#106000 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Mon Mar 15, 2010 12:04 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 scottduncan2 Dear Ken O., Regarding: KO: "Development is definitely impersonal, conditions.? There is no one to direct, but then panna arise due to accumulations, due to faith, due to sati, due to kusala?so it depends.? Cetana that?accompany panna will act,?so there is no person involved.??? Visud is the one contain these words that this method lead to enlightment..? Visud said this samantha bhavana, will be a basis of panna which and to enlightement see para 144, Visud VIII.." Scott: I've noticed that even the most inveterate 'no-control' advocate can founder at some point when it comes to exactly how much 'no-control' he or she is willing to accept. I think you are showing the limits of your abilities to tolerate the whole notion. Yes, so it is stated in the Visuddhimagga that a certain method was used and that the Path arose. Can one say anything more than that? Does this then suggest that one today should simply adopt this method as well? Such a notion is, to me, completely naive. There are so many unknown factors at this remove from both the text and the events the text reports that to take it as other than a report is to go way beyond the evidence. KO:? "I dont suggest anything,??the text speaks for itself.? There is no need to doubt the method and I have already explain that panna could arise with recitations as long as there is understanding of what is recited." Scott: It was reported in the text that the Path arose, and that four months of recitation preceded this. I don't doubt that the Path arises, because there are countless examples of its having arisen in countless situations. I am trying to get you to comment more clearly on why you focus on the method itself. What about the story of the monk, apparently of lesser intellect, in whom the Path arose after being given a cloth to rub? Should we all run out and get our own cloths and start rubbing them to cause the Path to arise? I'd say the 'cloth-rubbing method' is in no way different than the recitation method. KO:? "Hmm, I always at peace with the text.??It is not ambiguious?because it?has been very consistent with the sutta and the Abhidhamma.? ?Until then, you have to find your acceptance of the text.???If you said that?there is differing interpretations,?please show which commentary that said differently from this text on this 32 parts.? thanks" Scott: No, Ken, you and I are differing at the moment. These are the differing interpretations of the same text. Again, no need for another textual example. We have the one on which we differ now and that suffices. If you so much as tell me that you're right and I'm wrong I'll just have to stop immediately. ;-) So far all I read you to be saying is that the Path arose and that the recitation was the method that caused it to do so. I'm suggesting that you are missing a lot of other factors and cannot possibly make the determination that a) it was the recitation alone, as a method, that was the sole cause of the arising of the Path, and, b) that the texts are doing anything more than reporting an instance (with incomplete data) of an arising of the Path after a given person of given constitution went through a conventional set of actions. KO:?"The text is?talking?about real people,?I?stick to real people.?:-)" Scott: Okay Ken, its a language thing. Let's leave it. I'm talking about 'real people' too. :-/ KO: "Definitelhy not about atta.? Also?Defintely this method is not for everyone for arising of the path because each one?accumulations and panna is different.?? To think this could be done by any person who do not have the panna and accumulations, that is to me,??unwise and wrong practise.? Anyone who thinks they could just pick up a meditation subject without panna, will end up fustrated bacause it would not work.? All bhavana must have panna as the forerunner. Scott: Okay, thank Dog we can agree on at least one thing. But then you go on to say: KO: "I like to take an opportunity to say this.?In my personal opinion and no offense? meant, one of the greatest hurdle in DSG is that they presume too much.? When we talk about method, it must be atta or expectation or short cut???And DSG keep putting their past experiences of their meditations?or other methods they used.???They forget these did not work for them because at that time, they do not have the panna for it and the necessary accumulations.??At that?time, they are not the person describe in Visud or have the necessary environment and teacher as describe in Visud.?So lets not base on our own past experiences to judge what is written in Visud methods.? We should judge on?its consistency in the text and sutta."? Scott: You have yet to address the basis of your focus on method. Now we should switch from this hypothetical real person (don't even try to mention this again, man) and focus on you or I. It's one thing to discuss method intellectually, as we are doing. You are making some generalizations in the above, methinks. Inter-textual consistency is one thing but it isn't clear why you focus on this point and so it is irrelevant. So far all you are saying is that there are methods in the Visuddhimagga. Why does one consider 'atta' or 'shortcut' in relation to 'method?' I'd think that this was obvious. Look at the world of popular 'buddhism.' Here one can find discussions as vacuous and misinformed as whether or not one should exercise before or after meditation. One finds teachers and methods and claims everywhere. You don't think that a voice of reason is required? And believe me, it's not a person to whom this makes sense (because either it does or it doesn't) and no method can force someone to buy the caveats dispensed by 'DSG.' Just read some of the long-standing dissenters. How do you know that 'they' forget that these did not work for them because of lack of pa~n~naa or accumulations? One can make too facile a use of these generalizations as well. I'm not into a pursuit of jhaana. I've had run-ins with some jhaana-addicts, yeah, but this isn't why I have no interest. I don't because I don't. The idea of the moment and the impersonal and very gradual development of pa~n~naa and sati for which I have to 'wait' makes more sense to me. Why? Because it does. So far, no 'method' has appeared to me. I suggest that your focus on 'method' alone is narrow and restrictive and would ask that you please elaborate on why you are making such a stand. This is not yet clear to me. Thanks. Sincerely, Scott. #106001 From: "Lukas" Date: Mon Mar 15, 2010 12:21 pm Subject: Re: Will, and ultimate vs conventional teaching. szmicio Dear Alex, Howard > > ----------------------------------------------- > >Yes, of course that last-minute decision is possible (and even >fairly common), but, as you correctly point out, it also is >conditioned. > > ----------------------------------------------- > > Conditions can "set the stage", be supportive of something, but they do not have to 100% predetermine every reaction a person chooses. L: each reaction, each moment is conditioned, no one can choose. Not to pull a triger can be a condition to right understanding. When you want to shoot something and in a last moment you decided not to do this, then there can be right understanding, that has last dhammas as its object. sati. Best wishes Lukas #106002 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Mar 15, 2010 12:37 pm Subject: Re: Will, and ultimate vs conventional teaching. truth_aerator Dear Lukas, all, >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > > > L: Alex, you cannont budge your hand even for a slice. There needs >to be a proper conditions You cannot move your leg or finger or >anything. > > > > Of course, every thing is conditioned. But does this mean that the conditions are always fatalistic and a certain action (good or bad) is inevitable - no matter what one does? Is a person a killer, a rapist, a thief, only due to past causes? Or can a person at the last moment decide (also conditioned) that it is better not to pull a trigger and avoid killing? > > L: those moments of decisions are all conditioned. But are the past conditions responcible for Kamma (such as to pull the trigger kill or abstain) one does now? Or is the condition responsible for pulling or not the trigger is due to one's current intention (that can go either way)? > > How do you distinguish this teaching on conditionality vs Inaction? > > L: I tell to myself: just thinking. Maybe the teaching that nothing can be done is "just thinking"? > you said inaction, but that is not so, understanding that all is >conditioned is a cause to metta. because all is conditioned. So how does one develop or set causes for panna to arise? Why isn't that an action? > > How does what you interpret *on conditionality* different from >fatalism? > L: What is fatalism? The belief that Awakening or lack of it, is all predetermined and set in stone where nothing can be done either way. > I am not saying fatalism I am saying the best way for kusala is to >have more right understanding. Buddha spend a lot of time teaching >24 paccayas. > > Best wishes > Lukas Often a very short teaching was enough to make a person into stream-enterer or even an Arahant. Ex the story of Culapantaka. How much learning is required? This was said by one of the most knowledgeable Abh Experts: ====== HOW MUCH SUTAMAYA, KNOWLEDGE THROUGH HEARING? As stated in the Commentary we are quoting, it is sufficient to know only that the five aggregates are the truth of suffering; that craving is truth of origin of suffering. Here the five aggregates are the five aggregates of clinging, upadanakkhandha mentioned in this sutta. We