech... and in mind. But when they often reflect on that fact, that youth's intoxication with youth will either be entirely abandoned or grow weaker...” [To repeat for other reflections. Please see the sutta.] ============ ======== Third Part of the Sutta. In the third part of the sutta, the Buddha taught another consideration that would eventually lead to magga ~naana. "Now, a disciple of the noble ones considers this: 'I am not the only one subject to aging, who has not gone beyond aging. To the extent that there are beings — past and future, passing away and re-arising — all beings are subject to aging, have not gone beyond aging.' When he/she often reflects on this, the factors of the path take birth [maggo sa~njaayati] . He/she sticks with that path, develops it, cultivates it. As he/she sticks with that path, develops it and cultivates it, the fetters are abandoned, the obsessions destroyed.” [Pali word inserted by me.] Han: One must reflect on the realities associated with aging. What is aging? Aging is the change (vipari.naama) of the four essentials of form (mahaa bhuuta ruupas) due to burning up with the heat element (jiira.n tejo). And when the mahaa bhuutas undergo changes, the derivatives (upaadaaya ruupas) also change. Only when one reflects on the vipari.naama changes of the ruupas, one will lead to loki pa~nca”ngika magga (sammaa ditthi, sammaa sankappa, sammaa vaayaama, sammaa sati, sammaa samaadhi). These are also vipassanaa ~naanas. When the person reflects more on vipassanaa ~naanas then only one can lead to lokuttaraa magga ~naana. This is the gist of what the Sayadaw said. I must admit that I may not be very precise in narrating the Sayadaw’s explanation. ---------------- My best wishes Lukas #97933 From: "gazita2002" Date: Mon May 18, 2009 3:05 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Physical Phenomena (01) gazita2002 hallo Nina, Han and others, a few more thoughts on this. It seems as if these realities are 'hidden/buried' by concepts and defilements. we can know intellectually that citta,cetasika and rupa are paramattha dhammas, but no panna to know the truth of their arising and falling away. one reality at a time; that always amazes me bec 'the sea of concepts' seems to be so overpowering. the only thing that can 'break thro' is panna, the reality that knows. patience, courage and good cheer, azita --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Han and all, > Thank you, Han. > Op 18-mei-2009, om 9:39 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > > > We may have thought that there is one consciousness that lasts, > > that can see, hear and think, but this is not so. Only one citta > > arises at a time: at one moment a citta that sees arises, at > > another moment a citta that hears and at another moment again a > > citta that thinks > ------- > N: Just a few thoughts. We may believe that we understand this, but > it is difficult to realize this truth. We may begin to pay attention > to seeing or hearing, but, it still seems that seeing lasts a second, > hearing lasts a second. In reality this is not so. When it seems to > last, even a second, it shows that we just think of seeing, or of > hearing. That is different from awareness of their characteristics > when they appear. > ------ #97934 From: han tun Date: Mon May 18, 2009 3:41 pm Subject: Re: Physical Phenomena (01) hantun1 Dear Nina and Azita, > The Text: Citta experiences only one object and then it falls away to be succeeded by the next citta. We may have thought that there is one consciousness that lasts, that can see, hear and think, but this is not so. Only one citta arises at a time: at one moment a citta that sees arises, at another moment a citta that hears and at another moment again a citta that thinks. In our life an unbroken series of cittas arise in succession. > Nina: Just a few thoughts. We may believe that we understand this, but it is difficult to realize this truth. We may begin to pay attention to seeing or hearing, but, it still seems that seeing lasts a second, hearing lasts a second. In reality this is not so. When it seems to last, even a second, it shows that we just think of seeing, or of hearing. That is different from awareness of their characteristics when they appear. Han: The Text is very clear to me. But please excuse me, I do not quite understand your further explanation. I think what you are saying is that if we just see or hear, it is only concepts (as Azita said). Only when we are aware of the *characteristics* of what appears it is the reality. Respectfully, Han #97935 From: "Sukinder" Date: Mon May 18, 2009 8:26 pm Subject: Re: Dukkha; anatta (was, Not self vs. not-self) sukinderpal Hi Rob Ep and Ken, I hope you don't mind that I butt in here. Sarah had commented off-list that I had not written for some time. ============= Rob Ep: > I did answer this challenge when you originally brought it up, but I will be happy to do so again. Perhaps you did not see my response the last time: > > Mass is describeable and measureable. You can say what it is as a positive characteristic. It has a definition - mass is the density of matter per unit. It not only applies to objects, but to digital pictures for instance. Pixels are also measures of density, and you can measure it easily by how many dots are within a square inch of space. So there is nothing mystifying about such a characteristic. S: When this discussion about anatta between you and Jon first started, my reaction was that the Buddha's choice for the term was probably the best. This one of the three characteristics inherent in all conditioned realities was something not known to anyone before the Buddha taught the Dhamma. Could this not be the reason why the Buddha had no alternative than to define it in terms of what in fact is the opposite but mistakenly taken for real, namely `self'? Could it not be an affirmation of a one *real* characteristic, which remains forever hidden due to ignorance and wrong view? And from this would one not arrive at the conclusion that there indeed is no "self" anywhere with more firm basis? But you are saying that the Buddha's teaching Anatta did not point to any characteristic, but only to `absence of self'. This seems to be based on logical inference, one which almost anyone will make without having to further study or even have any real interest in the Dhamma. You of course have come to read about nama and rupa and accepted in principle the distinction between realities and concepts. But I think that you will agree that the conclusion that you have made about `anatta' is one which could have been made even by someone who can't appreciate the reality / concept distinction, no? The three characteristics is said to be penetrated only at the moment of enlightenment. Before that paramattha dhammas are known gradually by way of individual characteristics and through the different levels of vipassana, as nama or rupa, dhatu, as conditioned variously, as khandha, as ayatana etc., all a matter of direct understanding. Was this understanding about anatta a matter of inference, then it seems to me that it would not have to necessarily become the object of panna immediately preceding enlightenment. If thinking about and comparison was the way to be finally convinced about anatta, anicca and dukkha, then you are giving more power to abstraction than to direct insight. In fact if being convinced by way of reasoning is what is required, then it seems that other theories, philosophical and religious, could do the job almost as well. In the above explanation, you are describing concepts based on other concepts. This is easy, as it is all about agreed upon convention and no need is ever there to determine what in fact is reality and what is concept. Without the Dhamma obviously all of that is taken for real, leaving us forever lost in reference points which don't exist. The Dhamma on the other hand point to dhammas that arise and fall away through the five senses and the mind which can be known or at least referenced to directly. This perhaps is the distinctive difference when one tries to define the two. While conventional reality is defined in terms of concepts and all one needs is to agree to them, ultimate realities needs attention being drawn to present moment experience to best understand what it is that is being conveyed. For example if I were to talk about `taste', could this be understood by giving any number of explanations or by turning the attention to the experience itself? Even if this was based on memory, still it is about what actually happened as against something which is only the product of thinking. Again this defines pariyatti, distinguishing it from mere accumulation of knowledge. You seem to be seeking explanations about anatta without reference to the present moment and consider that to be necessary `pariyatti'. I think this is wrong. Because while listening to the Dhamma one is drawn to the present moment with the understanding that all there is to be known is the present moment reality, which will then be seen as having arisen by conditions and fallen away already. When seeking an answer about what is the behavior of realities in terms of a philosophical explanation, the `thinking' at that moment might be the object of either pariyatti understanding or of satipatthana. This is the only *real* study. In other words, no amount of explanation would be of any use if there is not the inclination to study the present moment. I am not saying this as an excuse to avoid trying to explain what anatta for example is. But what I'm trying to draw your attention to is the fact that in Dhamma, "study" happens only with the arising of panna and the object must be the present moment. Philosophical explanations are interesting, which I'll admit to having plenty of accumulations for, and this would be due to ignorance and desire, if not also wrong view. ;-) But proliferation encourages more proliferation and we need to know where to stop, namely the present moment. In Dhamma when one idea is explained in terms of other ideas, the focus is not lost as to what it is that is being referenced. Questions too must be made with panna, in other words some level of understanding with regard to purpose and the object. Lastly I'd like to say that my confidence in the Abhidhamma is in the fact that it points to the present moment experience which can be the object of study. I do not seek clear definitions, but whatever explanations which help to understand the present moment, I'm happy with. There is risk otherwise, that I miss the point and when not satisfied come up with theories of my own. Take for example this matter about vitakka, I don't seek to know the mechanics of how this `repeated striking' takes place, but like Ken, that whatever this is, it happens in the span of one single moment. If I ended up with positing this idea that the `repeated striking' is a description of what takes place over many moments, then one question I'm faced with is, what happens during each moment? Half strike, one strike, one seventh strike? Would it not be better to stop there and consider the commentarial explanation as being merely a `conventional pointing to' and that what exactly this characteristic is, will be revealed as wisdom develops? On the other hand, were I to insist on my own theory, I can see that it could lead to questioning almost everything stated in the Texts. And I sure wouldn't want to end up there. ;-) My respect for the Abhidhamma is not that it teaches me *something*, but that it will *everything*. I thought that this one would not be long, but it is. So I better end here. It is possible that I have misrepresented your argument, in which case please correct me. Metta, Sukin Same with your other example - inpenetrability. Inpenetrability can be demonstrated by putting two objects in contact with each other and seeing clearly that they do not go through each other or intersect. Liquids are penetrable. Solids are not. > > So now you can answer the question I keep asking, in one form or another: how do you describe or demonstrate or measure anatta as a positive characteristic? What is its definition? If the definition is what everyone in the universe knows it to be - the absence of self or the fact of not being a self or part of self - it is not a positive characteristic, it is a negation of a characteristic, and that is how the Buddha defined it. So I await your counter-explanation. If you cannot specify it with a positive definition, then you do not actually know what it is, and if so I would then ask you - when you talk about the characteristic of anatta, exactly what are you referring to? > > Best, > Robert E. > #97936 From: "Phil" Date: Mon May 18, 2009 8:43 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: siila philofillet Hi Scott Nice to have a little visit and touch bases with Dhamma friends before my next disappearance. I know we'll be discussing Dhamma for a long time down the road, non-death permitting! > I don't think that thoughts about the next delicious meal differ in quality from thoughts about the next delicious woman. Do you imagine a need to be more strenuously opposed to the one over the other? Why differentiate? We all live in the 'land of the grossly defiled.' Do you think you live in a land somehow set apart from the rest of us? ;-) I think the difference lies in akusala kamma patha. I have not come across akusala kamma patha related to eating. I agree that lust for food also leads us off the path, but certain forms of sexual misconduct are defined by the Buddha as akusala kamma patha, which - if I recall correctly - are kamma of the degree that can condition rebirth, and with a higher likelihood of rebirth in woeful realms. (Yes, I know that any citta of any past life can be the rebirth citta, but the Buddha teaches in terms of probability, using a dice throwing simile to get at it, calling certain rebirths "a lucky toss" or something like that. I am all about improving probabilities even though I understand there is nothing close to a guarantee of certain kinds of rebirth.) Failing to challenge unwholesome habits re sexual lust, such as using pornography, is inviting conditioning of such deeds. Also, I am very proud of having uprooted the lifelong (well, since puberty) accumulated habit of glacing appraisingly at every woman I pass (and perfectly comfortable with the notion of being proud of being a person who is proud of having done so.) This was not easy, not easy at all, and I can recall the days in which I began challenging the habit, in 2004, I think. (I can remember sitting at a Starbuck's window counter) and from peripheral vision or sleazeball radar a hot miniskirt coming my way, but not taking it in. It was hard. Now it's easy, second nature not to glance.) The not-looking was strongly conditioned by the Buddha's teaching that when we abstain from bad deeds, we provide freedom from fear ( a form of Dana) to countless beings. If I am fortunate enough to lie on a death bed some day, and fortunate enough to have my wits with me (unlikely, considering the family Alzheimer genes) I will be comforted by reflecting on how many women I provided with free from momentary fear by my abstaining. (Some would say that women enjoy being glanced at in a lustful way, I don't know about that, and even if they do, it is still a fearful thing in some sense.) This morning I read a sutta passage that said there are four kinds of mortals that do not fear death - the third kind is the one who can reflect that he/she has not done harmful deeds and "will not go to the destiny of those who perform such deeds" or something like that. I remain convinced that the Buddha does not discourage us from thinking in terms of being persons who are likely or not likely to find unfavourable destinations upon rebirth - we find that teaching again and again in Angutta, for one, too often to be denied. (The commentaries always provide deeper interpretations of these simple, straightforward suttas, and that's fine, but the deeper interpretations do not cancel out the benefits of reflecting in the more straightforward way, I'm quite sure, the latter helps lead to conditions where the deeper meaning can be revealed.) Whew, there's a classic Philesque ramble for you! Land of grossly defiled for us all? No, thats not true, as you know different people are born with different accumulated tendencies, I think it is not true to say that we are all the same. The commentarial teaching of the "caritas" bears this out, as a commons sense examination of people we spend a lot of time with (the only way to know someone, said the Buddha) does. I don't know if you are in the land of the grossly defiled with me or not, Scott. I would have to "hang" with you for a good little while. As I said to Nina, I am eager to retreat again, so I will leave you with this, my friend. Metta, Phil p.s as a fellow Canadian, I think you would find it quite hilarious, as I do, to see the way Canadians have become stigmatized by the swine flu here in Japan. It's about time we got treated like the foul beasts we are! haha. #97937 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon May 18, 2009 9:06 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) -2b sarahprocter... Hi Ann, Like you, we got rather behind before we left Hong Kong and then our trip here to Fiji. Anyway, time to catch up now and so glad to see you've joined in this thread on 'thinking'. --- On Sat, 16/5/09, glenjohnann wrote: >I am finding your discussion on "thinking" very interesting and useful. I had always put "thinking" into a little corner of its own, knowing that in many respects it was like the sense consciousness, however, also knowing that it was different because it's object is so often a concept and not a dhamma. .... S: K.Sujin often says, when it's not the sense experiencing moments of seeing, hearing etc, it's thinking. So most the day, we live in the world of dreams, in nimitta, but the sense experiences 'cover up'. In other words, we think there is lots of seeing and hearing and that these experiences last, but actually, there's just one short moment of seeing, one short moment when light appears, and then the rest of the time, there is the world of darkness. It just seems light all the time. That's the world of avijja! ... >I always thought that at some point this would be elaborated on (being content to think about the sense door processes more) and this discussion is the eye-opener that I have been waiting for. >I will continue reading and catch up - soon, I hope. Thank you for this discussion. .... S: Thanks for adding this note. We'll look forward to any more comments as you catch up too. Today is such a lovely day here (in Suva), a blue sky, lovely temperature and gentle breezes and no pollution - all almost unheard of in Hong Kong and very different from my January visit here. I'm having difficulty sitting at a computer rather than in the garden.... Makes me think of those lovely Canadian summers....:) Metta, Sarah ====== #97938 From: sarahprocterabbott@... Date: Mon May 18, 2009 9:08 pm Subject: Re: Skillful thieves (was: [dsg] Re: effort.] [1] sarahprocter... Hi Rob Ep, (1) --- On Thu, 14/5/09, Robert Epstein wrote: >Such an interesting thread. In addition to the subject itself, it activates all sorts of memories of my mother when she was younger, and of my own young days. Interesting to note the nature of those arising dhammas as they come and cause some kammic reactions and then pass away again. Curious what kinds of namas such memory-events are? They must have their own interesting category. ... S: Yes, it is interesting as you say. Lots of passing dhammas, so many ideas about there being 'my' experiences and a 'me' in the past. We can see how there can be conditions for memory (sa~n~naa)not to recall certain events for decades (in my case, anyway) and then suddenly there's a 'trigger' and sa~n~naa recalls the various scenarios. So here are examples of past dhammas and concepts conditioning present thinking and remembrance by natural decisive support condition. It could be something from lifetimes in the past too. Usually, we attach a lot of importance to these past stories and recollections, forgetting again that there's just the present moment, the present thinking. .... >More below: >> S: Please tell her that I appreciate her examples. R:> Thank you. My mother is in her '80s with some health issues and doesn't have too much social contacts