have fully explained above that they are the objects which present themselves at the time of seeing, hearing, etc. We have also dealt comprehensively with the truth of the origin of suffering in the section concerned. Knowing the law of dependent origination in a brief manner. In the great sub-commentary on Visuddhimagga, it is definitely stated that what the Venerable Assaji taught, namely; ye dhamma hetuppabhava --- The perfect one has told to cause, of causally arisen things --- constitutes in brief the whole law of dependent origination. The commentary on Vinaya Mahavagga affirms also that by the words "ye dhamma hetuppa-bhava" the Venerable Assaji was teaching the five aggregates otherwise called the truth of suffering and by the words "tesam hetum tathagato aha" he was teaching the truth of origin of suffering. Thus it is clear that having learnt briefly, by hearing, about the dukkhasacca and samudayasacca, one has also learnt in a brief manner the law of dependent origination. Those who are preaching that vipassana meditation is not feasible unless one has mastered the law of dependent origination supported by tables and circular diagrams, are therefore going against these words of the commentary and sub-commentary and causing great harm to patipattisasana. In the Cula Tanhasankhaya sutta of the Mulapannasa Pa?i canon, we find the following regarding the brief knowledge to be acquired by learning, suta; "Oh, king of the devas, in this teaching, the Bhikkhu has heard that it is not fit nor proper to hold the view that all dhammas are permanent, pleasant and self." It means that if the Bhikkhu has ever heard of the fact that the five khandhas of the nama, rupa which present themselves at the six doors of senses every time there is seeing, hearing etc., are not proper to be regarded as permanent, pleasant, self; that they are transitory, subject to suffering and not self, then he has sufficient brief knowledge, suta mayanana, to proceed to engage himself in meditation. Thus the Buddha continued: "Then that Bhikkhu, who has learnt that much by hearsay, knows by contemplation and actual experience all dhammas." Then the Blessed One taught how to attain by meditation the knowledge of differentiation between nama and rupa, the nama rupapariccheda nana, etc. We have summarised the above thus: 1. All dhammas are transient, subject to suffering and not self. 2. That much is sufficient knowledge acquired by hearing, suta. 3. Enough to enable, through meditation, to differentiate the nama from rupa of the aggregates. 4. And to recognise their nature of impermanence and unsatisfactoriness. Nos. 1 and 2 above indicate sufficiency of brief knowledge of sutamaya nana (to proceed to the practice of meditation). No. 3 shows how by noting every action of seeing, hearing etc., at the moment of occurrence, knowledge is gained which enables one to distinguish between nama and rupa, namarupa-pariccheda nana and to know the cause of phenomena of seeing, hearing etc, paccayapariggaha nana. These two kinds of knowledge are called abhinna panna, being the nataparinna of the three parinnas. By no. 4 is meant full knowledge of all the dhammas and insight into their nature of impermanency, suffering and non-self, in accordance with "sabbam dhammam abhinnaya, sabbam dhammam parijanati." This constitutes the profound knowledge of tirana parinna and pahana parinna. The main point we wish to emphasises here is that having just learnt through hearing that all dhammas are impermanent, suffering and non-self, one has enough sutamaya nana to proceed to endeavor for attainment of arahatta magga phala. Thus the assertion that, without a comprehensive knowledge of the law of dependent origination, meditation should not be practiced goes against this Pa?i text of Culatanhsa?khaya sutta, causes demoralisation in those bent on the practice of meditation and is detrimental to the prosperity of patipatti sasana. If, according to their proposition, meditation could be practised only after thoroughly mastering the law of dependent origination together with its explanatory circular diagrams etc., some people who have no time nor chance to study the law of dependent origination or are slow in learning it comprehensively, are liable to lose the opportunity of gaining the path or fruition even if they are endowed with param?s, sufficient conditions and qualifications, to attain them. To cite an example, during the time of the Blessed One, one Bhikkhu by the name of Culapantaka found it difficult to memorise a verse of only 45 alphabets although he tried it for four weeks. To learn the whole law of the dependent origination extensively would thus have been an impossible task for him. Yet the same bhikkhu attained Arahatship, accomplished in jhana abhinna, supernormal knowledge, and vision by practising for one morning only the meditation exercise prescribed by the Buddha. http://www.mahasi.org.mm/discourse/E27/E27ch06.htm With Metta, Alex #106003 From: "Lukas" Date: Mon Mar 15, 2010 12:56 pm Subject: Re: Will, and ultimate vs conventional teaching. szmicio Dear Alex, > > L: those moments of decisions are all conditioned. > > But are the past conditions responcible for Kamma (such as to pull the trigger kill or abstain) one does now? Or is the condition responsible for pulling or not the trigger is due to one's current intention (that can go either way)? L: People suffers in the circle cause no control, this is why samsara is so painful. And no way to get out from this circle. Buddha taught only moha that conditions that all, and no way for anyone to get out from this. No one who can change conditions. They are now. kamma is only one condition of 24. one's intention? intentions arise and fall away, they are not ours. > > > How do you distinguish this teaching on conditionality vs Inaction? > > > > L: I tell to myself: just thinking. > > Maybe the teaching that nothing can be done is "just thinking"? L: It is. So I also have a problem ;> > > you said inaction, but that is not so, understanding that all is >conditioned is a cause to metta. because all is conditioned. > > So how does one develop or set causes for panna to arise? Why isn't that an action? L: Yoniso mansikara, have the opportunity to listen Dhamma, living a life. This is waht there is, this is very natural. siila also can be condition to panna, but I think not now, cause we have a lot of wrong view. And with such idea of self we can be taken in. > > > How does what you interpret *on conditionality* different from >fatalism? > > L: What is fatalism? > > The belief that Awakening or lack of it, is all predetermined and set in stone where nothing can be done either way. L: As you know Buddha said this is useless to have a fatalistic view. But there is also a reality that is conditioned. > > I am not saying fatalism I am saying the best way for kusala is to >have more right understanding. Buddha spend a lot of time teaching >24 paccayas. > > > > Best wishes > > Lukas > > Often a very short teaching was enough to make a person into stream-enterer or even an Arahant. Ex the story of Culapantaka. > > > How much learning is required? > > This was said by one of the most knowledgeable Abh Experts: > > ====== > HOW MUCH SUTAMAYA, KNOWLEDGE THROUGH HEARING? > > As stated in the Commentary we are quoting, it is sufficient to know only that the five aggregates are the truth of suffering; that craving is truth of origin of suffering. Here the five aggregates are the five aggregates of clinging, upadanakkhandha mentioned in this sutta. We have fully explained above that they are the objects which present themselves at the time of seeing, hearing, etc. We have also dealt comprehensively with the truth of the origin of suffering in the section concerned. Knowing the law of dependent origination in a brief manner. In the great sub-commentary on Visuddhimagga, it is definitely stated that what the Venerable Assaji taught, namely; ye dhamma hetuppabhava --- The perfect one has told to cause, of causally arisen things --- constitutes in brief the whole law of dependent origination. > > The commentary on Vinaya Mahavagga affirms also that by the words "ye dhamma hetuppa-bhava" the Venerable Assaji was teaching the five aggregates otherwise called the truth of suffering and by the words "tesam hetum tathagato aha" he was teaching the truth of origin of suffering. Thus it is clear that having learnt briefly, by hearing, about the dukkhasacca and samudayasacca, one has also learnt in a brief manner the law of dependent origination. Those who are preaching that vipassana meditation is not feasible unless one has mastered the law of dependent origination supported by tables and circular diagrams, are therefore going against these words of the commentary and sub-commentary and causing great harm to patipattisasana. > > > In the Cula Tanhasankhaya sutta of the Mulapannasa Pa?i canon, we find the following regarding the brief knowledge to be acquired by learning, suta; "Oh, king of the devas, in this teaching, the Bhikkhu has heard that it is not fit nor proper to hold the view that all dhammas are permanent, pleasant and self." > > It means that if the Bhikkhu has ever heard of the fact that the five khandhas of the nama, rupa which present themselves at the six doors of senses every time there is seeing, hearing etc., are not proper to be regarded as permanent, pleasant, self; that they are transitory, subject to suffering and not self, then he has sufficient brief knowledge, suta mayanana, to proceed to engage himself in meditation. > > Thus the Buddha continued: "Then that Bhikkhu, who has learnt that much by hearsay, knows by contemplation and actual experience all dhammas." Then the Blessed One taught how to attain by meditation the knowledge of differentiation between nama and rupa, the nama rupapariccheda nana, etc. We have summarised the above thus: > > 1. All dhammas are transient, subject to suffering and not self. > 2. That much is sufficient knowledge acquired by hearing, suta. > 3. Enough to enable, through meditation, to differentiate the nama from rupa of the aggregates. > 4. And to recognise their nature of impermanence and unsatisfactoriness. > > Nos. 1 and 2 above indicate sufficiency of brief knowledge of sutamaya nana (to proceed to the practice of meditation). No. 3 shows how by noting every action of seeing, hearing etc., at the moment of occurrence, knowledge is gained which enables one to distinguish between nama and rupa, namarupa-pariccheda nana and to know the cause of phenomena of seeing, hearing etc, paccayapariggaha nana. These two kinds of knowledge are called abhinna panna, being the nataparinna of the three parinnas. By no. 4 is meant full knowledge of all the dhammas and insight into their nature of impermanency, suffering and non-self, in accordance with "sabbam dhammam abhinnaya, sabbam dhammam parijanati." This constitutes the profound knowledge of tirana parinna and pahana parinna. > > The main point we wish to emphasises here is that having just learnt through hearing that all dhammas are impermanent, suffering and non-self, one has enough sutamaya nana to proceed to endeavor for attainment of arahatta magga phala. Thus the assertion that, without a comprehensive knowledge of the law of dependent origination, meditation should not be practiced goes against this Pa?i text of Culatanhsa?khaya sutta, causes demoralisation in those bent on the practice of meditation and is detrimental to the prosperity of patipatti sasana. > > If, according to their proposition, meditation could be practised only after thoroughly mastering the law of dependent origination together with its explanatory circular diagrams etc., some people who have no time nor chance to study the law of dependent origination or are slow in learning it comprehensively, are liable to lose the opportunity of gaining the path or fruition even if they are endowed with param?s, sufficient conditions and qualifications, to attain them. To cite an example, during the time of the Blessed One, one Bhikkhu by the name of Culapantaka found it difficult to memorise a verse of only 45 alphabets although he tried it for four weeks. To learn the whole law of the dependent origination extensively would thus have been an impossible task for him. Yet the same bhikkhu attained Arahatship, accomplished in jhana abhinna, supernormal knowledge, and vision by practising for one morning only the meditation exercise prescribed by the Buddha. > http://www.mahasi.org.mm/discourse/E27/E27ch06.htm > > > > > With Metta, > > > Alex > Best wishes Lukas #106004 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Mar 15, 2010 8:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Will, and ultimate vs conventional teaching. upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 3/15/2010 2:06:48 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hello Howard, all, >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Alex (and Lukas & Nina) - > > In a message dated 3/15/2010 12:39:49 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > truth_aerator@... writes: > > Dear Lukas, Nina, all, > > >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > > > > Dear Howard and Alex, > > > > L: Alex, you cannont budge your hand even for a slice. There needs >to > be a proper conditions You cannot move your leg or finger or >anything. > > Of course, every thing is conditioned. But does this mean that the > conditions are always fatalistic and a certain action (good or bad) is inevitable > - no matter what one does? Is a person a killer, a rapist, a thief, only > due to past causes? Or can a person at the last moment decide (also > conditioned) that it is better not to pull a trigger and avoid killing? > ----------------------------------------------- >Yes, of course that last-minute decision is possible (and even >fairly common), but, as you correctly point out, it also is >conditioned. > ----------------------------------------------- Conditions can "set the stage", be supportive of something, but they do not have to 100% predetermine every reaction a person chooses. >A:How do you distinguish this teaching on conditionality vs >Inaction? How does what you interpret *on conditionality* different >from fatalism? > ------------------------------------------------- >H: Since you, yourself, accept that decisions are conditioned, the >same question could be asked of you. > ----------------------------------------------- Person can abstain at the last minute from bad actions, though it may be very difficult to do. ----------------------------------------- If there is such last-minute abstention, is it uncaused? ------------------------------------- Sure a person may be born in a poor circumstances where one has to kill to survive. But there is possibility that s/he will abstain from pulling the trigger. Person has a choice, limited, but still a choice. -------------------------------------- Is the choice unconditioned? ------------------------------------ Even if ultimately everything, including all choices one makes, are fatalistically predetermined from inconceivable past - I think it is good to install a strategic belief that "evil can be abandoned, good can be developed, conditions can be set for wisdom to arise." ----------------------------------------- Such a belief is a valid one, and the belief itself will serve as a condition. -------------------------------------- Buddha really has condemned the fatalistic views of inaction (its kamma with fixed result) to believe in inaction. Thats ajivika and Makkhali Gosala's simplistic view of conditionality. So I don't think I am totally off-base here. ----------------------------------------- You have made no comment about the matter of probability I raised. What are your thoughts on that? -------------------------------------- IMHO. With metta, Alex ======================= With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #106005 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Mar 15, 2010 2:24 pm Subject: Re: Will, codetermination truth_aerator Hello Howard, all, >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Alex - > > In a message dated 3/15/2010 2:06:48 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > truth_aerator@... writes: > > Hello Howard, all, > > > >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@ wrote: > > > > Hi, Alex (and Lukas & Nina) - > > > > In a message dated 3/15/2010 12:39:49 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > > truth_aerator@ writes: > > > > Dear Lukas, Nina, all, > > > > >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > > > > > > Dear Howard and Alex, > > > > > > L: Alex, you cannont budge your hand even for a slice. There needs > >to > > be a proper conditions You cannot move your leg or finger or >anything. > > > > Of course, every thing is conditioned. But does this mean that the > > conditions are always fatalistic and a certain action (good or bad) is > inevitable > > - no matter what one does? Is a person a killer, a rapist, a thief, > only > > due to past causes? Or can a person at the last moment decide (also > > conditioned) that it is better not to pull a trigger and avoid killing? > > ----------------------------------------------- > >Yes, of course that last-minute decision is possible (and even >fairly > common), but, as you correctly point out, it also is >conditioned. > > ----------------------------------------------- > > Conditions can "set the stage", be supportive of something, but they do > not have to 100% predetermine every reaction a person chooses. > > > >A:How do you distinguish this teaching on conditionality vs >Inaction? > How does what you interpret *on conditionality* different >from fatalism? > > ------------------------------------------------- > >H: Since you, yourself, accept that decisions are conditioned, the >same > question could be asked of you. > > ----------------------------------------------- > > Person can abstain at the last minute from bad actions, though it may be > very difficult to do. > ----------------------------------------- > If there is such last-minute abstention, is it uncaused? > ------------------------------------- Last minute abstention is conditioned but perhaps not fatalistically. If a person reflected in such a way, then trigger may have been pulled. If a person reflected in another way (perhaps remembering kamma, or just the notion of ethics and honor) then that could be condition not to pull the trigger. > Sure a person may be born in a poor circumstances where one has to >kill to survive. But there is possibility that s/he will abstain >from pulling the trigger. Person has a choice, limited, but still a >choice. > -------------------------------------- > Is the choice unconditioned? > ------------------------------------ Conditioned by the mind that chooses among the available alternatives. As I understand it Whenever there is moment of choice there is: a) What one wills now (Kamma) b) results of past volition (vipaka) c) current int/ext physical factors B&C cannot be changed. But A) can go at least in two ways (and 4 variations if we accept kusala/akusala) i) to do or ii) to abstain. > ----------------------------------------- >You have made no comment about the matter of probability I raised. > What are your thoughts on that? > -------------------------------------- There may be moments where a choice can be made either way, and externally one could make only a probable guess. (this doesn't apply to kamma