these days other than my Dad, who is 89, and my family. Luckily we live nearby and talk to and see them regularly. I think my Mom will find it interesting that I have discussed her handling of these situations with the group here. I will let you know what she says! :-) .... S: That would be interesting. Please tell her that I appreciate her examples and gentle, understanding approach. The interesting thing, too, is that we never know how we'd react in a particular situation until it happens. We can speculate about what's best, but we never know. I can't say I'd react next time as I did the last, for example. In London I had a very quiet yoga friend who one would expect to react very calmly, but when some thugs tried to snatch her bag through the window of her car at a red traffic light, she went ballistic. She told me she was shocked by her behaviour afterwards, but it was partly because she was scared about her little son in the back of the car. We never know. Conditions! [to be contd] Metta, Sarah ========= #97939 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon May 18, 2009 9:29 pm Subject: Re: Skillful thieves (was: [dsg] Re: effort.] [2] sarahprocter... Hi Rob Ep & all, [2] continuing, >My 89-year-old Dad by the way does all the shopping and such, as well as taking care of my mother to a great degree. He also still has his apartment in New York and goes back and forth between apartments in NY and DC. My mom's mental life has changed quite a lot and much of the time she treats my Dad like a roomate. He is a good example of metta, taking care of her even when she is somewhat distant. Life is funny, is it not? .... S: It's a wonderful opportunity for him to develop metta, generosity, compassion and so on. I'm sure he's very glad to have the chance to help in this way. .... >>S: I remember reading that is said that tanha is like a thief groping in the dark to steal while upadana is like the actual stealing. So, we're all thieves in this sense whenever tanha and upadana arise. R:> Well then I should be on probation, I guess. One positive thing is that when I am too busy clinging, I forget to crave as fully as usual. :-) .... S: Well, I wouldn't be concerned about the lack of craving - there will be plenty more opportunities. :-) ... R:>ha ha; well here are two more stories - maybe not as interesting as the others, but a little bit different. >When I lived in that same difficult neighborhood, once in a while a gang of guys would come through a beat everybody up. They would pass through our area with about fifty boys, and just hit whoever they caught or ran into, then move on. In a few minutes they would all be gone. I remember "picking" one of the guys who didn't seem too violent, and putting myself in front of him so he would "choose" me. He wasn't too enthusiastic about hitting anyone, but knew, as I did, that he would have to hit someone to be okay with his group. With eye contact we sort of established that we would act out the event, and he gave me a rather gentle punch to the stomach while I exaggerated the result and doubled over in "pain." We "almost" smiled at each other and he moved on. I stayed down in the grass until the group passed on, then got up, feeling that we had collaborated on a good performance. .... S: Seems like you went to a very unusual and interesting School of Acting for Real. Obviously where you picked up 'the technique' :) .... >Another time, a bit more scary, I made the mistake of bicycling with my friend Richie in the back of the railroad tracks near our apartment building. Two big guys stopped us with a German Shepherd off the leash, and literally knocked us off our bikes. They asked for money, and I remember the German Shepherd coming over and panting and drooling right over my face. For some reason, I was not as frightened as I should have been, and stayed relaxed physically and did not try to move away. The big guys pulled us up to demand money more directly. Once again, we only had a few cents and they were angry again. But we stayed calm. I remember once again making some kind of eye contact with these guys and staying very relaxed, almost stupidly relaxed. The guys wound up being content to knock us back down and went away. To me, the significance was that I had the sensation of observing everything, rather than reacting to it. .... S: Very interesting parallels to my experiences (esp. the Israel one) I recounted. Perhaps it's like someone falling through a window (or worse) and feeling no pain. The shock seems to be a condition for some of us to stay 'almost stupidly relaxed'. Usually, I'd like to stress, I get nervous about the smallest of things, such as being 5 mins late for an appointment or whether I've packed the right bathing suit.... .... >I like these stories very much. I think it would be great to hear the conversations you had with these assailants. You do seem equally as capable as my mother of turning these folks into friends. :-) .... S: Well, as you've asked, in the first 'escapade', I don't think there was any conversation. The assailant put a hand over my mouth, but when I didn't resist it, he released his hand and that was when I quietly explained and pleaded my case, explaining how it was in both our interests to let me go. I just remember a look of shock on the guy's face before he suddently ran off. It was a few days later on that kibbutz that I read my first book on Buddhism with such interest in 'anatta' in particular. In the second Indian 'escapade', there was conversation and even good humour on both sides. It was rather like haggling over the price of some fruit in the market, when the banter becomes the fun. In the end, the assailant was happy with this banter and perhaps the comments about it not being according to his religion or culture to be aggressive in particular. Yes, we did part as 'friends'. .... >>S: ... We think of the big dramas of life, but when we understand more about the paramattha dhammas, we begin to see that there are only the worlds appearing through the different senses, with so much thinking about these experiences. R:>Very interesting. .... S: I liked Scott's comment to Phil with regard to attachment to sense experiences. Who doesn't cling to sense experiences? Only the anagami (the once-returner). So when we appreciate that there are just these various worlds appearing, one at a time, and that for all of us, there is attachment, so very much attachment, I think it does help (as Lukas has been stressing), to become the 'understanding' person when others behave badly. .... >>S: It's always helpful sharing these anecdotes and discussing Dhamma with you, Rob! Look forward to more :-) R:>Thanks, Sarah; it is fun! .... S: When you speak to your mother, perhaps she might like to share more of her anecdotes with her own fine examples of kindness and patience. Perhaps it'll be an opportunity to have more helpful discussion with her. My mother's also a wonderful example of someone who never complains no matter the circumstances. I have a lot to learn in that regard! Metta, Sarah ====== #97940 From: "szmicio" Date: Mon May 18, 2009 9:50 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: siila szmicio Dear Lodewijk Thinking just thinks, its not ours.we really don't know what concpets will impinge next. It looks like outer world of people and things exist, but do we realise the characteristic of impingment now? It looks there is something we call 'distractions', but those are another moments of thinking. Just it, only thinking which is real, no distractions anywhere. thinking is anicca, anatta and but those are another moments of thinking. We can be concern about how many defilments there is. But that's another kind of thinking. Lodewijk, lead your normal life. There is this very moment, and only now right understanding can arise. Any moment can be a condition to right understanding. My best wishes Lukas > I reminded Lodewijk of your letter to him. He said again: in the > present time there are too many distractions and he is disaouraged > about developing right understanding. He gets confused when > thinking of the Dhamma. #97941 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon May 18, 2009 9:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) sarahprocter... Hi Howard (Nina, Phil & all) --- On Sat, 16/5/09, upasaka@... wrote: >>>H: The primary sense of 'self' relevant to the teaching of anatta is that > of "personal self," which refers to an alleged independent and lasting > core or essence (or "soul") within the aggregates. It is this > notion that is > the primary concept utterly denied any basis in reality in Buddhism. ------ >>N: Anattaa does not only refer to a personal self, also to a "thing" that seems to "exist" outside oneself. Ruupakkhandha refers to all ruupas, not just the ruupas of the body. ============ ========= ======= H:> I was adressing the *primary* notion of self relevant to the Dhamma, Nina. I thought I had made that clear. .... S: Well, I'm interested to consider further what "the *primary* notion of self relevant to the Dhamma" is. I don't think it just refers to a "core or essence (or 'soul') *within* the aggregates". For example, from Nyantiloka's dictionary: "There are 20 kinds of personality-belief [sakkaaya di.t.thi], which are obtained by applying 4 types of that belief to each of the 5 groups of existence (khandha): * (1-5) the belief to be identical with corporeality, feeling, perception, mental formations or consciousness; * (6-10) to be contained in them; * (11-15) to be independent of them; * (16-20) to be the owner of them (M.44; S.XXII.1). S: We read in other suttas how it is dependent on these kinds of sakkaaya di.t.thi that all other kinds of atta-view and wrong-view depend. This is why sakkaaya di.t.thi has to be understood and eradicated first. Metta, Sarah p.s Great to see you around Phil. This thread may be relevant to your comments about other wrong views too. ========== #97942 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon May 18, 2009 10:02 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) sarahprocter... Hi Ken H, --- On Sun, 17/5/09, kenhowardau wrote: >The ball is in my court; sorry for the delay. It's a good thing we're not playing tennis! :-) .... S: Let it bounce around as long as you like when you're writing to me :-). So are you out of the office and back on the surf board now? What a strange experience that all was, but again, just the usual sense objects with a little variety in the concepts. ... >And that nama or rupa has already fallen away! No idea of a self (even of a Roger Federer) could have got to it in time. >Some people will say 'But you can get to another one in time. Just prepare your mind for (say) visible object to come along, and then, when visible object does come along, your prepared mind will grasp it.' ... S: Or else they might say concerning the one that's just gone, 'But you can note it, label it and so preserve it.' As easy as making jam..... ... >But that's not the way it works. As some people here have been discussing, it is more like a series of one act plays. From moment to moment the curtain goes down and then goes up on a completely new scene - from a completely new play. There is no "preparer" in one moment who continues on to be the "prepared" in the next. .... S: Yes, we never have any idea what the next scene will be. Either panna and sati arise or they don't. There's no preparing or catching or labelling or preserving involved. [I think this is a very 'positive' aspect of understanding dhammas as anatta, Rob Ep.] ... >Hope you arrived safely in Fiji; no floods this time. ... S: So far, so good. Apparently it rained every day last week and the sun came out for our arrival. Not that any of it makes much difference to Jon in his office all day.... And for me, it just affects the thinking about the stories involved:-). More pleasant feeling, for sure - that's about it. Take your time..... Perhaps Nina has some more of Lodewijk's comments too. Metta, Sarah ======== #97943 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon May 18, 2009 10:11 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Congratulations on Nina's new book sarahprocter... Dear Han, --- On Sun, 17/5/09, han tun wrote: >Han: The age-related ailments are under control. But I have generalized weakness all over the body. If I walk the leg muscles get tired. If I do small things in the house I get tired easily. Even my jaw muscles get tired while chewing the food. If the weather is hot (which is hot in Bangkok now) I get easily tired in doing anything. Fortunately, I can still read and write, but not as much as before. ... S: Super to see your messages and to know that you'll be posting and discussing extracts from the book on Rupas. Your condition sounds just like mine when I'm jet-lagged as I've been the last couple of days! I like Lukas's reminders and comments - if it wasn't like this, the Buddha would have got it wrong.... It's wonderful that you can still read and write anyway - a real blessing in 'mature' age. I can't read a thing anymore without my glasses, but I was reading in the paper here about a lady who's 105 yrs old and who still reads without glasses and still helps out in the fields. She has over 100 children, grandchildren, great- and great great grandchildren. Every day she counts her blessings. Lots of kusala vipaka and cheery accumulations. I'll look forward to reading your extracts and any of the discussions. Metta, Sarah ====== #97944 From: "szmicio" Date: Mon May 18, 2009 10:23 pm Subject: Re: Physical Phenomena (01) szmicio Dear Han, Please continue your review on ruupa. I am constantly not finding time to read and your post really encourage me. > > Nina: Just a few thoughts. We may believe that we understand this, but it is difficult to realizie this truth. We may begin to pay attention to seeing or hearing, but, it still seems that seeing lasts a second, hearing lasts a second. In reality this is not so. When it seems to last, even a second, it shows that we just think of seeing, or of hearing. That is different from awareness of their characteristics when they appear. > > Han: The Text is very clear to me. But please excuse me, I do not quite understand your further explanation. I think what you are saying is that if we just see or hear, it is only concepts (as Azita said). Only when we are aware of the *characteristics* of what appears it is the reality. L: Only in moments of Satipatthana such dhammas can be known. There is nama-ruupa-pariccheda-naana and only when this kind of naana arises, there can be understanding of naama and ruupa. Really no need to be concern or 'try to understand'. Panna and sati are just dhatus that perform its own functions and no one can have control over them. We should reflect more and more about anattaness of panna and sati and it is very helpfull, because slowly we can learn in life, how out of control and not ours things are. This can be condition to sati to arise and be not forgetful of what naama and ruupa realy is. But again its not ours, sati doesnt belong to anyone. Panna can support sati in such moments and then its panna of Eightfold Path. Then only kind of panna that can eradict defilments. But those two, are just dhatuus, nothing more. They arise in the same way as lobha or dosa. and also fall away in the same way. They are not ourselfs, they dont belong to anyone. It looks like seeing is there, an hearing and then thining, but only sati and panna can know them as they really are. seeing is citta and it doesnt last. visible object is ruupa and it cannot experience anything. That's also what I know from intelectual understanding but panna and sati can arise in each moment very very naturaly and perform their function. There are ruupas that are distant and proximate, subtle and gross,internal and external and panna can know them. But we cannot, even when we think we can know seeing or hearing. But in reality there is only the characteristic of experiencing that can experience ruupa that is visible object. citta that sees cannot see in conventional sense, as it looks like to be. I think it's nimitta of realities. vedana is not feeling we used to think of. Even if we think of plesant feeling here or there. It has its own characteristic and only sati and panna can arise and know it as it is. No one of us can. My best wishes Lukas P.s Maybe today I'll spend more time on Nina's ruupas. Thanks for your good reminders. #97945 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue May 19, 2009 2:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Physical Phenomena (01) nilovg Dear Lukas (and Han), Thank you for a lovely post full of reminders, and these really help me. When I wrote my post I was hoping you would say something. Op 19-mei-2009, om 7:23 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > Han: The Text is very clear to me. But please excuse me, I do not > quite understand your further explanation. I think what you are > saying is that if we just see or hear, it is only concepts (as > Azita said). Only when we are aware of the *characteristics* of > what appears it is the reality. ------- N: True. There may be a beginning of attending to seeing or hearing, but then immediately thinking follows. It cannot be so clear in the beginning, but I am reminded by Lukas not to worry, it all depends on pa~n~naa and sati which are dhaatus. -------- > > L: Only in moments of Satipatthana such dhammas can be known. There > is nama-ruupa-pariccheda-naana and only when this kind of naana > arises, there can be understanding of naama and ruupa. Really no > need to be concern or 'try to understand'. Panna and sati are just > dhatus that perform its own functions and no one can have control > over them. > We should reflect more and more about anattaness of panna and sati > and it is very helpfull, because slowly we can learn in life, how > out of control and not ours things are. --------- N: Most important, so that we do not have the wrong attitude right from the beginning, and keep on 'trying to understand'. -------- > L: This can be condition to sati to arise and be not forgetful of > what naama and ruupa realy is. But again its not ours, sati doesnt > belong to anyone. Panna can support sati in such moments and then > its panna of Eightfold Path. The only kind of panna that can > eradicate defilements. > But those two, are just dhatuus, nothing more. They arise in the > same way as lobha or dosa. and also fall away in the same way. They > are not ourselfs, they dont belong to anyone. -------- N: As Kh Sujin said: sati can arise as naturally as seeing now. Nobody can cause the arising of nama and rupa. -------- > > L: It looks like seeing is there, an hearing and then thinking, but > only sati and panna can know them as they really are. seeing is > citta and it doesnt last. visible object is ruupa and it cannot > experience anything. That's also what I know from intelectual > understanding but panna and sati can arise in each moment very very > naturaly and perform their function. > > There are ruupas that are distant and proximate, subtle and > gross,internal and external and panna can know them. But we cannot, > even when we think we can know seeing or hearing. But in reality > there is only the characteristic of experiencing that can > experience ruupa that is visible object. citta that sees cannot see > in conventional sense, as it looks like to be. I think it's nimitta > of realities. ------- N: Seeing falls away immediately, and what remains is the image or sign. ------- > > L: vedana is not feeling we used to think of. Even if we think of > plesant feeling here or there. It has its own characteristic and > only sati and panna can arise and know it as it is. No one of us can. ------- N: Only after the first stage of insight feeling can be understood more clearly. Now we have a vague idea of what feeling is. As Azita says: the sea of concepts that is so overpowering. Nina. #97946 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue May 19, 2009 2:11 am Subject: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 34. nilovg Dear friends, We think of a person who moves his body, but actually there is no person and there is not a body which stays. The body consists of the four Great Elements of Earth (solidity), Water (cohesion), Fire (temperature) and Wind (motion), and of other types of rpas. The rpas of the body arise and then fall away immediately. There is no living being who goes, but it is citta which conditions the movement of the rpas we call our body. There can be awareness of different realities which appear one at a time. Through eyes only visible object appears, through bodysense hardness, softness, heat, cold, motion or pressure can appear. A concept of the whole body or of a person is not a reality, but the thinking of it is real, it is nma. We may notice that there is thinking and just be satisfied to know that. We call it thinking, but do we have right understanding of it? When there is thinking there are many different types of cittas, succeeding one another. Sometimes there are kusala cittas, but most of the time there are akusala cittas when we are thinking, cittas rooted in lobha, dosa and moha. We are inclined to take the different moments of thinking as a whole, thinking seems to last. Do we cling to an idea of self who thinks? If we learn to be aware of nma and rpa as they present themselves one at a time, the self will begin to disintegrate. Someone asked me: How can we ever know different realities which succeed one another so quickly? Do we not have to be extremely fast? There is no self who knows realities, it is pa which is able to know them. If we think that we have to be fast we cling to a concept of self and this hinders the development of right understanding. When there are conditions for the arising of awareness pa will gradually develop and it will perform its function. ******* Nina. #97947 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue May 19, 2009 3:09 am Subject: Re: Skillful thieves (was: [dsg] Re: effort.] [2] nilovg Dear Rob Ep and Sarah, Those anecdotes make Dhamma very human, very daily. Do give us more, Rob. Nina. Op 19-mei-2009, om 6:29 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > S: When you speak to your mother, perhaps she might like to share > more of her anecdotes with her own fine examples of kindness and > patience. Perhaps it'll be an opportunity to have more helpful > discussion with her. My mother's also a wonderful example of > someone who never complains no matter the circumstances. I have a > lot to learn in that regard! #97948 From: "Scott" Date: Tue May 19, 2009 4:57 am Subject: Re: Sangiiti Sutta Fours (11-12) scottduncan2 Dear Friends, continuing on from #97837 Fours (10) (cy: #97876, #97887): CSCD <> (The Message of the Buddha, 33). It seems hard to find any fault with that. Jayatilleke goes on: << He was the first to distinguish meaningless questions and assertions from meaningful ones. As in science he recognised perception and inference as the twin sources of knowledge, but there was one difference. For perception, according to Buddhism, included extra-sensory forms as well, such as telepathy and clairvoyance. Science cannot ignore such phenomena and today there are Soviet as well as Western scientists, who have admitted the validity of extra-sensory perception in the light of experimental evidence.