with certain retribution). As I understand it, when there are many complex processes and variable are involved, it is no longer a linear system. It is no longer as simple as one domino falling and causing another to fall. When three sheaves of read stajd supporting each other, which one determines if they stand or fall? When the river flows, does it determine the shape of the riverbed or does the riverbed determine the shape of the river? When two stars of similar mass are rotating around each other, does star A determine the movement of star B, or does Star B determine the motion of Star A? This problem grows exponentially when there is 3rd Star. And it is NOT simply another variable to calculate. It raises the calculation to a very new level. It is not just a matter of adding 3rd equation. "While the two-body problem is integrable and its solutions completely understood , solutions of the three-body problem may be of an arbitrary complexity and are very far from being completely understood. " http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Three_body_problem Volition is even harder than solving a problem of 3 bodies rotating around each other. With metta, Alex #106006 From: Vince Date: Mon Mar 15, 2010 4:47 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Will, codetermination cerovzt@... "I do not believe in free will. Schopenhauer's words: 'Man can do what he wants, but he cannot will what he wills', accompany me in all situations throughout my life and reconcile me with the actions of others, even if they are rather painful to me. This awareness of the lack of free will keeps me from taking myself and my fellow men too seriously as acting and deciding individuals, and from losing my temper." - "My Credo". Albert Einstein best, Vince, #106007 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Mar 15, 2010 4:46 pm Subject: The Best Protection! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: Morality is not a Prison, but the only Effective Protection! What is Morality? Morality is the root cause of all success and all what is good. Morality is the intention behind avoidance of all wrongdoing. Morality is the mental combination of non-envy, goodwill and right view. Morality is the self-control enabled by awareness, tolerance & restraint. Morality is the non-breaking of the rules one have accepted and respects. What is the Meaning of Morality? Morality means consistency between all mental, verbal & bodily actions. Morality means upholding the foundation of all advantageous states. What is the Function of Morality? To STOP bad and evil behaviour and it?s painful future effects. To ATTAIN blameless mental purity and the blissful joy of innocence. What is the Manifestation of Morality? The virtuous blameless innocence of mental, verbal and behavioural purity. What is the Proximate Cause of Morality? The scrupulous shame within conscience is the cause of any moral ethics. The fear of the results of wrongdoing is the Cause of any moral ethics. Shame and fear of wrongdoing are therefore 2 protectors of the world! Ultra-Cut: Doing Good creates Pleasure! Doing Bad creates Pain! <...> Source: The Path of Purification: Visuddhimagga. Written by 'the great explainer' Ven. Buddhaghosa in 5th century AC. http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=771100 Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samahita _/\_ Sri <...> #106008 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Mar 15, 2010 6:31 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Will, codetermination truth_aerator Hello Vince, Howard, all, >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Vince wrote: > "I do not believe in free will. Neither do I. However there is a big difference between fatalism and choice (within the alternatives possible of course) which allows one to eventually drop akusala and develop kusala. Buddha did deny the inaction doctrines such as "that the reason person is a killer is all due to past kamma". The present choice is a complex thing that is based on various factor: 1) One's kamma 2) One's vipaka 3) Physical factors int/ext 4) Other people's kamma who are near you 5) Their vipaka The fact that there are more than two variables make the system far more complex and outcome of conditionality more unpredictable. Does the flowing river shape the river bed, or does the river bed shape the flow of the river? When 3 objects in space are orbiting around each other, which object exerts force and has force exerted on it? All 3. Unlike one billiard ball hitting the other billiard ball, mind has far more than 1 choice. And the nature of the mind is far more complex than simply 1 trillion of such little balls. The linear formula that can be applicable to two dimensional variables, just doesn't fit the complexities of the mind. IMHO. With metta, Alex #106010 From: "colette" Date: Mon Mar 15, 2010 10:40 am Subject: [dsg] Re: "luminous nature" and Wrong Views ksheri3 Hi Kevin, Good response. So lets focus on the problem you specified first and formost, THERAVADAN vs. MAHAYANAN. I do not imprisson myself in the myopia of the foundation, any foundation. (This is an unacceptable behavior for any gang, group, sect, belief structure). The foundation clearly relates to the fixation of the Theravadan practice. You may ask "why this fixation of the foundation is wrong or myopic". I reply that people do not live, do not exist, IN AND do not live, exist FROM the foundation. Compare Tokyo to Kobe Japan, or San Fran's "Knob Hill" and San Fran's Marina District. They all have foundations upon which the residents build their idolotry or manifest a psuedo-reality. In Tokyo do you see structures erected pon four poles while in Kobe it's common to see homes built on stilts, four poles? Why is this? ARe the Japanese not a single group of people? Why is Knob Hill so much more impervious to structural change than the Mission District's total slavery to structural continuity, lack of change? In both cases if I shake or rock the foundation I will get different results. The Theravadan fixates on the foundation and fears leaving the serurity of such a predictable consciousness. The Mahayana accept the PRAVDA, the Truth of the Theravadan but then propose possibilities, potentials, for instance in the icy conditions of the Himalayas monks strip naked, yet when draped w/ soaking wet towels the towels become dry and still the cold conditions do not effect the naked bodies of the monks, practitioners, of the advanced processes which the monks have manifested their reality upon. Indeed, the foundations are different. True, the Theravadan and the Mahayanan accept the parts of the foundation as TRUTHS and realities yet the Mahayana suggest the potential for change, suggest that the tree can also bare fruit, and so seek to see, seek to feel, seek to taste, the fruit that may or may not grow from the foundational tree. Thus, the Mahayana seek to look outside the imprissoning walls of THE GREAT WALL, seek to experience the reality that exists outside of the friendly confines that cement and barbed wire give to those in slavery. Like the tree that lives in the ground, the Mahayana expound upon the fundamental parts of the foundation of the Theravadan. Could it have been possible for Western culture to have escaped the prison of the castle walls if there had not been people to challenge the hallucinations, the delusions, even the false propoganda, that the church advocated and demanded of the people who were generously giving opulence and luxury to the "others" that pronounced the NECESSITY of life only being given by remaining within the friendly confines of the prison, the castle? Druing the Ming Dynasty was the Forbidden City burned down because the Emporer slaughtered thousands of women, that forced the emporer to evaluate his own behavior, his own myopia, or is it because DEATH IS CERTAIN and THE TIME OF DEATH IS NOT CERTAIN i.e. "Immanence"? What brings about "CHANGE"? toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Kevin Farrell wrote: > > > > Hello Colette. > > Thank you for your kind comments. I appreciate them. I am not sure if you understood my message or not though, because you sound as if you are advising me about this and to "go for it" if that is how I feel but to remember that one cannot speculate about an object until one actually knows that object (I think you are pointing to the fact that this view is just conceptual proliferation). I in fact don't follow Mahayana anymore. I followed Theravada for a while, and listened to Ajahn Sujin about dhammas and developed some understanding. Then, however, I fell into some wrong views and believed in Mahayana. I no longer ascribe to those views. I think they are just conceptual proliferation-- deceptive conceptual proliferation. > > Thanks, > Kevin > > > ________________________________ > Colette: > > > "Good Morning Kevin, > > "Knowing the path and walking the path are two different things" Morpheus in THE MATRIX..." > #106011 From: "ptaus1" Date: Mon Mar 15, 2010 7:21 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Will, codetermination ptaus1 Hi Alex, Howard, Vince, all, > A: The present choice is a complex thing that is based on various factor: > 1) One's kamma > 2) One's vipaka > 3) Physical factors int/ext > 4) Other people's kamma who are near you > 5) Their vipaka > ... > Whenever there is moment of choice there is: > a) What one wills now (Kamma) > b) results of past volition (vipaka) > c) current int/ext physical factors If we focus on one person at the moment, I feel we're missing quite a lot of important stuff in the above list: - present kamma (cetana) will be conditioned by other present dhammas, like a/kusala citta which will also make that cetana a/kusala, as