>> Probably most readers will concede the possibility that the Buddha knew a few things which modern science is only now beginning to discover, or accept. We will leave it at that. **olds: [ 4.11 ]Cattaari ~naa.naani. Dhamme ~naa.na.m, anvaye ~naa.na.m, paricchede ~naa.na.m, sammuti ~naa.na.m. [ 4.11.1 ] anvaye: PED: [fr. anu + i] 1. conformity, accordance; 2. following, having the same course, behaving according to, consequential in conformity with. Rhys Davids and Walshe take this as knowledge of what is in conformity with Dhamma. This is not indicated by the text, and I think what is intended is the general principle. For example, supposing one were in a debate with someone of another view who was presenting their idea; it would be necessary to be able to determine what followed from their theories in order to present counter arguments. [ 4.11.2 ] paricchede: PED: 1. exact determination, circumscription, range, definition, connotation, measure; 2. limit, boundary; 3. limitation, restriction; 4. division (of time); 5. (town)-planning, designing. Rhys Davids and Walshe take this, apparently following the commentary as paresa'n citta-paricchede. Again I think the better course is to stick with what we are given, and understand that it includes this as one reasonable way to apply it. [ 4.11.3 ] This is an interesting concept in that the implication is that knolwledge in general is what is agreed upon as knowledge, arrived at by general consensus. **rd: 4.11Of this category, (1) and (2) occur in S. II, 57 f. There they are described respectively as the 'four truths' applied to 'decay and death,' and this tradition as loyally held and to be held. Vibhanga, 329 f., gives the four, describing (1) as understanding the four paths and their fruits, and (2) as tradition of the four truths respecting suffering as loyally held, etc. B. here quotes Vibh., but defines (1) as the four truths. 4.11.1For pariccheda- read (as in B. and Vibh.) paricce- B.: paresa.n citta-paricchede ~naa.na.n. But he reads paricce in the text. 4.11.2Cf. Milinda i, 226. CSCD < Date: Tue May 19, 2009 8:41 am Subject: Re: siila szmicio Dear Howard Nice to hear you. Actually I dont know this word papanca, could you expleain it to me? > Thinking just thinks, its not ours.we really don't know what concepts will > impinge next. > ============================ > This is somewhat true, but not entirely. When there is the > need, thinking can be directed by volition to a particular subject > area or away from a particular subject area. L: It looks like that. But, there is nothing that can be directed. It looks that we can decide whether we will choose this word or that word. It looks there is a Self that can think, but in relity there are just diffrent concpets, that impinge on mind-door. No one can choose what will be think next. Those are all conditioned by moha. Reading and hearing Dhamma can be the condition for right understanding or other kusalas. There is no Satta(being) in samsara-vatta. Just moha that conditions sankhara and sankhara conditions citta. this is what should be know. This is the only thing that can be know by sati. Concepts about beings cannot be object of Satipatthana. > Though often > we cannot "turn on a dime," some thinking is dangerous papanca, and > we need to stop it short, which we often > can do. Much of what besets us is due to our thinking, and > carefully guarding our thinking is a sine qua non for Dhamma ? > practice. L: No one can control right thinking. Right thinking has its own conditions to arise. And this is right understanding that condition right-thinking or right-volition, if someone prefers. Here is a quote from Visuddhimagga (XVI,90) : Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found; The deeds are, but no doer of the deeds is there; Nibbana is, but not the man who attains it; Although there is a path, there is no goer. My best wishes Lukas #97951 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue May 19, 2009 4:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: siila upasaka_howard Hi, Lukas - In a message dated 5/19/2009 11:41:56 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, szmicio@... writes: Dear Howard Nice to hear you. Actually I dont know this word papanca, could you expleain it to me? ============================ It is mental proliferation, in terms of thinking and emotion. It is obsessive mental functioning that arises due to defiled mentality and in turn, further defiles the mind, creating a downward spiral. With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97952 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue May 19, 2009 5:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: siila upasaka_howard Hi, Lukas - In a message dated 5/19/2009 11:41:56 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, szmicio@... writes: > Thinking just thinks, its not ours.we really don't know what concepts will > impinge next. > ============================ > This is somewhat true, but not entirely. When there is the > need, thinking can be directed by volition to a particular subject > area or away from a particular subject area. L: It looks like that. But, there is nothing that can be directed. It looks that we can decide whether we will choose this word or that word. It looks there is a Self that can think, but in relity there are just diffrent concpets, that impinge on mind-door. No one can choose what will be think next. Those are all conditioned by moha. Reading and hearing Dhamma can be the condition for right understanding or other kusalas. There is no Satta(being) in samsara-vatta. Just moha that conditions sankhara and sankhara conditions citta. this is what should be know. This is the only thing that can be know by sati. Concepts about beings cannot be object of Satipatthana. > Though often > we cannot "turn on a dime," some thinking is dangerous papanca, and > we need to stop it short, which we often > can do. Much of what besets us is due to our thinking, and > carefully guarding our thinking is a sine qua non for Dhamma ? > practice. L: No one can control right thinking. Right thinking has its own conditions to arise. And this is right understanding that condition right-thinking or right-volition, if someone prefers. Here is a quote from Visuddhimagga (XVI,90) : Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found; The deeds are, but no doer of the deeds is there; Nibbana is, but not the man who attains it; Although there is a path, there is no goer. -------------------------------------------- An excellent and important quote that says truly that there is no being who is actor, but there are deeds. And here's one from the Buddha, himself: "Abandon what is unskillful, monks. It is possible to abandon what is unskillful. If it were not possible to abandon what is unskillful, I would not say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' But because it is possible to abandon what is unskillful, I say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' If this abandoning of what is unskillful were conducive to harm and pain, I would not say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' But because this abandoning of what is unskillful is conducive to benefit and pleasure, I say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' "Develop what is skillful, monks. It is possible to develop what is skillful. If it were not possible to develop what is skillful, I would not say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' But because it is possible to develop what is skillful, I say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' If this development of what is skillful were conducive to harm and pain, I would not say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' But because this development of what is skillful is conducive to benefit and pleasure, I say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.'" — _AN 2.19_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an02/an02.019.than.html) ------------------------------------------ My best wishes Lukas ============================== With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97953 From: "szmicio" Date: Tue May 19, 2009 11:14 am Subject: Re: siila szmicio Dear Howard, "Abandon what is unskillful, monks. It is possible to abandon what is unskillful. If it were not possible to abandon what is unskillful, I would not say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' But because it is possible to abandon what is unskillful, I say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' If this abandoning of what is unskillful were conducive to harm and pain, I would not say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' But because this abandoning of what is unskillful is conducive to benefit and pleasure, I say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' "Develop what is skillful, monks. It is possible to develop what is skillful. If it were not possible to develop what is skillful, I would not say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' But because it is possible to develop what is skillful, I say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' If this development of what is skillful were conducive to harm and pain, I would not say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' But because this development of what is skillful is conducive to benefit and pleasure, I say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.'" L: Yes, that's very good reminder. Hearing this wonderful Dhamma can be a conditions for dana,siila and bhavana. Right effort can arise and perform its function. Then it all support panna. Right effort can condition sati. It seems that when we try with all our efforts develop kusala then it's right effort. But that is not so. If it would be right effort, then satipatthana would arise. But how often we are aware of realities?? So right effort arise with right understanding of nama and ruupa. No matter what we think of it. We can think that right effort can be induced by ourselfes, but right effort cannot arise with ditthi and moha. There is also right effort with each kusala citta. When we start to realise that reading and hearing Dhamma can be condition to develop more kusala, then we have less concerns about any Self. This is the way which leads to eradiction of ditthi, so to less akusala. Yesterday I've read Nina's cetasikas, chapter on ditthi and realised how much ditthi we all have been accumulated. > Here is a quote from Visuddhimagga (XVI,90) : > > Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found; > The deeds are, but no doer of the deeds is there; > Nibbana is, but not the man who attains it; > Although there is a path, there is no goer. > -------------------------------------------- > An excellent and important quote that says truly that there is no > being who is actor, but there are deeds. L: They are all sankhara dhammas. See Anatta Lakhana Sutta(sorry but couldnt find). My best wishes Lukas P.s Nina, Sarah and friends I think I need to discuss more on doubts. #97954 From: "glenjohnann" Date: Tue May 19, 2009 11:46 am Subject: Skillful thieves (was: [dsg] Re: effort.] [1] glenjohnann Hi Sarah and all --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarahprocterabbott@... wrote: > > So here are examples of past dhammas and concepts conditioning present thinking and remembrance by natural decisive support condition. > ... Can you please say more about concepts conditioning present thinking and remembrance by natural decisive support. What caught my attention was "concepts" - as a condition for anything. Ann #97955 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue May 19, 2009 10:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: siila upasaka_howard Hi, Lukas - In a message dated 5/19/2009 2:14:39 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, szmicio@... writes: Dear Howard, "Abandon what is unskillful, monks. It is possible to abandon what is unskillful. If it were not possible to abandon what is unskillful, I would not say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' But because it is possible to abandon what is unskillful, I say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' If this abandoning of what is unskillful were conducive to harm and pain, I would not say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' But because this abandoning of what is unskillful is conducive to benefit and pleasure, I say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' "Develop what is skillful, monks. It is possible to develop what is skillful. If it were not possible to develop what is skillful, I would not say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' But because it is possible to develop what is skillful, I say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' If this development of what is skillful were conducive to harm and pain, I would not say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' But because this development of what is skillful is conducive to benefit and pleasure, I say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.'" L: Yes, that's very good reminder. Hearing this wonderful Dhamma can be a conditions for dana,siila and bhavana. Right effort can arise and perform its function. Then it all support panna. Right effort can condition sati. It seems that when we try with all our efforts develop kusala then it's right effort. But that is not so. If it would be right effort, then satipatthana would arise. -------------------------------------------- So, Lukas, is it reasonable to expect instant results? I don't know where you reside, but this reminds me of what some say is a typically American predisposition to instant gratification! ;-) Things don't work that way, my friend. We can plant the seed, water it, and nourish it, but then we must patiently wait. Results come on "their own," depending on conditions. But without our contributing the essential conditions, there is no reason to expect the results. I've spent a good number of years during this lifetime planting, seeding, watering, and feeding. Some small, clearly discernable growth has resulted, with occasional dramatic flowerings, but for fuller blooming much patience is yet needed. ------------------------------------------- But how often we are aware of realities?? So right effort arise with right understanding of nama and ruupa. No matter what we think of it. We can think that right effort can be induced by ourselfes, but right effort cannot arise with ditthi and moha. There is also right effort with each kusala citta. When we start to realise that reading and hearing Dhamma can be condition to develop more kusala, then we have less concerns about any Self. This is the way which leads to eradiction of ditthi, so to less akusala. Yesterday I've read Nina's cetasikas, chapter on ditthi and realised how much ditthi we all have been accumulated. > Here is a quote from Visuddhimagga (XVI,90) : > > Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found; > The deeds are, but no doer of the deeds is there; > Nibbana is, but not the man who attains it; > Although there is a path, there is no goer. > -------------------------------------------- > An excellent and important quote that says truly that there is no > being who is actor, but there are deeds. L: They are all sankhara dhammas. See Anatta Lakhana Sutta(sorry but couldnt find). My best wishes Lukas P.s Nina, Sarah and friends I think I need to discuss more on doubts. ---------------------------------------------- I've found doubt wither and confidence blossom as I follow the Buddha's ehipassiko teaching. ================================ With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97956 From: han tun Date: Tue May 19, 2009 3:57 pm Subject: Physical Phenomena (02) hantun1 Dear All, This is the serial presentation of The Buddhist Teaching on Physical Phenomena by Nina. Comments and questions are welcome. -------------------- Introduction (continuation) Cittas can be good or wholesome, kusala cittas, they can be unwholesome, akusala cittas, or they can be neither kusala nor akusala. Seeing, for example, is neither kusala nor akusala, it only experiences visible object through the eye-door. After seeing has fallen away, visible object is experienced by kusala cittas or by akusala cittas. Thus, when an object impinges on one of the six doors different types of cittas arise in a series or process and all of them experience that object. They arise in a specific order within the process and there is no self who can prevent their arising. The cittas that arise in a process experience an object through one of the five sense-doors and through the mind-door. Only one citta arises at a time, but each citta is accompanied by several cetasikas or mental factors that share the same object with the citta but perform each their own function. Some cetasikas such as feeling and remembrance or “perception” (saññå) accompany each citta, others do not. Unwholesome mental factors, akusala cetasikas, only accompany akusala cittas, whereas “beautiful” mental factors, sobhana cetasikas, accompany kusala cittas. -------------------- Introduction to be continued. with metta, Han #97957 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue May 19, 2009 5:00 pm Subject: Re: Dukkha; anatta (was, Not self vs. not-self) kenhowardau Hi Robert E, Thanks for this reply, which I somehow missed seeing. I only became aware of it when Sukin posted his response. ----------- <. . .