well as feeling, perception, attention, etc. - past dhammas - e.g. the ones that have just fallen away, e.g. one javana citta being followed by the same javanas, etc. - anusayas, asavas, etc, which I'm not yet certain how to consider when it comes to conditionality, but which certainly play a part in every moment. Perhaps someone more knowledgeable can explain how all these come together in a moment to create an impression of choice taking place, though I suspect the best thing would be to read the guide to conditional relations or something like that. Best wishes pt #106012 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Mar 15, 2010 7:53 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Will, codetermination truth_aerator Hello Pt1, all, >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > > > > > Hi Alex, Howard, Vince, all, > > > A: The present choice is a complex thing that is based on various factor: > > 1) One's kamma > > 2) One's vipaka > > 3) Physical factors int/ext > > 4) Other people's kamma who are near you > > 5) Their vipaka > > ... > > Whenever there is moment of choice there is: > > a) What one wills now (Kamma) > > b) results of past volition (vipaka) > > c) current int/ext physical factors > > If we focus on one person at the moment, I feel we're missing quite a lot of important stuff in the above list: > > - present kamma (cetana) will be conditioned by other present dhammas, like a/kusala citta which will also make that cetana a/kusala, as well as feeling, perception, attention, etc. > > - past dhammas - e.g. the ones that have just fallen away, e.g. one javana citta being followed by the same javanas, etc. > > - anusayas, asavas, etc, which I'm not yet certain how to consider when it comes to conditionality, but which certainly play a part in every moment. > > Perhaps someone more knowledgeable can explain how all these come together in a moment to create an impression of choice taking place, though I suspect the best thing would be to read the guide to conditional relations or something like that. > > Best wishes > pt Sure past dhammas, current anusayas, etc do influence the available choices to choose from - and they *may* incline one more toward a particular choice. But there are always in a human two possibilities. 1)To do. or 2) to abstain. IMHO, the Buddha didn't preach fatalism ala Makkhali Gosala. With metta, Alex #106013 From: Sukinder Date: Mon Mar 15, 2010 8:47 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) sukinderpal Hello Mike, Sorry for taking so long to respond. I continue not to have enough time. ========= Suk: > Regarding the idea of "gathering information (though imperfect) from > observation", I take this to imply that you realize that formal meditation > involves moments of ignorance and attachment, however it must still overall > be useful. I of course see meditation as being an attempt at control and > hence contradicting what one otherwise believes to be the truth. I don't > therefore see this as possibly leading to those truths being > directly experienced, but in fact to further encouraging the tendency to and > belief in 'self' and control. Mike: Sorry, I see no contradiction. Just because you can't control something doesn't mean it is impossible to observe it or create conditions where it is easier to observe. S: If you had reacted with something like, ?Just because you can?t control something doesn't mean that there can?t be mindfulness and understanding, hence development,? I?d have nothing to disagree with on the point. But when you said instead that, ?it doesn't mean it is impossible to observe it or create conditions where it is easier to observe?, it seems that you are not talking purely about impersonal dhammas and conditionality, but something else is being brought into the picture. I mean if at any given moment, there are only fleeting dhammas arisen by conditions performing their respective functions, understanding this to be the case is all that is called for. To talk as you do about observing and creating conditions etc. sounds then like there must be some degree of control and hence can?t refer to that which constitutes the All. Besides, when there is even a little bit of understanding about the present moment, this is wisdom assisted by the corresponding level of right effort, mindfulness, thinking and concentration. And this would be exactly an instance of the Path being treaded, to think instead that one need to do something ?more? or something else, therefore seems to reflect that this kind of understanding hasn?t occurred because otherwise the value and the difference would most definitely have been appreciated! ============= Mike: To give a rather imperfect simile, when I excite a material with a laser I can't control the timing of the billions of photons of light that are emitted in a few microseconds, but I can observe that they emit photons of certain energies. S: And yet anyone who has ever done this but hasn?t heard and understood the Dhamma, he or she will invariably go away with the idea of self and control reinforced. In other words any knowledge about impersonal phenomena in this regard becomes more an object of attachment and view rather than of detachment and wisdom. The example you give is based entirely on concepts and therefore potentially misleading, as I think you agree. At the expense of gradually coming to understand better the nature of dhammas, one reasons in support of the idea of control and / or setting up of conditions based on concepts which have nothing to do with namas and rupas. While the latter is all that ultimately exists at any given moment and therefore can be object of sati and panna at any time, the former can only be thought about such that while one thinks to learn something from them, the namas and rupas such as seeing, visible object, feeling and most particularly ?thinking? continues not to be understood, or worse, taken for ?me?. ============ Mike: I think we agree that the point is to realise(not just intellectualize) that there are just uncontrollable anatta dhammas. As far as I can understand, you have a particular approach to realising that. S: The more I consider the Dhamma, the more I am convinced that there is only ever the present moment to be known and therefore not see ?meditation? as being part of the Path. What do you think I am missing here, in other words, what is it that you see that I do not? Metta, Sukinder #106014 From: Sukinder Date: Mon Mar 15, 2010 8:48 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] On hindrances sukinderpal Hi Alex, >Sukin: Yours seem to be a conventional idea about the hindrances and >their effects Alex: It is not my idea. It is what the Buddha has said. In fact Contrary to some later Tibetan Tantra, hindrances cannot be used to help insight. IMHO at the moment when the hindrance is present, there is no panna there. AN 5.51 makes it clear that hindrances hinder panna. Contrary to what kilesas try to say, you can't use what hinders panna to help panna. Suk: Are you saying that I?ve stated to the effect that the hindrances help insight? And have I said anything to imply that panna and the hindrances can possibly arise together? As I said Alex, it appears that you continue refusing to consider the Dhamma and dhammas in terms of how the Abhidhamma teaches it. When you talk about the hindrances, you do not take into account that they arise by conditions to know an object and *must* fall away instantly, followed by any set dhammas also equally conditioned and anicca. Therefore while I and some others suggest the possibility of sati and panna to arise by conditions immediately following a particular hindrance and know its characteristic, you are picturing the matter in such a way that it becomes then impossible to conceive of such a thing happening. Actually this may not even be entirely true, since it also looks like that you are arguing just for the sake of it. And the motive may be simply to justify the need to follow the practice that you do. After all no one would deny that the hindrances fall away at some point? And since this must necessarily be followed by some citta, can?t that be one with sati and panna of some level which knows the characteristic of the just fallen away hindrance? And how does one ever recognize a hindrance anyway, if not for the fact of another kind of citta (not necessarily with panna) arising to know it? ============= Alex quotes: "if one were to say of anything as a heap of the unwholesome, it is about the five hindrances that one could rightly say this. For this is a complete heap of the unwholesome, that is, the five hindrances. What five? The hindrance of sensual desire, the hindrance of ill will, the hindrance of sloth and torpor, the hindrance of restlessness and worry, the hindrance of doubt . " - SN 47.5(5) Alex?s comment: So how can one "investigate" the hindrances? Only with presently arisen wisdom and as analysis of *past* hindrances. As I've said, at the moment when hindrance arises, then wisdom cannot be present. But wisdom can take past memory of hindrances and analyze/investigate it. Suk: By analyze / investigate, I take it that you are referring to ?an idea? about and not the characteristic of a hindrance. I don?t think you understand it the way I do, else why would you single out the hindrances and not any other dhamma. So what you are saying is that the hindrances particularly, can?t be known directly but only as object of thinking and analyzed / investigated in the same way as one does with regard to any concept, right? But perhaps you need to realize that concepts are analyzed only in terms of other concepts, and since no concepts have any characteristic, one ends up believing in *stories* about the