> R: > I did answer this challenge when you originally brought it up, but I will be happy to do so again. Perhaps you did not see my response the last time: --------- Your ESP was close: I saw that one but not this one. :-) -------------------- R: > Mass is describable and measurable. You can say what it is as a positive characteristic. It has a definition ------------------------------- I think the same can be said for anicca dukkha and anatta: an enlightened person can describe them from his own direct experience. (Although unenlightened people won't necessarily know what he's talking about!) BTW, I'd like to make clear again that I am not trying to tie conventional science in with the Dhamma. I am just looking for some similes to help explain how (according to my understanding) dhammas can have inherent characteristics. ------------------------------------------- R: > - mass is the density of matter per unit. ------------------------------------------- I'm not sure that is right. According to my internet research mass is "the property of a body that causes it to have weight in a gravitational field." So mass is a property. The weighing, or measuring, of matter is just something that is made possible by its having mass. Mass is not a number of atoms per square inch, or a number of pixels on a screen; it is an inherent characteristic of matter. I remember the physicist Paul Davies explaining that the universe did not need to be the way it was. The laws of the universe were set down at the time of the big bang, and in a different universe different laws could have applied. Matter might not have had mass (or inertia or impenetrability etc). But it does! That's the way things are. In the satipatthana-known world, phenomena have anicca dukkha and anatta. That's the Dhamma! :-) ------------------------- R: > What is its definition? If the definition is what everyone in the universe knows it to be - the absence of self or the fact of not being a self or part of self - it is not a positive characteristic, it is a negation of a characteristic, and that is how the Buddha defined it. So I await your counter-explanation. If you cannot specify it with a positive definition, then you do not actually know what it is, and if so I would then ask you - when you talk about the characteristic of anatta, exactly what are you referring to? --------------------- In my opinion I have been giving positive definitions all along. You just haven't seen them that way. :-) As Sukin said in his excellent reply, ". . . no amount of explanation would be of any use if there is not the inclination to study the present moment." I don't mean to say that applies especially to you. All of us have moments of forgetfulness when we mistake the Dhamma for a conventional teaching. Ken H #97958 From: "szmicio" Date: Tue May 19, 2009 10:16 pm Subject: Re: siila szmicio Dear Howard > Things don't work that way, > my friend. We can plant the seed, water it, and nourish it, but > then we must patiently wait. Results come on "their own," depending > on conditions. But > without our contributing the essential conditions, ther is no > reason to expect the results. L: I think kamma can be know and also vipaka can be known as they are. -------------- > H: I've spent a good number of years during this lifetime > planting, seeding, watering, and feeding. > Some small, clearly discernable > growth has resulted, with occasional dramatic flowerings, but for > fuller blooming much patience is yet needed. L: If there wouldnt be thinking, there wouldnt be growth, isnt it? In reality there is "growth" only for a moment, when kusalas start to perform their functions and then again there will be akusala. Bhante Dhammadhara said once, that there can be few kusalas in life and after this there are again akusala cittas. And then anything can happen. --------------- > Nina, Sarah and friends > I think I need to discuss more on doubts. > ---------------------------------------------- > I've found doubt wither and confidence blossom as I follow the > Buddha's ehipassiko teaching. L: Yes, but what is doubt? Is it what we conventionaly think of doubt? My best wishes Lukas #97959 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed May 20, 2009 1:26 am Subject: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 35. nilovg Dear friends, We should consider the definition of pa or non-delusion given in the Visuddhimagga (XIV, 143): Non-delusion has the characteristic of penetrating things according to their individual essences, or it has the characteristic of sure penetration, like the penetration of an arrow shot by a skilful archer. Its function is to illuminate the objective field, like a lamp. It is manifested as non-bewilderment, like a guide in a forest.... When pa has been developed it is as fast as an arrow shot by a skilful archer, and it is sure in its penetration of the true nature of realities. It illuminates the object which is experienced so that it is known as it really is. It is pa, not self, which is so keen that it knows precisely the reality which appears as it is. It is important to know when there is clinging to awareness, it may be so subtle that we do not notice it. The best cure is studying the reality which appears right now. Even clinging to awareness can be realized as a type of nma. It arises because we have accumulated clinging. When pa has not been developed we have doubt about all the realities which appear. We do not know precisely when there is kusala citta, when akusala citta and when vipka-citta, citta which is the result of kamma. Someone had a question about the nature of vipka- citta: Can we know when vipka-citta is kusala vipka, the result of kusala kamma, and when akusala vipka, the result of akusala kamma? Can we know when the object which vipka-citta experiences is a pleasant object and when an unpleasant object? We cannot always know whether an object is pleasant or unpleasant. Moreover, we may take for pleasant what is not pleasant, since we are attached to particular things with which we are familiar. When we see something there is visible object which impinges on the eyesense. Seeing is vipka-citta and it experiences only visible object. It does not experience things such as a house or a tree. Those are concepts which are experienced by cittas arising in a mind-door process. There are sense-door processes and mind-door processes succeeding one another very quickly. When we are looking at something there are eye-door processes and mind-door processes. Visible object impinges on the eye-door time and again and it is hard to tell when visible object which is pleasant and when visible object which is unpleasant impinges on the eyesense. It is difficult to know which of the many moments of seeing and hearing are kusala vipka and which akusala vipka. Akusala vipka and kusala vipka arise in different processes of citta but cittas succeed one another so quickly that what are in fact countless cittas seem to be one moment. ****** Nina. #97960 From: "Scott" Date: Wed May 20, 2009 4:17 am Subject: [dsg] Re: siila scottduncan2 Dear Phil, Regarding: P: "...Failing to challenge unwholesome habits re sexual lust, such as using pornography, is inviting conditioning of such deeds..." Scott: I think that the above is a rather misdirected reading of the Dhamma as some sort of form of asceticism. I don't consider the Dhamma to be a mere treatise on 'self-control'. My take on what you describe is that, rather than the peaceful and quiet vibe that would accompany a moment of knowing lust as lust, you are finding instead more moments filled with anger and aversion with, apparently, a concept as object (Phil the Dirty Vicar). P: "p.s as a fellow Canadian, I think you would find it quite hilarious, as I do, to see the way Canadians have become stigmatized by the swine flu here in Japan. It's about time we got treated like the foul beasts we are! haha." Scott: Ha - you just want anyone to punish you. ;-) All's I know is that I'll never eat another pork chop! Especially one from Canada! Those things will give you swine flu in a second. Sincerely, Scott. #97961 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed May 20, 2009 7:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: siila nilovg Dear Lukas (Howard), Op 20-mei-2009, om 7:16 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > Nina, Sarah and friends > > I think I need to discuss more on doubts. > > ---------------------------------------------- > > I've found doubt wither and confidence blossom as I follow the > > Buddha's ehipassiko teaching. > > L: Yes, but what is doubt? Is it what we conventionaly think of doubt? ------- N: The cetasika doubt is different from what we mean by doubt in conventional sense. It is doubt regarding paramattha dhammas. Doubt whether or not this is the right Path leading to the end of defilements. Or: is the present reality nama or rupa? Howard quoted a beautiful sutta: "Abandon what is unskillful, monks. It is possible to abandon what is unskillful. If it were not possible to abandon what is unskillful, I would not say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' This is Lodewijk's favorite one. We just discussed it. This is a great encouragement to develop understanding of nama and rupa, the only way to abandon all akusala. The Path is difficult and its development is a long term development. It is important to realize our own ignorance, even at this moment. BTW Lodewijk thanks you and Howard for your mails. He was so busy with the printing proofs of his memoires, and now he does not feel like writing. Lukas, I like what you wrote here: We often hear Kh Sujin say: when akusala arises know it as a mere dhamma. I heard the following recording with Kh Bong: Nina. #97962 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed May 20, 2009 7:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: siila nilovg Dear Lukas and Howard, Op 19-mei-2009, om 6:50 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: Lukas to Lodewijk: > It looks there is something we call 'distractions', but those are > another moments of thinking. Just it, only thinking which is real, > no distractions anywhere. thinking is anicca, anatta and but those > are another moments of thinking. > > We can be concern about how many defilments there is. But that's > another kind of thinking. > > Lodewijk, lead your normal life. There is this very moment, and > only now right understanding can arise. > > Any moment can be a condition to right understanding. ------- N: Well said, also akusala can be the object of right understanding, we do not have to skip this. Thus, any moment, nothing excepted can be an opportunity for the development of right understanding. Howard wrote: ----- N: Understanding is the condition for guarding one's thinking. Akusala thinking may have arisen already but had we not learnt the Dhamma we would not even know that there is akusala. Listening, considering, developing more understanding, this is the way leading eventually to the eradication of defilements. ------ Nina. #97963 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed May 20, 2009 7:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: siila upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and Lukas & Lodewijk) - In a message dated 5/20/2009 10:28:53 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Dear Lukas and Howard, Op 19-mei-2009, om 6:50 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: Lukas to Lodewijk: > It looks there is something we call 'distractions', but those are > another moments of thinking. Just it, only thinking which is real, > no distractions anywhere. thinking is anicca, anatta and but those > are another moments of thinking. > > We can be concern about how many defilments there is. But that's > another kind of thinking. > > Lodewijk, lead your normal life. There is this very moment, and > only now right understanding can arise. > > Any moment can be a condition to right understanding. ------- N: Well said, also akusala can be the object of right understanding, we do not have to skip this. Thus, any moment, nothing excepted can be an opportunity for the development of right understanding. ============================= As I see it, merely another phenomenon arising, whether it be thinking or something else, is not in itself distraction. It is distraction only when we are caught by it - for example, getting lost in thought or in sloth & torpor; i.e., when mindfulness is lost. 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) #97964 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Wed May 20, 2009 12:05 pm Subject: Re: Dukkha; anatta (was, Not self vs. not-self) epsteinrob Hi Sukin. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Sukinder" wrote: > > Hi Rob Ep and Ken, > > I hope you don't mind that I butt in here. Don't mind at all. The more the merrier. :-) > Sarah had commented off-list that I had not written for some time. It is nice that you took this occasion to speak about this interesting subject. Of course it may lead to some argumentation on my part, but I hope you don't mind too much. > ============= > S: When this discussion about anatta between you and Jon first started, my reaction was that the Buddha's choice for the term was probably the best. I am not denying the Buddha's term at all. I am in fact trying to support what the term actually says, and clearly means: 'not self.' When a term has the word 'not' in it, you cannot make believe that the 'not' is not there, that it is really saying 'this' instead of 'not this.' I do not pretend to see realities directly, although I may have had a half-glimpse or two, but I disagree that my view on this does not serve the attempt to see realities directly and to observe anatta in the present moment. If one distorts what the most basic meaning of something is, there is absolutely no chance that one will ever see this directly. If pariyatti is so distorted that the basic meaning of something is denied, then what good will it do to try to clarify it further? It is possible that one's own proliferations in philosophy have such a solid sway that it is no longer possible to look at the simple basic reality of the words used by the Master Teacher, and they have been distorted. In that case it is important to clarify that basic meaning so that it is not further obscured. Buddha defined anatta in terms of the beliefs of the day, and in terms of the *inherent* belief in a self that is part of our legacy as a human species, as sentient beings. As sentient beings we tend to belief in self without any proof because all things that happen in our conventional perception seem to lead back to the center of consciousness, and we presume there is someone in there and that phenomena circulate around this self. So Buddha needed to counteract this very basic assumption of all human beings and do so strongly. Atta is the noun that existed as the 'self,' and Atman was the form in which self was defined as a spiritual or eternal self. The teaching regarding phenomena is that all things within samsara, including the experience of the human organism and personality are 'not self,' meaning that they are not a self and they are not a part of a self. Anatta is a positive characteristic of all things in the sense that all things when seen in reality are lacking a self and are not part of self, and it takes wisdom to see this. That does not mean that "anatta" is something other than what it actually is, which is 'not' 'self.' To say it is some weird other thing that can only be seen with panna, but which we can not even comprehend intellectually prior to this, is a distortion of the clear and obvious meaning that the Buddha himself espoused. It is not necessary to add this kind of mysticism to the Buddha's teaching, and to put off understanding of basic concepts of Buddhism for future lifetimes, when it is obvious now. If we want to some day see directly the realities that the Buddha taught about, we should not distort their basic meaning now, when we are capable of clarifying them instead. > This one of the three characteristics inherent in all conditioned realities was something not known to anyone before the Buddha taught the Dhamma. Could this not be the reason why the Buddha had no alternative than to define it in terms of what in fact is the opposite but mistakenly taken for real, namely `self'? So according to the above, there are these two realities, one is false and one is real. The false one is easy to understand - it is the "self," which is an unreal construct or concept of the ignorant. On the other hand, there is the *real* characteristic of all dhammas, which can only be seen by the wise - it is called "not-self," or "anatta." It is real, but no one knows what the heck it is, because we cannot define it at all until we awaken. So "not-self," which you say is the opposite of the delusory "self," does not mean what it says. It does not mean "not self" even though you say it is the opposite of the false "self," but means something completely different, because it must be a positive characteristic that is actual, rather than the insight that there is *no self* in any dhamma. This kind of mysticism is so distorted it only adds delusion to delusion. There is no reason to think that there is a thing of some kind that *is* a "not self" and that it is opposite to a "self" and really exists. That is indeed proliferating, because it is taking th obvious and the clear and turning it into an obscurity and an opacity. To do so is in the opposite direction of 'seeing.' It is instead saying that 'this truth cannot be seen at all. We don't know what it is, but the Abhidhamma teaches us that it is real, and that is good enough.' > Could it not be an affirmation of a one *real* characteristic, which remains forever hidden due to ignorance and wrong view? Yes, of course, the "real characteristic" that is anatta is the plain actuality of what things are, that they have the characteristic of being what they are and not something else. They are not a self, they are not an entity, they are not part of a permanent and eternal other thing; they are just what is at the moment. That is anatta, not-self. > And from this would one not arrive at the conclusion that there indeed is no "self" anywhere with more firm basis? Yes, but we won't see that by making up a mythical object out of this clear teaching. > > But you are saying that the Buddha's teaching Anatta did not point to any characteristic, but only to `absence of self'. That *is* the characteristic of anatta. That there is no self. What more do you need? It is the solution to everything, so there is no reason to underplay it by demanding that it also be a unicorn or a deva. It is *not self,* and that is more than enough. > This seems to be based on logical inference, No, it is based on the understanding of what *not self* means and that it is the basis of Buddhism, that we are empty of self, and thus we can get rid of the cause of suffering. I have snipped the rest in which you mainly seek to dismiss my argument by saying that it is conceptual, inferred, not direct, etc. I understand your point but don't think it is correct. Let's stick to the issue. If "not self" is a something rather than a negation, then define it at least in conceptual terms, what is it supposed to be? This is a basic requirement even of having faith in something. I don't see how skipping over the issue, or putting it off for another lifetime, can lead to insight or knowledge. We must work with anatta now, not say we can't know what it is. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = #97965 From: "colette" Date: Wed May 20, 2009 9:40 am Subject: [dsg] Re: siila ksheri3 Hi Group, Pardon me for not specifying a particular individual in this discussion on "INTENTIONAL ACTS" aka Sila but there are far too many entries on this topic for me to read through and to choose which one would be best for me to respond to. Scott seems to get along with me so I just reached into the msg. board and grabbed this entry. Who me? Not have anything to say? Pishaw. Concerning Phil's aspect of "pornography". wow, I was involved, at one time in my life, in what is labeled as the "pornographic" industry better phrased and characterized as "Adult Entertainment". Initially, while I was first getting my feet wet in this industry I could not help but to view the everyday newspaper as being far more pornographic than the Adult Entertainment material. For instance we claim that there is "news" and that that "news" is worthy of our attention and scrutiny HOWEVER, it turns out that the actuality of this supposed "news" is nothing more than the advertising of other people's pain and suffering, more specifically, concerning another person's DEATH or MURDER. To devote your life to the glorification and advertisement of pain and suffering with Death being the greatest and highest of newsworthy events to broadcast, that, my friends, is sooooooooo PORNOGRAPHIC that I cannot possibly imagine how you or any contemplative or meditative would even consider applying such a derogatory terminology to Adult Entertainment while ignoring the most blatant example possible. People certainly INENTIONALLY ACT to get college degrees in "communications" where by they can take the warranty that they eventually recieve from the manufacturer to a news outlet and ask for a well paying job so that they can be the instrument which broadcasts the glory of the CAUSATION OF PAIN, THE CAUSATION OF SUFFERING, AND THE CAUSATION OF DEATH. In fact, this act of broadcasting the negatives is glorified as being the regulator of what is termed STATUS QUO. If it wasn't for those people consumed by vanity and greed who choose to enter into the advertising field of PAIN, SUFFERING, DEATH, then the masses of ignorant people would not clearly know and clearly define what is good thereby exhalting corrupt and hatefilled political regimes. ------------------------- > P: "...Failing to challenge unwholesome habits re sexual lust, such as using pornography, is inviting conditioning of such deeds..." > colette: fine, make the challenge to what you construe as being "unwholesome" but don't challenge something you know nothing about unless you intend on walking a mile in their shoes.;) -------------------- > Scott: I think that the above is a rather misdirected reading of the Dhamma as some sort of form of asceticism. I don't consider the Dhamma to be a mere treatise on 'self-control'. > > My take on what you describe is that, rather than the peaceful and quiet vibe that would accompany a moment of knowing lust as lust, colette: take for instance the view of the HUNGRY GHOST whose thirst can never be satiated. Does that individual know lust? If the thirst for sexual gratification can never be satiated how, THEN, can it be possible for this individual to know what "lust" is and is not? If it is true that the individual knows that gratifying their thirst for lust, will not cure their thirst, and yet continues to pursue lust as a cure-all, as a "magic-bullet", as a morophine or opiate to satiate the thirst where is the consciousness and the cognition? But that's a side point. ----------------------- you are finding instead more moments filled with anger and aversion with, apparently, a concept as object <....>. colette: I luv it! "nudge nudge" Surely Bicycle Repairman must be around here somewhere? ------------------------------- > > P: "p.s as a fellow Canadian, I think you would find it quite hilarious, as I do, to see the way Canadians have become stigmatized by the swine flu here in Japan. It's about time we got treated like the foul beasts we are! haha." > colette: really? If so, then I can take a page from my youth as a goal keeper in hockey where I can ask you to enter my "crease" and try to have the puck sent to you by your teammates. My stick side hand got a lot of work hacking at the ankles of opponents bothering me in my own crease. lol You mention Swine Flu and the USA's obvious directive to rename the disease as H1N1 since it was discovered that the recent outbreak of Swine Flu probably came from an American pig farm in Mexico which somehow came into contact with one of the nearest town's residents and then spread from there. <....> ------------------------------------------------- > Scott: Ha - you just want anyone to punish you. ;-) All's I know is that I'll never eat another pork chop! Especially one from Canada! Those things will give you swine flu in a second. <...> toodles, colette #97966 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed May 20, 2009 3:25 pm Subject: The 10 Experiences! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: Experiencing Right Things might cure illness instantly! Once when Venerable Girimananda was sick, then the Buddha said to Ven. Ananda : If you, Ananda , would go to Ven. Girimananda & explain to him the 10 experiences, it may be that Girimananda 's illness will be cured instantly! And which are these ten experiences? They are: 1: The experience of Impermanence, and inconstancy (Anicca-Saññā). 2: The experience of No-Self, Egolessness, and Impersonality (Anatta-Saññā). 3: The experience of Disgust, Loathsomeness, and Foulness (Asubha-Saññā). 4: The experience of Danger, Damage, and Disadvantage (Ādīnava-Saññā). 5: The experience of Leaving Behind, Removal, and Giving up (Pahāna-Saññā). 6: The experience of Disillusion, Dispassion, and Detachment (Virāga-Saññā). 7: The experience of Ceasing, Stilling, and Final Finishing (Nirodha-Saññā). 8: The experience of Disappointment with entire world (Sabbaloka-Anabhirati-Saññā). 9: The experience of Transience of all formations (Sabbasankhāresu Anicca-Saññā). 10: The experience of Breathing Awareness (Ānāpānasati-Saññā). Having learnt and fully memorized these ten experiences from the Blessed Buddha, the Venerable Ananda went to the Venerable Girimananda and recited these ten experiences to him. Then as soon as the Venerable Girimananda heard these ten experiences explained, his illness instantly subsided! This was thus the way the Venerable Girimananda was cured, and could rise from his sick-bed.... (To see and know that in advance takes a SammāSamBuddha !) <...> Source (edited extract): Numerical Discourses of the Buddha. Anguttara Nikāya AN 10:60, AN V 108ff. 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 The 10 Experiences! #97967 From: "colette" Date: Tue May 19, 2009 2:37 pm Subject: Skillful thieves (was: [dsg] Re: effort.] [1] ksheri3 Wasn't it Aliester Crowley who said that "all magicians are theives", but did he say this in the book "The Book of Lies" or the book "the Book of the Law" <...> What, prey-tell, are you alluding to, here, in your subject line representing THEIVES? Shall we take another person's life from them? This is a theft, no? And what do we, as mage's have, if nothing greater than Life THEREFORE what is there that we, as MAGES could take from another person that has any significance other than their LIFE? What good does it do me? Why would I need a schmuck's life that has only lied to me, that has only treated me as though I was lower than the most ignorant of beings, etc., what good would that diseased organism's life do me if I was to take it, or even to consider it worthy of my time to take? i think, here, now, I'll go back to the first post which cuaght my eye on this subject of theft or GRAND THEFT (see Grand Illusion by Styx [I saw the opening act of that tour at the chicago auditorium theater, in, what was it, 1978 or 79]), since it was, in this first post that I read where I found allusions to the Kagyu and Nyingma theories of Mahayana Buddhism. toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarahprocterabbott@... wrote: <...> > S: Yes, it is interesting as you say. Lots of passing dhammas, so many ideas about there being 'my' experiences and a 'me' in the past. We can see how there can be conditions for memory (sa~n~naa)not to recall certain events for decades (in my case, anyway) and then suddenly there's a 'trigger' and sa~n~naa recalls the various scenarios. So here are examples of past dhammas and concepts conditioning present thinking and remembrance by natural decisive support condition. It could be something from lifetimes in the past too. Usually, we attach a lot of importance to these past stories and recollections, forgetting again that there's just the present moment, the present thinking. <...> #97968 From: "colette" Date: Tue May 19, 2009 2:50 pm Subject: Skillful thieves (was: [dsg] Re: effort.] [1] ksheri3 here we are: "concepts conditioning present thoughts...", "...present thinking...", the most obvious of red flags: "...remberence by..." what oh-so "Clinging" in nature, no? You condition your own memory past/present/future by clinging to "rememberence" or "memory". And how nice of you to work with me as I diasect Cone's material from the khando site on Madhymika by using this illusion: "CONCEPTS". SUNYA SUNYA SUNYA, NO? Personally, I love this stuff when it all starts coming together. <...> Nevertheless, I've forwarded this message so that I can deal with it tomorrow when I have time but now must depart since I gotta walk from Kedzie to Ashland to get something to eat today. toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "glenjohnann" wrote: > > > > Hi Sarah and all > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarahprocterabbott@ wrote: > > > > So here are examples of past dhammas and concepts conditioning present thinking and remembrance by natural decisive support condition. > > ... > > Can you please say more about concepts conditioning present thinking and remembrance by natural decisive support. What caught my attention was "concepts" - as a condition for anything. > > Ann > #97969 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed May 20, 2009 4:42 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) sarahprocter... Dear Scott (& Rob Ep), --- On Mon, 18/5/09, Scott wrote: >Scott: I like the following, from the Maha-Nidesa 1, 42, Khuddakanikaaya (Visuddhimagga XX, 72): "Life, person, pleasure, pain - just these alone Join in one conscious moment that flicks by. <....> S: Yes, I appreciate it how ever many times I read it too... .... >No store of broken states, no future stock; Those born balance like seeds on needle points. Breakup of states is foredoomed at their birth; Those present decay, unmingled with those past. The come from nowhere, break up, nowhere to go; Flash in and out, as lightning in the sky." ... S: No 'store', no 'future stock', just the present dhammas which 'balance like seeds on needle points'. I love that line and think of the coming together of the ayatanas in a very fine balancing act for just a moment. For example, in order for there to be the seeing of its visual object, there has to be the 'coming together' of that visual object, eye-sense, seeing consciousness and its accompanying mental factors (contact, concentration, feeling, advertance, life-faculty, perception and co-ordinating intention) for a split instant, justlike the balance of 'seeds on needle points'. K.Sujin always uses the word 'amazing' to describe this 'coming together'. And then as the verse says, they 'flash in and out, as lightning in the sky.' Just one moment of consciousness at a time, like the touching of one point of the circumference of the wheel on the ground. All those experiences in the past, even just a moment ago, gone never to return, just like that flash of lightning too....We're just left with our dreams. Metta, Sarah ======= #97970 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed May 20, 2009 5:16 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Reflections on death sarahprocter... Dear Lukas (Han, Scott, Phil & all), I like the reminders you repeat as well. --- On Tue, 19/5/09, szmicio wrote: >Here is Upajjhatthana Sutta: http://www.accessto insight.org/ tipitaka/ an/an05/an05. 057.than. html ------------ --------- --------- ---- > (Han)Third Part of the Sutta. >In the third part of the sutta, the Buddha taught another consideration that would eventually lead to magga ~naana. >"Now, a disciple of the noble ones considers this: 'I am not the only one subject to aging, who has not gone beyond aging. To the extent that there are beings; past and future, passing away and re-arising; all beings are subject to aging, have not gone beyond aging.' When he/she often reflects on this, the factors of the path take birth [maggo sa~njaayati] . He/she sticks with that path, develops it, cultivates it. As he/she sticks with that path, develops it and cultivates it, the fetters are abandoned, the obsessions destroyed.; [Pali word inserted by me.] .... S: This also reminds me of Scott's comments to Phil about attachment to sense objects. We are not the only ones subject to such attachments, not gone beyond such attachment to sense objects. It's the same for all everyone. We cling to sense objects (at different moments to varying degrees) because the anusaya (the latent tendencies) have not yet been eradicated. Only the anagami no longer clings to such objects and only the arahat is beyond future rebirth. Furthermore, it is only when the present dhammas are understood to be arising and falling away that the idea of permanence will eventually be eradicated. So it is the understanding of dhammas as anatta, impermanent and thereby unsatisfactory (in the deepest sense) that attachment to sense objects can ever be attenuated and eventually eradicated. Otherwise, we may have the illusion that they're not so strong for us or others in this life-time, not knowing anything about the deeply-rooted anusayas or tendencies which are bound to manifest in future lives. It all comes down (again!) to the understanding of the dhamma appearing at this very moment. Like the seeds on the needle-point, the understanding can only develop when such attachment, wrong view, ignorance or other dhammas appear. Thanks again for the repeating the helpful quotes and Han's good comments. Metta, Sarah ======== #97971 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed May 20, 2009 5:34 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) sarahprocter... Hi Rob Ep (& Howard), --- On Mon, 18/5/09, Robert Epstein wrote: >>H: When people think there is a substantive property, called "not-self," > they are, IMO, being fooled by language use. The term 'not-self' is an > adjective with special usage as in "the not-self teaching", and not a noun. > There is no property called "not-self" that things have. R:> I agree. Unfortunately there seems to be an idea at large that not-self is a characteristic in its own right, to be discerned by the wise. .... S: Anatta is a characteristic of all dhammas. In other words, it's not "a characteristic in its own right" to be known, divorced from such dhammas. The same applies to anicca and dukkha - they can only ever be known as "characteristics of dhammas". So, it is only by knowing the characteristic of visible object or hardness (to give a couple of examples), as dhammas, as rupas which can only ever be experienced, which can never experience objects themselves, that the nature of such dhammas can be known as anatta. ... R:> I have no doubt that those with highly developed panna can discern the constant play of anicca and are clear that there is no eternal or unchanging self in the midst of that play. ... S: Highly developed panna can only understand the anicca characteristic *of dhammas*. This is not conceptual or the same as the understanding of impermanence that is generally considered. Before there can be the fine and precise understanding of the arising and falling away, there has to be the understanding that there are only dhammas, only namas and rupas at this moment - no self or atta anywhere to be found. So, again, it comes back to the understanding of seeing and visible object, hearing and sound, doubt and wrong view - any reality being experienced now. ... >that ability to see the true nature of things has morphed into the concept of "not-self" being something other than the negation of an illusion. ... S: Whatever language or concepts we use, it has to be the understanding of presently appearing dhammas as anatta. ... >My guess is that when the arahats declared that 'not-self' was an inherent characteristic of all dhammas, they did not mean it to turn into an illusion in its own right, but only to point out the true nature of the selflessness of all things. ... S: Yes, I agree. The illusion is the 'self'. Anatta is the *real* characteristic of all dhammas. I've appreciated all your discussions on this topic and your keen questioning:-). Metta, Sarah ======== #97972 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed May 20, 2009 5:45 pm Subject: Re: Physical Phenomena (02) buddhatrue Hi Han (and Nina), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: > > > Dear All, > > This is the serial presentation of The Buddhist Teaching on Physical Phenomena by Nina. > Comments and questions are welcome. > > -------------------- > Introduction (continuation) > > Cittas can be good or I don't have any comments or questions on this part but I do have some for later material in the Introduction. So, when you get to those parts I will comment. Just letting you know that I'm following along. :-) Metta, James #97973 From: han tun Date: Wed May 20, 2009 6:20 pm Subject: Re: Physical Phenomena (02) hantun1 Dear James, Good to see your post addressed to me after a very ling time! > James: I don't have any comments or questions on this part but I do have some for later material in the Introduction. So, when you get to those parts I will comment. Just letting you know that I'm following along. :-) Han: I will definitely be looking forward to your comments. Kind regards, Han #97974 From: Ajahn Jose Date: Wed May 20, 2009 6:34 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Reflections on death ajahnjose My Dear Sarah, I am an expert on reflections on death, they gave me two weeks to live three months ago, and here I am at Sacred Heart Hospice, Darlinghurst, the private hospital of St Vincen, run by nuns. Metta. By the way, On February 20th I was clear of all charges, they found the people who frame me. Love. Ajahn Jose signature Venerable Yanatharo, Ajahn Jose --- On Thu, 21/5/09, sarah abbott wrote: <...> S: This also reminds me of Scott's comments to Phil about attachment to sense objects. We are not the only ones subject to such attachments, not gone beyond such attachment to sense objects. It's the same for all everyone. We cling to sense objects (at different moments to varying degrees) because the anusaya (the latent tendencies) have not yet been eradicated. Only the anagami no longer clings to such objects and only the arahat is beyond future rebirth. <...> #97975 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed May 20, 2009 7:57 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Reflections on death sarahprocter... Dear Ven Yanatharo, I'm very glad to hear that you're being well taken care of at the hospice and that the charges have been dropped. Thank you for sharing your good news with us. We never know what will happen. A year ago, a friend was given a few weeks to live (brain lymphoma) and now he appears fully recovered after chemo, radiotherapy and many big changes in his lifestyle. But, for all of us, there is always death each moment with each consciousness. Now, we have the opportunity to grow in wisdom. Wishing you the best and please share any of the reflections you've been having on death or life. With metta, Sarah --- On Thu, 21/5/09, Ajahn Jose wrote: From: Ajahn Jose My Dear Sarah, I am an expert on reflections on death, they gave me two weeks to live three months ago, and here I am at Sacred Heart Hospice, Darlinghurst, the private hospital of St Vincen, run by nuns. Metta. By the way, On February 20th I was clear of all charges, they found the people who frame me. Love. Ajahn Jose signature Venerable Yanatharo, Ajahn Jose #97976 From: "szmicio" Date: Wed May 20, 2009 8:14 pm Subject: Hindrances szmicio Dear friends, Bhante Dhammadhara in his "Be here now" gave us such a good reminder on distractions and sati. "Q.: Distraction is just the opposite of what we want. Bhikkhu: So, be aware of distraction. Q.: It is the main thing that makes awareness impossible. Bhikkhu: No. The main thing that makes awareness impossible is misunderstanding. There is always restlessness with wrong understanding. At the moment we don't like our distraction are we then not distracted by our distraction? Why can't we just be aware of distraction? But, oh no, we don't like distraction and there we are, thoroughly distracted from awareness. This happens because of our attachment to a self who does not want to be distracted. Q: We know that it is not a skillful state. Bhikkhu: But at what level do we realize that? What about the state that is distracted by distraction? That is equally unskillful and we don't even know we have it. Instead of learning to be aware of whatever appears we are being choosey. We don't want to be aware of distraction. We want to get on with being aware of breath, of body, of feeling, of citta (consciousness), or of this or that. What about distraction? Is distraction not included in the four satipatthanas, the objects of mindfulness? The Buddha did not say, whatever you do, don't be aware of distraction. What choice do you have? You can't be aware of seeing at the moment of distraction, because then there is no seeing, there is distraction. You can't be aware of calm at the moment of distraction, because there is no calm. Ask yourself, do you really want to be aware or do you just want calm? Just get rid of the distraction and get on with whatever we are doing. But what is the point of getting on with whatever we are doing when it is “we” who are doing it all the time? There is no awareness, no detachment. What is the point? We are just perpetuating the illusion of a self who has got a job to do, who wants to do it and does not like distraction which gets in the way of doing the job. Then there is no right understanding at all. If there really is awareness, you are not upset by distraction, because it has just arisen because of conditions, it is not self. You are aware of it and then you can be aware of whatever appears next. There can be awareness and right understanding of what has already appeared because of conditions, only for one moment though. And then there may be a whole lot of distraction. You can't do anything about it, anatta. If there is awareness at that moment something has been done already. Anatta. You can't stop awareness from arising - it has already arisen. Developing awareness. I don't think it is what we really want to do at all. We don't have the intention deep down. We are not really interested very often. Only at a moment of right understanding is there any interest, right interest in the object which appears, to see it as it really is. We are always looking for some other object, trying to change it or make it last. That is attachment, not detachment. We may be worried, because we have not got enough awareness. We are comparing ourselves with others, because they know more than us, they are always aware, always calm. Then there is no awareness, no detachment. There is just an idea of self at the center of the world. We may think of what different teachers say, about ways and methods to develop the path, but then there is no awareness. Because at the moment of awareness there is no teacher, no person, no name, no address. There is just the characteristic of nama (mental phenomena) or the characteristic of rupa (material phenomena). Nama is not a person, a teacher, a method, a way. Rupa is not a name or address, a date, a self. So, if we realize that perhaps we have not had very much awareness yet, that is good, that is right understanding, if it is true. And that is the way to develop more of it. That is the right way. But we may find it depressing when we are attached to wanting to be further ahead than we are. One moment there can be attachment, the next moment, if we have got enough right understanding accumulated, there can be awareness. The next moment there can be depression or aversion, because there is not as much awareness as we wanted, or it did not last as long as we thought it should, or we had doubt about what we were aware of. We have to be honest, we have to know the truth. If we don't have much understanding we should realize that, and then, if we realize that, there is some understanding, and we can start. It: is hard to admit our lack of awareness and understanding. It is hard to be honest and face the truth. Even if one has some amount of right understanding that does not mean that one doesn't ever have any wrong understanding. One may, for example, mistake thinking about a reality for awareness. There may be wholesome thinking, but that is different from awareness of realities. We may, for example, be angry and realise that anger is unwholesome. That is different from awareness and understanding of anger as just a reality, not “my unwholesomeness”. Anger is a type of nama which arises and then falls away, it is not self. Even if one has a basic theoretical understanding one may still practice in the wrong way." My best wishes Lukas #97977 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed May 20, 2009 8:40 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: siila sarahprocter... Hi Phil & all, (No need to reply:-)) I hope you and Naomi are well? Will you be visiting Canada in the summer?(oops, don't answer!). Here at our hotel in Suva, our room-cleaner is called Naomi too. On my last visit, we became good friends and she was very kind to me and I gave her a modest tip. Naomi is very 'generously built' - probably 6 foot and like many locals, with a very broad frame. She has a big smile and wears a hibiscus flower behind her ear as she wanders around with her straw broom. When she first spotted me the day after my arrival at the other end of the corridor, she roared out 'Sarah' and with arms akimbo, we walked towards each other until she was able to give me a big hug. I thought she was going to lift me off my feet. A very different culture from Hong Kong and very refreshing along with the blue skies! (No Dhamma so far, but I thought Suva Naomi might make one of your novels along with Mr Abbott...) Now, down to business.... --- On Sun, 17/5/09, Phil wrote: >I have had an interesting time recently, because while there are many warnings about "wrong view" at DSG, warnings which refer to the wrong view of self, I have had a lot of experience with the REALLY dangersou forms of wrong view. Perhaps people here don't experience this, but there are plenty of times for me when I think "what is this Dhamma, this is just another religion concocted by frightened minds to chase away fear of death", this is just another concocted religion, there is no need to fear kamma, there are no results of deeds, I can do whatever I want and it makes no difference. THAT, my friend, is the really dangerous wrong view, and I live with it very close to me all the time. So when people tell me to be careful about atta view, it is hard for me to appreciate. .... S: I think there's a connection, though. If we don't understand dhammas, we won't understand how they are conditioned. The dhammas can only be understood when they're known as namas and rupas, no atta involved. Without developing this understanding, there will always be the kinds of ideas and ignorance about kamma you honestly mention. There are bound to be such doubts and wrong views. It's very, very natural. It's only at the second stage of insight that the understanding of conditioned dhammas becomes firm and only at the third stage that the understanding of kamma is clearly understood. Of course, only a sotapanna who has eradicated atta-view altogether no longer has any more wrong views. I'm sure you know all this, but I wanted to point out that there are bound to be doubts and wrong views of various kinds arising and these too can be known for what they are. If they didn't arise, they couldn't be known. .... >... But I prefer the harder, tougher, stricter teachings, such as the one in a sutta I saw that says that if one dies when harnessed to lustful thoughts, the only rebirth that is possible is in the woeful realms. That is closer to the kind of "you're going to go to Hell if you keep doing this!" thinking of other religions, but it is there in the Dhamma, and is very helfpul for fellows like me who are drenched in akusala. ... S: So does one just abstain because one is concerned about one's own future? Isn't this like people who go to pray in temples and offer pujas in order to have a happy, heavenly rebirth? In other words, behind it is still just the clinging to oneself which grows and grows. It's not really the understanding of the harm of akusala when it arises or the benefit of kusala when it arises, as I see it. Just my rambling reflections too. As I said, no need to respond to anything I write. Thanks for dropping by -I always appreciate your rambles:-)) Metta, Sarah ===== #97978 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed May 20, 2009 9:07 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Hindrances sarahprocter... Dear Lukas (Lodewijk & all), --- On Thu, 21/5/09, szmicio wrote: >Bhante Dhammadhara in his "Be here now" gave us such a good reminder on distractions and sati. "Q.: Distraction is just the opposite of what we want. >Bhikkhu: So, be aware of distraction. .... S: Yes, I like this part (and that snipped too). [Also more under 'Distractions' in U.P.] I've always appreciated the reminders that no matter how distracted we are, no matter how complicated life might seem, no matter how absorbed we are in various tasks, sati and panna can arise at any moment. There was a good quote on this topic in one of Nina's recent extracts from Anapanasati: no 24: "..........We do not have to try or to think of effort. When there is still wrong view, we may think that we cannot be aware while doing complicated things. We may think that at such moments awareness is more difficult than when we are walking or doing things which do not require much attention. In reality there is no difference. If one believes that there is a difference, one does not know what right awareness is. If there is less of a preconceived idea that in particular situations awareness is impossible, there can be awareness also while doing complicated things. We may be absorbed in what we are doing, but that doesn’t matter. Being absorbed is a reality, it can be known as only a type of nåma. Realities appear already because of their own conditions, and gradually we can learn to study their characteristics." **** Metta, Sarah ========= #97979 From: han tun Date: Wed May 20, 2009 9:13 pm Subject: Physical Phenomena (03) hantun1 Dear All, This is the serial presentation of The Buddhist Teaching on Physical Phenomena by Nina. Introduction (continuation) -------------------- As regards physical phenomena or rpa, there are twentyeight kinds of rpa in all. Rpas are not merely textbook terms, they are realities that can be directly experienced. Rpas do not know or experience anything; they can be known by nma. Rpa arises and falls away, but it does not fall away as quickly as nma. When a characteristic of rpa such as hardness impinges on the bodysense it can be experienced through the bodysense by several cittas arising in succession within a process. But even though rpa lasts longer than citta, it falls away again, it is impermanent. Rpas do not arise singly, they arise in units or groups. What we take for our body is composed of many groups or units, consisting each of different kinds of rpa, and the rpas in such a group arise together and fall away together. The reader will come across four conditioning factors that produce rpas of the body: kamma, citta, temperature and food. The last three factors are easier to understand, but the first factor, kamma, is harder to understand since kamma is a factor of the past. We can perform good and bad deeds through body, speech and mind and these can produce their appropriate results later on. Such deeds are called kamma, but when we are more precise kamma is actually the cetasika volition or intention (cetan) that motivates the deed. Kamma is a mental activity which can be accumulated. Since cittas that arise and fall away succeed one another in an unbroken series, the force of kamma is carried on from one moment of citta to the next moment of citta, from one life to the next life. In this way kamma is capable to produce its result later on. A good deed, kusala kamma, can produce a pleasant result, and an evil deed can produce an unpleasant result. Kamma produces result at the first moment of life: it produces rebirth-consciousness in a happy plane of existence such as the human plane or a heavenly plane, or in an unhappy plane of existence such as a hell plane or the animal world. Throughout our life kamma produces seeing, hearing and the other sense-impressions that are vipkacittas, cittas that are results. Vipkacittas are neither kusala cittas nor akusala cittas. Seeing a pleasant object is the result of kusala kamma and seeing an unpleasant object is the result of akusala kamma. Due to kamma gain and loss, praise and blame alternate in our life. --------------------- Introduction to be continued. with metta, Han #97980 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed May 20, 2009 8:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: siila sarahprocter... Dear Lukas (& Phil), --- On Sun, 17/5/09, szmicio wrote: >"126. ``Dveme, bhikkhave, paccayaa micchaadi.t. thiyaa uppaadaaya. Katame dve? Parato ca ghoso ayoniso ca manasikaaro. Ime kho, bhikkhave, dve paccayaa micchaadi.t. thiyaa uppaadaayaati. 127. ``Dveme , bhikkhave, paccayaa sammaadi.t.thiyaa uppaadaaya. Katame dve? Parato ca ghoso, yoniso ca manasikaaro. Ime kho, bhikkhave, dve paccayaa sammaadi.t.thiyaa uppaadaayaati. There are, monks, these two conditions for the arising of wrong view. Which are two? Another's utterance and improper attention. These monks, are the two conditions for the arising of wrong view. There are, monks, these two conditions for the arising of right view. Which are two? Another's utterance and proper attention. These monks, are the two conditions for the arising of right view."< ************ ********* ********* ********* S: Such good reminders.... ... >L: Arent those our concerns and doubts? When citta arises with doubt it can be very similar to kusala citta, but in real it is akusala. The function of doubt is that it wavers about realities. We are never sure until kusala citta with right understanding arises and performs its function. Then there is no doubt. Everything is clearly comprehended. .... S: Yes, as you say, doubt "wavers about realities". Nicely put. ... >L: Yes, It can be a condition for lazziness. As Buddha said parato ghoso(reading or hearing Dhamma) is not sufficient and there sould be yoniso manasikara also to be strong enough to condition right understanding. parato ghossa and ayoniso manasikara cannot condition right understanding. But they can condition wrong understanding. Isnt it also a Dhamma? To know about akusala? .... S: And when it is wise attention, when there is right understanding about the value of listening and considering the Dhamma, there will be conditions for more of this - for more wise attention, more considering, more right understanding. If the listening and repeating of words leads to 'laziness about akusala' or less consideration of the harm of ignorance and attachment, then it indicates a lack of wise attention, a lack of right understanding of what was heard. As you suggest, akusala is dhamma and has to be known too. .... >L: Yes but does it mean that we should stop to listen Dhamma. I've rised similar question to Khun Sujin: "What if reading Dhamma leads to more akusala, should we stop reading?" And she said "And then what?" ... S: "And then what?" indeed. If we think that the problem is the listening and reading of Dhamma and stop this, then there will be more akusala without the important good reminders and opportunities for wise considering and understanding in between, I think.... When there's right understanding of dhammas now, we begin to understand more about the causes and conditions for their arising, including akusala. We also understand that this is the same for all others too. .... >L: Yes, but I think right understanding is very subtle, no matter how tough we try to practice. >Just few reflections. ... S: Very true - very subtle. Usually there's the cloak of ignorance hiding the truth. Metta, Sarah ====== #97981 From: han tun Date: Wed May 20, 2009 9:16 pm Subject: Re: Physical Phenomena (03) hantun1 Dear Nina, > The Text: The last three factors are easier to understand, but the first factor, kamma, is harder to understand since kamma is a factor of the past. Han: But how past is the *past*? My understanding is that it can be the past factor of this life, as well as the past factor of the previous lives. Respectfully, Han #97982 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Wed May 20, 2009 10:01 pm Subject: Re: Dukkha; anatta (was, Not self vs. not-self) epsteinrob Hi Ken. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > > Hi Robert E, > > Thanks for this reply, which I somehow missed seeing. I only became > aware of it when Sukin posted his response. > > ----------- > <. . .> > R: > I did answer this challenge when you originally brought it up, but > I will be happy to do so again. Perhaps you did not see my response the > last time: > --------- > > > Your ESP was close: I saw that one but not this one. > :-) > > -------------------- > R: > Mass is describable and measurable. You can say what it is as a > positive characteristic. It has a definition > ------------------------------- > > I think the same can be said for anicca dukkha and anatta: an > enlightened person can describe them from his own direct experience. > (Although unenlightened people won't necessarily know what he's talking > about!) Well, that's my point - you can't say something is describeable and makes sense and then say that there's no understandable description of it to demonstrate that. No offense, but that's a nonsense equation, like saying that 2 + 2 = 0. I'll tell you what: I'll settle for a description by an arahat claiming that what you say is the case, even if I don't understand the statement. I don't think such a statement even exists, but if it does, I'd like to see it. If no such statement exists, then the proposition that such is the case is also nonsense, just speculation. > BTW, I'd like to make clear again that I am not trying to tie > conventional science in with the Dhamma. I am just looking for some > similes to help explain how (according to my understanding) dhammas can > have inherent characteristics. My point is that just as the analogous situation makes sense, the idea that anatta is a definite characteristic also has to make sense. I don't have to understand it, but I can still see that at least it is claimed to be such by someone who has the authority to say so. BTW, I agree 100% that anatta is a characteristic of all dhammas. I just don't think that means that anatta is something other than 'lack of selfhood.' > ------------------------------------------- > R: > - mass is the density of matter per unit. > ------------------------------------------- > > I'm not sure that is right. According to my internet research mass is > "the property of a body that causes it to have weight in a gravitational > field." Well, look at how mass is measured. From Wikipedia: "The density of a material is defined as its mass per unit volume." See, occasionally I know what I'm talking about, though I try not to do it too frequently. :-) > So mass is a property. The weighing, or measuring, of matter is just > something that is made possible by its having mass. Mass is not a number > of atoms per square inch, or a number of pixels on a screen; it is an > inherent characteristic of matter. It is also measureable in terms of an objective, defineable formula. And by the way, the definition you gave is also a concrete explanation of what it does and how it works, at least in one aspect. Let's hear something along those lines about anatta. I'll bet any positive statement about anatta has to do with the fact that things do not have a self, or are mistakenly taken for self. That's what anatta is about; it's not a secret of the arahats. Buddha advertised it constantly in his talks, which we call "suttas." Buddha defined the "not-self characteristic" just as clearly as you and I defined density above, in the Anatta-lakkhana Sutta, and this is what he said: ""So, bhikkhus any kind of form whatever, whether past, future or presently arisen, whether gross or subtle, whether in oneself or external, whether inferior or superior, whether far or near, must with right understanding how it is, be regarded thus: 'This is not mine, this is not I, this is not myself.'" "This is not myself" is how Buddha describes the Right Understanding of the not-self characteristic. The characteristic that all dhammas have that we call anatta is that with right understanding the arahat recognizes that all things are *not his self.