hindrances, while realities arise and fall away and ignorance about these continues to be accumulated. But you also appear to contradict yourself here, because how can you even talk about suppressing the hindrances when as you say, they can?t be the object in the moment? Or are you suggesting that samatha / jhana practice is taken up in anticipation of the hindrances arising otherwise? Furthermore, what investigates the hindrances, is it the jhana cittas themselves? I have another question at this point, if you think that with the arising of a hindrance panna can?t immediately follow to know it by characteristics, can any other kusala dhamma do, and if so, why this and not that? ================= Alex: If there is any point in investigating the hindrances, it is only for the sake of their abandonment, thats it. Suk: Now you say this, but still: Shouldn?t the focus be on the wisdom and its development rather than on the idea of abandoning the hindrances? You speak of the former as if it is only a means to an end. I think you forget that it is wisdom which is the key factor in the eradication of defilements and which needs to be developed starting from that which is Suttamaya panna. And since it is a long way between any little wisdom now and that which is required for the eradication to take place, the focus must reasonably be on the development of this wisdom and not on ?eradication?. Moreover since there is still so much attachment, ignorance and most particularly self view, focusing on the idea of ?eradication? would more likely than not just be more food for these dhammas?.. =============== Alex quotes: "Bhikkhus, these five hindrances are makers of blindness, causing lack of vision, causing lack of knowledge, detrimental to wisdom, tending to vexation, leading away from Nibbana" - SN46.40(10) "One whose mind is overwhelmed by unrestrained covetousness will do what he should not do and neglect what he ought to do. And through that, his good name and his happiness will come to ruin. One whose mind is overwhelmed by ill-will... by sloth and torpor... by restlessness and remorse... by sceptical doubt will do what he should not do and neglect what he ought to do. And through that, his good name and his happiness will come to ruin. But if a noble disciple has seen these five as defilements of the mind, he will give them up. And doing so, he is regarded as one of great wisdom, of abundant wisdom, clear-visioned, well endowed with wisdom. This is called "endowment with wisdom." - AN 4:61 Suk: These are conventional descriptions reminding us about the danger of the hindrances. It seems also that their arising or non arising conditions accordingly some of the eight worldly conditions to be manifested, though I?m not sure about this. In any case the danger which is being pointed at is in the very moment when the hindrances arise and manifest and not in the possible effects down the road, wouldn?t you agree? And was that your basis for thinking that the hindrances can only be analyzed in terms of past memory? Also you should note in the above the following: ?But if a noble disciple has seen these five as defilements of the mind, he will give them up. And doing so, he is regarded as one of great wisdom, of abundant wisdom, clear-visioned, well endowed with wisdom. This is called "endowment with wisdom." Does this not impress upon you as being all about wisdom / insight / direct understanding? =============== Alex quotes: "Similarly, there are five impurities of the mind impaired by which the mind is not pliant and wieldy, lacks radiant lucidity and firmness, and cannot concentrate well upon the eradication of the taints (asava). What are these five impurities? They are: sensual desire, ill-will, sloth and torpor, restlessness and remorse, and sceptical doubt. But if the mind is freed of these five impurities, it will be pliant and wieldy, will have radiant lucidity and firmness, and will concentrate well upon the eradication of the taints. Whatever state realizable by the higher mental faculties one may direct the mind to, one will in each case acquire the capacity of realization, if the (other) conditions are fulfilled. - AN 5:23 Alex?s comment: So to be even more precise and sticking to the suttas, hindrances are obstacles to be removed. They obstruct wisdom, and thus cannot themselves be recommended , nor are they themselves useful in any way for wisdom. Suk: Not to be recommended for sure, but neither would I recommend ?trying to suppress them?. ;-) Again I say, the problem is in your unwillingness to see how all this works from the Abhidhamma standpoint. Sure, when any of the hindrances arise, the ?mind is not pliant and wieldy, lacks radiant lucidity and firmness, and cannot concentrate well?. On the other hand it should also be obvious that ?if the mind is freed of these five impurities, it will be pliant and wieldy, etc?, that this is all due to panna, in this case, one that is close to enlightenment. How else could this point have been reached if not by the development of wisdom? How could you imagine the development of calm as having any part in any of this? ============== Alex: As for control. We already try to control or set the causes to alter the physical reality. When we drive (or use any other type of transportation), we control the location of the body or at least set the required conditions to alter the location of the body. When in cold weather we put extra layers of cloth, that is one of the causes for the body to feel warmer. Eating is the condition for temporary satiation of hunger. Drinking water is the required condition for quenching of thirst. So we are always setting causes for certain results. Doesn't it makes sense to set causes for abandoning the hindrances and allowing understanding to arise? Suk: When you drive and put on warm clothes etc, you are not talking about dhammas. The conclusion about there being ?control? such as in the examples you give comes from thinking in terms of concepts, some taken as starting points and some in between and some as result. The connection is made in total ignorance of nama and rupa and conditionality and also of kamma / vipaka. For example, seeing, visible object, hardness, thinking, attachment, aversion, feeling etc. none of these are ever considered when in fact without them having arisen and fallen away, those concepts / ideas wouldn?t even be conceived. =========== Alex: Similar is with meditation where there is practice of abandoning the 5 hindrances, and seeing things as anicca, dukkha, anatta . As the saying goes "practice makes it perfect". The success at permanently seeing and understanding things as anicca, dukkha, anatta, depends on being able to see that temporary first with supressed hindrances in deep meditation. Of course in the beginning the development is weak due to lack of causes. But practice at removing obstacles to insight, will eventually make insight perfect and permanent. Suk: Yes, ?similarly with meditation?. ;-) Failing at understanding the reality / concept distinction I think we invariably fall prey to projections. As Buddhists we learn to see what we think we are supposed to see, and this is illusion of result. We take thinking with attachment for sati and the overall impression is that we are on the right track. And with all this, the idea of having been able to create conditions for sati to arise and the tilakkhana seen would be hard to avoid. So perhaps, ?practice makes it perfect?, but the question is, right or wrong practice and perfect at what? Able to sit for extended hours and wishing to find more time to do it as if sati won?t arise otherwise, this is sign of which one? Metta, Sukinder #106015 From: Sukinder Date: Mon Mar 15, 2010 8:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) sukinderpal Hi Pt, ======= Pt: Sorry for a late response. Thanks for your posts on patipatti and meditation. I enjoyed most of it, and agree with most of what you say, except for a few instances that seem like a bit of a provocation, so I don't think I need to reply there. Suk: No of course you don?t and thanks for making the correct decision. ;-) ======= Pt: Here's one thing that seems useful to address for the sake of discussion: > S: I of course see meditation as being an attempt at control and > hence contradicting what one otherwise believes to be the truth. I don't > therefore see this as possibly leading to those truths being > directly experienced, but in fact to further encouraging the tendency to and > belief in 'self' and control. Pt: I think this is a view that KenH, Sarah and other here share. One problem I have with it is that it kind of goes to the opposite extreme of when beginner meditators think that all meditation is good, i.e. always kusala. I mean both seem inaccurate, as the cittas are conditioned, they cannot be made to be all kusala or all akusala. Suk: But why must you base your judgement on this? It isn?t about the frequency of akusala vs. kusala being more or less the same in the two situations, but rather that there is no control over what does. It is about whether or not one understands that at any given moment, there are only ultimate realties arising and falling away. Those who meditate seem to believe that it is more likely that certain wanted dhammas will arise when engaged in what they do than at other times. Those who do not, make no such association, therefore their objection to meditation is not so much ?don?t do this? but rather that, ?why not understand that now there are dhammas arising and falling away by conditions beyond control?! This would at the same time, point to the reality / concept distinction which followers of meditation seem to continue failing at. =========== Pt: Recently I had a chance to meet some real-life buddhists (I'm mostly an "online buddhist", so rarely meet others in person) who did say that they meditate, but when I asked them to clarify, they basically said that there's no difference between a "meditation" and other daily activities because it's all about being aware of dhammas arising in the present moment regardless of the activity. So, my guess is that meditators at some point learn the difference between akusala trying to be aware, and kusala just being aware when it happens, ragardless of the outward activity. Suk: Why guess? Why not let the Dhamma be the guide? If your real-life Buddhist friends believe as some of us do, in dhammas being all there is at any given moment and that can be studied, what is their reason for meditating? Perhaps they have the idea of applying what they learnt in meditation to other activities in daily life? If so, would the result not more likely be a projection? I don?t see why one would be driven to distinguish between time for meditation and not, if there is a correct understanding about dhammas. But I may be missing something, in which case please explain more. ============= Pt: I think the situation with formal meditation is further complicated by the fact that samatha is also popular nowadays, which does require stillness and solitude to some degree, i.e. formality of some sort. So to me formal meditation is samatha meditation. For me, it usually takes place when I wake up too early, so I just stay in bed for a while. The difference between trying to focus on the breath in order to relax is fairly obvious when compared to settling on the breath that happens because there's no interest in engaging with the outward sense impressions. Suk: But this can be the result of having developed the particular habit, no? You are suggesting that concentrating on the breath is akusala when associated with the ?aim to relax? but not when it happens more or less spontaneously as a result of non-interest in other sense impressions. But is this how kusala is determined and subsequently developed? Wouldn?t the measure be that sati arises ?now? to know whether the mind is kusala or akusala, such that one would then know ?then? in the same way whether the one with breath as object is kusala or akusala? In other words, I don?t see why if there is no understanding at other times of the difference between kusala and akusala, one should be so certain that the non-interest in sense impressions leading to the concentration on the breath, are both kusala, in fact with wisdom. ============= Pt: And then at some point thinking would start all on its own, and then a bit later a brief awareness would kick in finding the thinking unsettling and would then again settle on the breath, and so it would go until my alarm clock goes off. Suk: You highlight ?thinking? instead of whether the citta is kusala or akusala. The jhana factors such as vitakka, vicara and ekaggata arise during times when the breath is object as well as during instances of what you call ?thinking?. This makes both of them the same in this regard, and I therefore do not think wisdom would make the kind of distinction you suggest. Thinking is never the problem, except when the actual jhanas are attained, in which case vitakka and vicara are seen with the level of wisdom to be an obstacle to the attainment of deeper levels of calm. I think it is so easy to be fooled by some kind of illusion of result. ============ Pt: As for vipassana, currently my opinion is that it cannot be "practiced" because it just happens, but I don't know, maybe it's different for people with advanced insight who are very familiar with characteristics of dhammas and can therefore "switch" to that mode at will so to speak. Don't know. Suk: Those with developed understanding to the point of sati and panna being indriya and bala, for them it is the accumulated tendency to always come back to the present moment and to *not choose* particular objects, which allows for any reality to be known directly by natural decisive support condition. But so is the case with any and every citta, including ignorance and samatha development. For us any reality is, you could say, invariably NDSC for ignorance and craving. Regarding those with well developed panna who can so to speak know any reality at any time, I don?t think you could describe any of what happens as ?switching to a particular mode?. Since there are only conditioned and fleeting dhammas, what switches to what? Are you suggesting an extended period of ignorance followed by sudden arising of sati and panna which then lasts for some time? Thanks for the discussion Pt. Metta, Sukinder #106016 From: "ptaus1" Date: Mon Mar 15, 2010 9:30 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Will, codetermination ptaus1 Hi Alex, > A: Sure past dhammas, current anusayas, etc do influence the available choices to choose from - and they *may* incline one more toward a particular choice. But there are always in a human two possibilities. > > 1)To do. > > or > > 2) to abstain. pt: I agree here if we're speaking in conventional terms. However, I find it hard to understand why would conditionality be equaled to fatalism? If that's what you are trying to say, sorry if I misunderstood you here: > A: IMHO, the Buddha didn't preach fatalism ala Makkhali Gosala. pt: I mean, (if we adopt ultimate terminology as is the custom on dsg) I don't see why saying that cetana is fully conditioned by other present and past dhammas should be equaled to fatalism. As i understand it, fatalism is a wrong view. E.g. if I believe that my current choice to commit akusala deed is influenced by past, then this in ultimate terms means that there is no right view that will arise and understand akusala cetana as akusala, and hence, akusala cetana will accompany akusala citta, and then in conventional terms it's no wonder that I commit an akusala deed as a result. If on the other hand akusala cetana arises that's conditioned by akusala dhammas in the present and past, but then right view arises that understands that this akusala cetana is fully conditioned and annata, then abstention will happen, precisely because there's understanding of conditionality. In conventional terms, this can be described something like - the person understands that his bad habits are anatta, i.e. they are just impersonal habits that one isn't obliged to follow when they arise. So, imo, understanding that cetana is fully conditioned by past and present dhammas, all of which are anatta, is precisely what leads to abstention from akusala deeds and therefore cannot be equaled to fatalism. Of course, right view is also conditioned by past and present dhammas. When it arises, there's abstention, when it doesn't arise, there's no abstention. Best wishes pt #106017 From: "Lukas" Date: Mon Mar 15, 2010 11:20 pm Subject: Re: My siila issues szmicio Hi Kevin, > Keeping sila is not easy at times. I've had periods where my sila has been very good and other times where it has not been so good. L: There is bad and good siila, but this is not ours. viratti refrains, not we. They are conditions for good siila, like reading Dhamma, wise reflection etc.. > I think when one understands the benefits of practicing sila, there may be more of an inclination towards sila. Birth in the human and Divine realms comes from practicing sila. If one can keep the basic sila of five precepts, one guards oneself against all types of untold harm and even birth in the lower realms. Plus one becomes dear to the gods, and that is quite good. L: Yes this is true. This is appreciation of kusala, siila, siila-anisamsa. This is very good. But I dont appreciate siila now. > Without human and divine births how could one ever practice the Dhamma through hearing and reflecting on it, practicing generosity and so on? L: patisandhi-citta arosen so now there is opportunity for all kind of cittas. Best wishes Lukas #106018 From: "Lukas" Date: Mon Mar 15, 2010 11:37 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Will, codetermination szmicio Dear pt, No need to say ultimate and conventional terms, cause this is the same. > So, imo, understanding that cetana is fully conditioned by past and present dhammas, all of which are anatta, is precisely what leads to abstention from akusala deeds and therefore cannot be equaled to fatalism. L: Yes, Magga the 4th Noble Truth is mental. This can be realised when we understand this subtle conditions for cultivation. Not me who is doing this or that. The 4th Noble Truth goes against to what we conventionaly think of cultivation. This is such against Self-view. >Of course, right view is also conditioned by past and present dhammas. When it arises, there's abstention, when it doesn't arise, there's no abstention. L: No abstention ;> just no abstention ;> But knowing conditions for siila is the 4th Noble Truth. This is very subtle. This is not me striving. Best wishes Lukas #106019 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 16, 2010 2:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Will, and ultimate vs conventional teaching. nilovg Hi Howard, Op 15-mrt-2010, om 14:25 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > While we are on this matter, I have a related question for Nina: Nina, > I understand that in Abhidhamma there is a "support" category of > conditionality. That is, while some conditions for a dhamma are > requisite, others > are "supportive". I would like to understand more about the meaning of > 'supportive'. In what sense is a condition supportive for another? > I think this > may be an important matter. -------- N: When speaking in a specific sense, there are some conditions that are supportive. Postnascence-condition: < As to