* That is anatta in the Buddha's own nutshell. The rest of the sutta follows this analysis as well. So where is the confusion? That is what this characteristic consists of, according to the Boss. The purpose of perceiving the not-self characteristic is not to see a secret thingy, but to remove clinging: "Bhikkhus, when a noble follower who has heard (the truth) sees thus, he finds estrangement in form, he finds estrangement in feeling, he finds estrangement in perception, he finds estrangement in determinations, he finds estrangement in consciousness. "When he finds estrangement, passion fades out. With the fading of passion, he is liberated. When liberated, there is knowledge that he is liberated. He understands: 'Birth is exhausted, the holy life has been lived out, what can be done is done, of this there is no more beyond.'" > I remember the physicist Paul Davies explaining that the universe did > not need to be the way it was. The laws of the universe were set down at > the time of the big bang, and in a different universe different laws > could have applied. Matter might not have had mass (or inertia or > impenetrability etc). But it does! That's the way things are. Right; the point is understanding the way things are, not making stuff up. > In the satipatthana-known world, phenomena have anicca dukkha and > anatta. That's the Dhamma! :-) And what does that mean? That's the question. Buddha lays it out. Here is anicca and anatta from the same sutta, explained perfectly well without any confusion. Even a non-arahat can understand it: "Bhikkhus, how do you conceive it: is form permanent or impermanent?" "Impermanent, venerable Sir." "Now is what is impermanent painful or pleasant?" "Painful, venerable Sir." "Now is what is impermanent, what is painful since subject to change, fit to be regarded thus: 'This is mine, this is I, this is my self'"? "No, venerable sir." The formula is very simple: Form [feeling, perception, etc.] is impermanent; that which is impermanent is painful; that which is painful is not to be regarded as one's self. > ------------------------- > R: > What is its definition? If the definition is what everyone in the > universe knows it to be - the absence of self or the fact of not being a > self or part of self - it is not a positive characteristic, it is a > negation of a characteristic, and that is how the Buddha defined it. So > I await your counter-explanation. If you cannot specify it with a > positive definition, then you do not actually know what it is, and if so > I would then ask you - when you talk about the characteristic of anatta, > exactly what are you referring to? > --------------------- > > In my opinion I have been giving positive definitions all along. You > just haven't seen them that way. :-) Respectfully, you haven't defined any of the characteristics, just listed them and said they are characteristics. That is not a definition at all. Here is what you said: "I think the same can be said for anicca dukkha and anatta: an enlightened person can describe them from his own direct experience." That's not a definition or a description; it's just an assertion that someone else knows the answer. Again, you say: "In the satipatthana-known world, phenomena have anicca dukkha and anatta. That's the Dhamma!" That also does not define or describe the characteristics in any way shape or form. It just makes another general assertion that phenomena have them. When are you going to talk about what they are? > As Sukin said in his excellent reply, ". . . no amount of explanation > would be of any use if there is not the inclination to study the present > moment." Still, you should be able to say something of what you are talking about when you refer to things, and so should Sukin! Sorry, but this is just general assertions with no evidence to back it up. > I don't mean to say that applies especially to you. All of us have > moments of forgetfulness when we mistake the Dhamma for a conventional > teaching. Well I would love to have something of substance to forget! So far, I'm still waiting to get started. The Buddha says very definite things about what anatta anicca and dukkha are. You do not. Do you accept the statements I have quoted from the Buddha, or do you think he was talking in a secret code that we can't understand? Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #97983 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Wed May 20, 2009 10:05 pm Subject: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > K.Sujin always uses the word 'amazing' to describe this 'coming together'. And then as the verse says, they 'flash in and out, as lightning in the sky.' Just one moment of consciousness at a time, like the touching of one point of the circumference of the wheel on the ground. All those experiences in the past, even just a moment ago, gone never to return, just like that flash of lightning too....We're just left with our dreams. Very nice. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #97984 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Wed May 20, 2009 10:12 pm Subject: [dsg] Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > S: Yes, I agree. The illusion is the 'self'. Anatta is the *real* characteristic of all dhammas. I certainly agree with this. The question really is: What *is* the characteristic of anatta when it is perceived as a characteristic of a dhamma? If I can be bold enough to imagine what that might be like, imagine your example of hardness and experiencing it arising, sustaining and then passing away. One can imagine that the direct experience of this rising and passing of the hardness would directly reveal that there is no core, no self, in that play of "anicca," that there is merely the experience of hardness changing and then vanishing, and that this directly shows the characteristic of "not-self." In seeing this play of changes directly in the dhamma, one would be perfectly clear that no self of any kind comes into play and this would express the anatta characteristic of the hardness. Though I don't of course presently experience this on the micro-moment level, it is not impossible for me to imagine that this is how the inherent characteristic of anatta may be experienced. On the level of conceptual understanding, I have a hope that this is not totally off the mark. > I've appreciated all your discussions on this topic and your keen questioning:-). Thank you; it is a topic that stretches the desire to see clearly; and I hope that is a positive thing. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = #97985 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Wed May 20, 2009 10:21 pm Subject: Skillful thieves (was: [dsg] Re: effort.] [1] epsteinrob H Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarahprocterabbott@... wrote: > > > Hi Rob Ep, > > (1) > > --- On Thu, 14/5/09, Robert Epstein wrote: > > >Such an interesting thread. In addition to the subject itself, it activates all sorts of memories of my mother when she was younger, and of my own young days. Interesting to note the nature of those arising dhammas as they come and cause some kammic reactions and then pass away again. Curious what kinds of namas such memory-events are? They must have their own interesting category. > ... > S: Yes, it is interesting as you say. Lots of passing dhammas, so many ideas about there being 'my' experiences and a 'me' in the past. We can see how there can be conditions for memory (sa~n~naa)not to recall certain events for decades (in my case, anyway) and then suddenly there's a 'trigger' and sa~n~naa recalls the various scenarios. So here are examples of past dhammas and concepts conditioning present thinking and remembrance by natural decisive support condition. It could be something from lifetimes in the past too. Usually, we attach a lot of importance to these past stories and recollections, forgetting again that there's just the present moment, the present thinking. I kind of like the awareness of these memories coming back from the past; but as you say, there is a tendency to attach a lot of meaning and sentiment to them. Good to notice that. > .... > >More below: > > >> S: Please tell her that I appreciate her examples. > > R:> Thank you. My mother is in her '80s with some health issues and doesn't have too much social contacts these days other than my Dad, who is 89, and my family. Luckily we live nearby and talk to and see them regularly. I think my Mom will find it interesting that I have discussed her handling of these situations with the group here. I will let you know what she says! :-) > .... > S: That would be interesting. Please tell her that I appreciate her examples and gentle, understanding approach. My mother was pleased that we appreciated her examples of this reaction. She smiled and recalled the situations too. I will have to ask her some more about them. > The interesting thing, too, is that we never know how we'd react in a particular situation until it happens. We can speculate about what's best, but we never know. I can't say I'd react next time as I did the last, for example. In London I had a very quiet yoga friend who one would expect to react very calmly, but when some thugs tried to snatch her bag through the window of her car at a red traffic light, she went ballistic. She told me she was shocked by her behaviour afterwards, but it was partly because she was scared about her little son in the back of the car. We never know. Conditions! Ha ha, yes, that is funny. Don't mess around with someone who has a child with them! Speaking of random associations, one of the times when I was not so calm is when I was jogging in the countryside and ran across a baby black bear on the road, who was happily playing and looking around. I know that if the mother bear sees you near her cub she'll rip you to pieces. Boy, you should have seen me run! I think I doubled my normal jogging speed! I just recalled that you said you were surprised at how calm you were in those intense situations because you are normally nervous when you are five minutes late or about other little things. I have the same tendency. I'm calm in an emergency, but constantly have small anxieties or sometimes larger ones about the things of everyday life. I've been known to get a bit tense over having my things moved around a bit or my towel relocated. Those little tendencies always give me a clue as to how many defilements are still left to be worked on, if one is even attached to the position of one's stapler or 'special tea cup.' And watch out if someone uses my yoga mat! :-( Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #97986 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Wed May 20, 2009 10:23 pm Subject: Skillful thieves (was: [dsg] Re: effort.] [2] epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob Ep and Sarah, > Those anecdotes make Dhamma very human, very daily. Do give us more, > Rob. > Nina. Well, let me know if I get too random. Once I start telling stories, I may not be able to stop! Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = > Op 19-mei-2009, om 6:29 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > > > S: When you speak to your mother, perhaps she might like to share > > more of her anecdotes with her own fine examples of kindness and > > patience. Perhaps it'll be an opportunity to have more helpful > > discussion with her. My mother's also a wonderful example of > > someone who never complains no matter the circumstances. I have a > > lot to learn in that regard! > #97987 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed May 20, 2009 10:26 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma article by I.B. Horner 1941 (plus killing with compassion?) sarahprocter... Hi Chris & all, --- On Sat, 16/5/09, Christine Forsyth wrote: >I'm not sure if this has been discussed previously on Dhammstudygroup ~ but would be interested in members opinions of this article: Abhidhamma Abhivinaya in the first two of the Pāli Canon I.B. Horner The Indian Historical Quarterly, Vol.17:3, Sep.1941 http://www.buddhane t.net/budsas/ ebud/ebsut064. htm ... S: Thanks for bringing it to our attention. I hadn't read it before and have somewhat skimmed through now. Her familiarity with the texts was incredible considering that only the Childers dict was available and translations were limited with no computers or even electric type-writers. For me, abhidhamma and dhamma, though having different meanings in different contexts, both point to the realities now to be known directly. For example, at one point she discusses the meanings of abhi-siila, abhi-citta and abhi-pa~n~naa. In the final analysis, I believe these terms can only be understood through the development of satipa.t.thaaan. Otherwise, they end up as theoretical constructs only. Anyway, there was a lot I appreciated in the article. How about you? What did you think of it? ***** Another article that was drawn to my attention recently was this one by Rupert Gethin one "Can a Living Being Ever Be an Act of Compassion?" http://www.buddhistethics.org/11/geth0401.pdf I thought of you when I read it and you may well have read it already.. I think it's a very good article and shows a good understanding of Abhidhamma in this regard. It also contains some good quotes. I'll look forward to any further comments on this as well. I think most friends here will find it quite interesting (and perhaps easier to read than IB Horner's on 'abhidhamma'.) Metta, Sarah ======== #97988 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu May 21, 2009 12:09 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Physical Phenomena (03) nilovg Op 21-mei-2009, om 6:16 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > The Text: The last three factors are easier to understand, but the > first factor, kamma, is harder to understand since kamma is a > factor of the past. > > Han: But how past is the *past*? My understanding is that it can be > the past factor of this life, as well as the past factor of the > previous lives. ------- N: Certainly, you are right. It can also be in this life. Nina. #97989 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu May 21, 2009 12:39 am Subject: Q. Re: [dsg] Re: siila nilovg Hi Howard and Lukas, Op 20-mei-2009, om 20:08 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > As I see it, merely another phenomenon arising, whether it be thinking > or something else, is not in itself distraction. It is distraction > only > when we are caught by it - for example, getting lost in thought or > in sloth & > torpor; i.e., when mindfulness is lost. -------- N: Can we say: when there is not yet enough understanding of realities. But I hasten to say that I myself do not have enough understanding. I would not think so much of the loss of mindfulness, I would rather emphasize understanding. Hiri and ottappa, moral shame and fear of blame, condition good morality, they accompany each kusala citta. In the following sutta insight is emphasized as the condition for the growth of hiri and ottappa. I quote from my Cetasikas: Lukas quoted Ven. Dhammadhara explaining that also distraction can be understood as a reality: We should not mind loss of sati, because it is not something we possess, as you also agree. It can only arise for amoment if there are the right conditions for it. Understanding develops very, very slowly but, as Ven. Dhammadhara also said: one has to be farsighted. The effects can be in the far future. For a being in a next life conditioned by the accumulations in this life of 'this being here now'. He said this when discussing a Jaataka of the skilfull seafarer who brought his ship with his people, loaded with treasures safely home after a long journey. He was farsighted. ------ #97990 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu May 21, 2009 12:46 am Subject: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 36. nilovg Dear friends, We do not clearly distinguish between different realities, we join them together. When we think of vipka, we usually think of a whole situation. For example we think that being in a swimmingpool is kusala vipka and we cling to this situation. When I was swimming there was at one moment the experience of a pleasant object through the bodysense, at another moment an unpleasant object. When we enjoy doing something like swimming, we do not always notice it when the object which is experienced is unpleasant. The object is unpleasant when, for example, the temperature of the water is just a little too cold. We are ignorant of the realities which appear one at a time. Swimmingpool is not a reality which can be directly experienced. Phenomena such as cold, softness, attachment or aversion are realities which can be directly experienced when they present themselves one at a time. Vipka is such a short moment, why should we try to find out whether it is kusala vipka or akusala vipka? When the vipka has already fallen away we continue to think about it. We find it so important whether there is kusala vipka or akusala vipka in our life. We regret the days when there is a great deal of akusala vipka and we think of a self who has to receive it. Vipka is the result of kamma. It arises just for a moment and then it falls away. When we hear unpleasant words the experience of sound is a moment of vipka and it falls away immediately. At the moment of hearing we do not know the meaning of the words yet. When we know the meaning there is thinking, and then there are usually akusala cittas which think with aversion about those words. We cannot change what has happened, but what can be done is the development of right understanding of realities. It is essential to know when there is kusala citta, when akusala citta and when vipka-citta, but we should not try to find out whether the vipka was kusala vipka or akusala vipka. Seeing, for example, is vipka and after it has fallen away there are kusala cittas or akusala cittas, but most of the time there are akusala cittas. We are attached to visible object or we have aversion towards it. It is important to know these types of akusala cittas which arise after the vipka-citta. ******* Nina. #97991 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu May 21, 2009 12:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Reflections on death nilovg Venerable Yanatharo, I join Sarah, and I am so glad about the good news. We welcome any of your reflections on death and life, with respect, Nina. Op 21-mei-2009, om 4:57 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > Dear Ven Yanatharo, > > I'm very glad to hear that you're being well taken care of at the > hospice and that the charges have been dropped. Thank you for > sharing your good news with us. #97992 From: "sprlrt" Date: Thu May 21, 2009 4:36 am Subject: The sixth door sprlrt Hi, In this context door means the dhamma(s) through wich an object (one of the 7 visaya rupa in the case of a sense door process; or a nimitta, a sign/shadow of a dhamma, in the case of the many mind door processes following each sense door one; with many bhavanga cittas/life continuum interposing between each single process) is experienced by citta & cetasika arising and falling in a vithi/process. The series of seven javana cittas, kusala or akusala, arising in the five sense door processes are always preceeded by vipaka cittas, the result of past kamma, such as seeing... touching, cognizing visible object... tangible impinging on the corresponding sense door, itself the result of past kamma. But in a mind door processes javana cittas are never preceeded by vipaka citta, i.e. they are unrelated to past kamma. The door through wich these cittas experience/cognize their object is bhavanga citta/life continuum wich, like the sense doors, is the result of past kamma but, unlike the sense doors, is not an internal upadinna rupa-dhamma on which an external visaya rupa-dhamma inpinges on. Mind door is a nama dhamma, citta and cetasika, including saကကa, the khandha that marks and remembers the object it, along with the other nama khandhas, experiences and, since it arises in all cittas, it marks and remembers all the objects, paကကatti included, that all cittas have experienced so far in this life, as well as those experienced in previous ones. The Atthasalini compares atta-saကကa to a young deer that mistakes a scarecrow for a man. Ditthi, arising with lobha and moha, (mis)takes dhammas for lasting selves and things, i.e. for paကကatti, which atta-saကကa marks and then remembers, providing, according to conditions, when it arises in bhavanga cittas (life continuum, the mind door interposing after each single vithi/process of cittas), the object that the cittas in the following mind door process cognize. The objects that saကကa has marked and passes on to mind door processes are neither kusala nor akusala nor avyakata. They are, with the exeption of nibbana, nimitta, just signs, shadows and concepts of dhammas arisen and fallen away already. Alberto #97993 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu May 21, 2009 4:43 am Subject: Q. Physical phenomena. nilovg Dear Han, I need to be very careful and add something to my former post. Op 21-mei-2009, om 6:16 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > The Text: The last three factors are easier to understand, but the > first factor, kamma, is harder to understand since kamma is a > factor of the past. > > Han: But how past is the *past*? My understanding is that it can be > the past factor of this life, as well as the past factor of the > previous lives. ------- N: I wrote: Certainly, you are right. It can also be in this life. ------- N: I write now: When we speak about kamma of the past it can be of a former life or this life. When we speak about kamma as factor producing rupa I think that it is of a former life. These are the senses, sex, life factor. Kamma, that is of a past life, produces rupas from the first moment of life and keeps on producing them. However, this is complicated and I do not like to specify which kamma produces them. No need to specify. Nina. #97994 From: han tun Date: Thu May 21, 2009 5:50 am Subject: [dsg] Q. Physical phenomena. hantun1 Dear Nina, > Nina: I write now: When we speak about kamma of the past it can be of a former life or this life. When we speak about kamma as factor producing rupa I think that it is of a former life. These are the senses, sex, life factor. Kamma, that is of a past life, produces rupas from the first moment of life and keeps on producing them. However, this is complicated and I do not like to specify which kamma produces them. No need to specify. Han: Okay, Nina, I accept your point that kamma factor that produce ruupa, (i.e., if you take only the nine kammaja-ekaja-ruupas) then it must be of a former life, because, as you said, the ruupas that are produced exclusively by kamma are senses, sex, hadaya-vatthu and life factor. The books mention the 25 types of kamma which produce ruupa starting with the arising sub-moment of the rebirth-linking consciousness, and throughout the course of existence up to the seventeenth mind-moment preceding the death consciousness. But I will not worry about this, as you said, they are very complicated. Thank you very much. Respectfully, Han #97995 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu May 21, 2009 2:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah (and Robert) - In a message dated 5/20/2009 8:35:08 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi Rob Ep (& Howard), --- On Mon, 18/5/09, Robert Epstein wrote: >>H: When people think there is a substantive property, called "not-self," > they are, IMO, being fooled by language use. The term 'not-self' is an > adjective with special usage as in "the not-self teaching", and not a noun. > There is no property called "not-self" that things have. R:> I agree. Unfortunately there seems to be an idea at large that not-self is a characteristic in its own right, to be discerned by the wise. .... S: Anatta is a characteristic of all dhammas. In other words, it's not "a characteristic in its own right" to be known, divorced from such dhammas. The same applies to anicca and dukkha - they can only ever be known as "characteristics of dhammas". So, it is only by knowing the characteristic of visible object or hardness (to give a couple of examples), as dhammas, as rupas which can only ever be experienced, which can never experience objects themselves, that the nature of such dhammas can be known as anatta. =============================== Saying that "not-self" is a property of things is like saying that not-square is a property of things. It is true that a rainbow, for example, is not square. But there is no quality of a rainbow that is it's "not squareness." That is the point. When it is said that all conditioned phenomena are not self, that means EXACTLY that no conditioned dhammas are self. The assertion that they are not self is a denial, the assertion of the LACK of a feature. With metta, Howard Emptiness /He who does not find core or substance in any of the realms of being, like flowers which are vainly sought in fig trees that bear none — such a seeker gives up the here and the beyond, just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin./ (From the Uraga Sutta) #97996 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Thu May 21, 2009 5:20 pm Subject: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob Ep, > Op 17-mei-2009, om 6:29 heeft Robert Epstein het volgende geschreven: > > > Is this not correct, that this kind of process develops and > > accumulates over a series of moments as well? > > > > In this way I am trying to make a distinction between that which is > > *contained* with in the moment [which may be everything up to that > > point,] and that which *takes place* in a single moment, which may > > very well be part of a process that takes more than a single moment > > and is accumulated. > ------- > N: Each process of cittas has javanacittas, seven cittas that are > either kusala or akusala (in the case of non-arahats). During these > moments new accumulations take place, of either kusala or akusala. At > the same time in each citta all former accumulations of kusala and > akusala are contained. I am afraid to say too much, because all this > is very complex. And, as Sarah said, we have to take into account > different types of conditions. > Nina. Well, this makes sense to me. I guess the point I have been hoping to confirm is that these cumulative processes can include actions that will continue between one moment and then another, based on the accumulation that is passed on. So I can imagine that one beating or turning over of the dhamma could take place at one moment, and then the next moment could contain a beating or turning over investigation of the dhamma that could take into account the 'right thinking' that took place and was passed on from the preceding moment. It is not as if all the beatings and turnings over of the object have to take place in one moment, and then - boom - it's over. Since accumulations do develop, and since they are passed on, the process of beating and turning over can take a number of moments. If deeper insight into the dhamma is to be gained by this sort of investigation, it makes sense that it might take place over a successive period of 'looks' at the dhamma, rather than just one shot. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #97997 From: han tun Date: Thu May 21, 2009 10:26 pm Subject: Physical Phenomena (04) hantun1 Dear All, This is the serial presentation of The Buddhist Teaching on Physical Phenomena by Nina. Introduction (continuation) -------------------- Rebirth-consciousness is the mental result of kamma, vipkacitta, but at that moment kamma also produces rpas and kamma keeps on producing rpas throughout life; when it stops producing rpas our life-span has to end. Kamma produces particular kinds of rpas such as the senses, as we shall see. Citta also produces rpas. Our different moods become evident by our facial expressions and then it is clear that citta produces rpas. Temperature, which is actually the element of heat, also produces rpas. Throughout life the element of heat produces rpas. Nutrition is another factor that produces rpas. When food has been taken by a living being it is assimilated into the body and then nutrition can produce rpas. Some of the groups of rpas of our body are produced by kamma, some by citta, some by temperature and some by nutrition. The four factors which produce the rpas of our body support and consolidate each other and keep this shortlived body going. If we see the intricate way in which different factors condition the rpas of our body we shall be less inclined to think that the body belongs to a self. -------------------- Introduction to be continued. with metta, Han #97998 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu May 21, 2009 11:53 pm Subject: Re: Dukkha; anatta (was, Not self vs. not-self) kenhowardau Hi Robert E, I wonder if, one day, we could ask why this is so important to you. Why are you so determined to deny the inherency aspect of anatta - even though to do so means to go against the Theravada texts (to deny their authority)? It must be very important to you. One other day, perhaps! :-) -------------------- <. . .> KH: > > I think the same can be said for anicca dukkha and anatta: an > enlightened person can describe them from his own direct experience. > (Although unenlightened people won't necessarily know what he's talking > about!) R: > Well, that's my point - you can't say something is describeable and makes sense and then say that there's no understandable description of it to demonstrate that. -------------------- That is not what I am saying. The entire Dhamma is a description of conditioned dhammas. Some people may need to hear only a few words of description (as in the case of Sariputta) while others will need long, elaborate descriptions repeated many times and over many future lifetimes. ----------------------- R: > <. . .> I'll tell you what: I'll settle for a description by an arahat claiming that what you say is the case, even if I don't understand the statement. I don't think such a statement even exists, but if it does, I'd like to see it. If no such statement exists, then the proposition that such is the case is also nonsense, just speculation. ---------------------- We've discussed this already. It is a matter of understanding: you give quotes in support of your understanding, and I give the exact same quotes in support of my understanding. -------------------------- <. . .> KH: > > BTW, I'd like to make clear again that I am not trying to tie > conventional science in with the Dhamma. I am just looking for some > similes to help explain how (according to my understanding) dhammas can > have inherent characteristics. R: > My point is that just as the analogous situation makes sense, the idea that anatta is a definite characteristic also has to make sense. I don't have to understand it, but I can still see that at least it is claimed to be such by someone who has the authority to say so. BTW, I agree 100% that anatta is a characteristic of all dhammas. I just don't think that means that anatta is something other than 'lack of selfhood.' ---------------------------- Yes, I know what you are saying, and I hope to convince you that you are mistaken. It is an extremely important point. According to your understanding, people and trees (for example) are anatta. But that is not what the Buddha taught! Only dhammas bear the anatta characteristic. I'll snip the next bit, where I think we may have reached some agreement . . . -------------------- <. . .> KH: > Mass is <. . .> is an inherent characteristic of matter. > > R: > It is also measureable in terms of an objective, defineable formula. And by the way, the definition you gave is also a concrete explanation of what it does and how it works, at least in one aspect. Let's hear something along those lines about anatta. -------------------- OK, to loosely quote from the Anattalakkhana Sutta, 'Because citta (consciousness) is anatta it is not possible to say 'Let my consciousness stay the way it is.' That's really quite extraordinary, isn't it? If it wasn't for anatta (as taught only by the Buddha) no one could make such an extraordinary statement. The consciousness you and I conventionally know certainly *can* stay the way it is. At least for a period of time. That is why wecan say, for example, "I have been happy all day," or, "she grieved for a year." Similarly, with regard to the body, we can say, "I have been sitting in this chair for two minutes." And all of that is true. The mental and physical things in the conventionally known world really do last. It would be ludicrous to suggest they didn't. And the Buddha didn't suggest it: his teaching was only about dhammas (absolute realities). Dhammas, and only dhammas, bear the anatta characteristic. Sentient beings (and other concepts) have nothing to do with it. It is only with respect to dhammas that we cannot say "let this remain the way it is" or "let this be some other way." --------------------------------- R: > I'll bet any positive statement about anatta has to do with the fact that things do not have a self, or are mistakenly taken for self. That's what anatta is about; it's not a secret of the arahats. Buddha advertised it constantly in his talks, which we call "suttas." ---------------------------------- The suttas were about conditioned dhammas: their existence, their cause, their cessation and the way leading to their cessation. They were not about a way leading to the cessation of people and trees. ------------------ R: > Buddha defined the "not-self characteristic" just as clearly as you and I defined density above, in the Anatta-lakkhana Sutta, and this is what he said: ""So, bhikkhus any kind of form whatever, whether past, future or presently arisen, whether gross or subtle, whether in oneself or external, whether inferior or superior, whether far or near, must with right understanding how it is, be regarded thus: 'This is not mine, this is not I, this is not myself.'" ---------------- (There's another example of what I was saying: we give the same quotes in support of different understandings.) ----------------------- R: > "This is not myself" is how Buddha describes the Right Understanding of the not-self characteristic. ----------------------- Yes, that is how he described it. And he described it from direct experience. Otherwise, his teaching would have been hypothetical. ----------------------------- R: > The characteristic that all dhammas have that we call anatta is that with right understanding the arahat recognizes that all things are *not his self.* ------------------------------ The arahant directly knows anatta. As a consequence, he is able to describe it. ---------------------------------------------- R: > That is anatta in the Buddha's own nutshell. The rest of the sutta follows this analysis as well. So where is the confusion? That is what this characteristic consists of, according to the Boss. The purpose of perceiving the not-self characteristic is not to see a secret thingy, but to remove clinging: ----------------------------------------------- No: as with all aspects of satipatthana, this is a matter of direct knowing. Can you see how your argument is the thin end of the wedge? If we were to deny the inherent nature of anatta we would also deny other inherent natures taught in the suttas. We would end up denying all of absolute existence. Paramattha dhammas would be seen as mere theoretical models. It does happen! There have been dozens of DSG members over the years who have tried to tell us that paramattha dhammas were just theoretical models - invented for the purpose of inducing detachment and renunciation. That would mean that detachment and renunciation (the way leading to the cessation of dukkha) were themselves just theoretical models. And so the way out would not really exist at all! -------------------------- R: > "Bhikkhus, when a noble follower who has heard (the truth) sees thus, he finds estrangement in form, he finds estrangement in feeling, he finds estrangement in perception, he finds estrangement in determinations, he finds estrangement in consciousness. "When he finds estrangement, passion fades out. With the fading of passion, he is liberated. When liberated, there is knowledge that he is liberated. He understands: 'Birth is exhausted, the holy life has been lived out, what can be done is done, of this there is no more beyond.'" ---------------------------- My thoughts exactly! :-) ---------------------------------------- <. . .> KH: > > In the satipatthana-known world, phenomena have anicca dukkha and > anatta. That's the Dhamma! :-) R: > And what does that mean? That's the question. Buddha lays it out. Here is anicca and anatta from the same sutta, explained perfectly well without any confusion. Even a non-arahat can understand it: "Bhikkhus, how do you conceive it: is form permanent or impermanent?" "Impermanent, venerable Sir." "Now is what is impermanent painful or pleasant?" "Painful, venerable Sir." "Now is what is impermanent, what is painful since subject to change, fit to be regarded thus: 'This is mine, this is I, this is my self'"? "No, venerable sir." The formula is very simple: Form [feeling, perception, etc.] is impermanent; that which is impermanent is painful; that which is painful is not to be regarded as one's self. ----------------------------------- Beautiful and inspiring! As I understand that sutta the monks to whom the Buddha was talking were practising satipatthana. When asked how they regarded any nama or rupa they were able to answer truthfully - from their own direct experience - that it was exactly how the Buddha had described it. (Without having seen a commentary I could be wrong, of course: maybe that sutta was addressed to beginners like us who were just trying to grasp the theory. (?)) --------------------- <. . .> R: > The Buddha says very definite things about what anatta anicca and dukkha are. You do not. Do you accept the statements I have quoted from the Buddha, or do you think he was talking in a secret code that we can't understand? ---------------------- It wasn't meant to be a secret code, but the Dhamma is nonetheless very difficult. It does not relate to anything already known by uninstructed worldlings. Ken H #97999 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Thu May 21, 2009 11:19 pm Subject: The Uncreated! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: Nibbâna is the Highest Happiness, & Peace!!! The Buddha once said about Nibbāna: The Uncreated Dimension: That, truly, is peace, this is the absolute supreme, namely, the end of every kammic formation, the final stilling of all mental construction, the letting go and leaving behind of any substrate for rebirth and all fuel for becoming, the fading away of all craving, & the relinquishing of all forms of clinging, silencing, stilling, ceasing, Nibbāna.... AN 3:32 Enraptured, ensnared and obsessed with greed, lust, urge & desire, enraged with hate, fuming with anger, stirred by ill will & irritation, blinded by ignorance, agitated by confusion, and fooled by delusion, overwhelmed, with mind entangled, one aims at own ruin, at the ruin of others, at the ruin of both, & one experiences frustration & pain! But if lust, hate, and ignorance are eliminated, one aims neither at own ruin, nor at the ruin of others, nor at the ruin of both, and one experiences neither mental frustration, nor any pain, nor any grief! Thus is Nibbāna immediate, visible in this life, inviting, captivating, fascinating & comprehensible to any intelligent & wise being. AN 3:55 The elimination of all Greed, the stilling of all Hate, the eradication of all Confusion: This quenching, indeed, is the true Nibbāna. SN 38:1 FREED For him, who has completed this journey. For him, who is untouched by any pain or sorrow. For him, who is in every-way wholly freed. For him, who has broken all chains. For such one, no Suffering is ever Possible! Dhammapada 90 Background Story More on this sublime Blissful State called Nibbāna: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Peace.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/Final_Freedom.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/Reaching_Peace.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/climax_of_calm.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Nibbana_Still.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/The_Uncreated.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/The_2_Nibbanas.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/IV/The_Stilled_One .htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/What_is_Nibbana.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/wtb/n_r/nibbaana.htm Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samāhita, Sri Lanka * http://What-Buddha-Said.net The Uncreated Element: Nibbâna!