postnascence-condition, pacchaj?ta- paccaya, citta and its accompanying cetasikas support the r?pas of the body which have arisen previously and have not fallen away yet. Thus, in this way citta conditions these r?pas by way of postnascence- condition. Citta does not cause the arising of the r?pas it conditions by way of postnascence, these r?pas have arisen already prior to the citta; it supports and consolidates these r?pas which are still present, since r?pa lasts as long as seventeen moments of citta. Citta is postnascence-condition for the previously arisen r?pas of the body which have been produced by the four factors of kamma, citta, temperature and nutrition and which have not fallen away yet. Citta supports and consolidates these r?pas. > The ruupa that is nutrition: < The nutritive essence which, because of the support of external nutritive essence, produces new r?pas of the body also supports and maintains the groups of r?pas produced by kamma, citta and temperature. > Thus it also has the force of support. Supportive or consolidating kamma, upatthambhaka kamma: it does not produce result, but when result has been produced in the form of rebirth-consciousness, it consolidates the kamma that produced the rebirth-consciousness, in causing happy or sorrowful results during that life. If we speak in general about support conditions, all the perfections, paramis, support the development of pa~n~naa leading to enlightenment. You find support an important matter, and of what are you thinking in particular? Nina. #106020 From: "Mike" Date: Tue Mar 16, 2010 6:47 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) mikenz66 Hi Sukinder, Thanks for your post. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sukinder wrote: > S: The more I consider the Dhamma, the more I am convinced that there is > only ever the present moment to be known and therefore not see > `meditation' as being part of the Path. What do you think I am missing > here, in other words, what is it that you see that I do not? Mike: Basically, as I've said many times, I think that the arguments put forward on this forum about anatta, control, and so on, are much too simplistic. Mike: I don't see any point in repeating myself. I'll leave it at that. Metta Mike #106021 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 16, 2010 7:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: vsm revisited nilovg Dear Chew, Op 13-mrt-2010, om 16:34 heeft Sadhu Chew het volgende geschreven: > When compare with the aruupa jhaana citta, the object of ruupa > jhaana citta is called the perceptions of resistance. And there are > variety of objects for the ruupa jhaana citta, but not the aruupa > jhaana citta, as for the first aruupa jhaana citta only takes the > boundless space as object. -------- N: I thought, according to the dictionary, that perceptions of resistance refers to sense objects, but in this context it may be different. I compared: The root of existence, Muulapariyaaya Sutta and co, translated by Ven. Bodhi, p. 69. the section on Unity: where there is a contrast between unity, ekatta and diversity, naanatta. The attainer referring to both ruupajhaana and aruupajhaana : jhaana occurs in a single mode on a single object, and it is called untiy. The non-attainer: refers to sense sphere dhammas, naanatta. But this is in another context. Nina. #106022 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 16, 2010 7:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma series, no 1. nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 14-mrt-2010, om 8:13 heeft Lukas het volgende geschreven: > You can answer your friends: "What did you do that you suffer less?" > "I had opportunity to read dhamma in detailed way". The Dhamma will > work. Reading is not supportive only, this is really the whole holy > life. This is savaaaka ideas. They just hear Dhamma, and Dhamma > worked for them. ------ N: It is more than reading, reading is not enough. Those who have heard much, bahussutta, know that pariyatti leads to pa.tipatti. Nina. #106023 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 16, 2010 7:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Conventional truth is truth too. nilovg Dear Alex, Op 15-mrt-2010, om 18:10 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > Is there any passage in canonical Abhidhamma that totally denies > the validity of any kind of existence of people? If so, how can a > book like Puggalapannati describe the difference between people, > that you KenH, say do not exist at all? -------- N: Abh does not deny it but explains that a person is conditioned citta, cetasika and ruupa. This is repeated all the time, which is marvellous. Even puggalapa~n~natti actually speaks about the different cittas and cetasikas of people, it is very interesting. The Vibhanga book gives many good examples of the good and bad qualities of different people in daily life. It is an eye-opener. Nina. #106024 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Mar 16, 2010 3:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Will, and ultimate vs conventional teaching. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 3/16/2010 5:45:24 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, Op 15-mrt-2010, om 14:25 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > While we are on this matter, I have a related question for Nina: Nina, > I understand that in Abhidhamma there is a "support" category of > conditionality. That is, while some conditions for a dhamma are > requisite, others > are "supportive". I would like to understand more about the meaning of > 'supportive'. In what sense is a condition supportive for another? > I think this > may be an important matter. -------- N: When speaking in a specific sense, there are some conditions that are supportive. Postnascence-condition: < As to postnascence-condition, pacchaj?ta- paccaya, citta and its accompanying cetasikas support the r?pas of the body which have arisen previously and have not fallen away yet. Thus, in this way citta conditions these r?pas by way of postnascence- condition. Citta does not cause the arising of the r?pas it conditions by way of postnascence, these r?pas have arisen already prior to the citta; it supports and consolidates these r?pas which are still present, since r?pa lasts as long as seventeen moments of citta. Citta is postnascence-condition for the previously arisen r?pas of the body which have been produced by the four factors of kamma, citta, temperature and nutrition and which have not fallen away yet. Citta supports and consolidates these r?pas. > The ruupa that is nutrition: < The nutritive essence which, because of the support of external nutritive essence, produces new r?pas of the body also supports and maintains the groups of r?pas produced by kamma, citta and temperature. > Thus it also has the force of support. Supportive or consolidating kamma, upatthambhaka kamma: it does not produce result, but when result has been produced in the form of rebirth-consciousness, it consolidates the kamma that produced the rebirth-consciousness, in causing happy or sorrowful results during that life. If we speak in general about support conditions, all the perfections, paramis, support the development of pa~n~naa leading to enlightenment. You find support an important matter, and of what are you thinking in particular? --------------------------------------------------------- Thank you for this clarification, Nina. I believe I misunderstood the meaning of 'support'. What I was after was whether, with regard to the possible arising of a dhamma, D, there is a distinguishing between conditions that are requisite for it; i.e., none of which could be missing if D is to arise, and conditions that are not necessary but contribute in some way to the arising of D. I conjectured that such might have a bearing on whether probability plays any role in conditionality as dealt with in the Dhamma. I suppose not. Did the Buddha ever speak in terms of various things being "likely" or "unlikely" or "possible"? (I know that he did speak of some things being "impossible," but that just means they never occur.) ============================ With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #106025 From: Kevin Farrell Date: Tue Mar 16, 2010 7:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: My siila issues farrellkevin80 ________________________________ Hi Lukas, what is it that motivates us to do bad deeds? Of course there are many factors but we can say it always involves lobha and dosa. Both are always arise with delusion. They are good friends of delusion. Whenver there is lobha and dosa, there is moha at play. I find that it is simply good to reflect on this at times. I am not sure if it will help you. With metta, Kevin Lukas wrote: Hi Kevin, > Keeping sila is not easy at times. I've had periods where my sila has been very good and other times where it has not been so good. L: There is bad and good siila, but this is not ours. viratti refrains, not we. They are conditions for good siila, like reading Dhamma, wise reflection etc.. > I think when one understands the benefits of practicing sila, there may be more of an inclination towards sila. Birth in the human and Divine realms comes from practicing sila. If one can keep the basic sila of five precepts, one guards oneself against all types of untold harm and even birth in the lower realms. Plus one becomes dear to the gods, and that is quite good. L: Yes this is true. This is appreciation of kusala, siila, siila-anisamsa. This is very good. But I dont appreciate siila now. > Without human and divine births how could one ever practice the Dhamma through hearing and reflecting on it, practicing generosity and so on? L: patisandhi-citta arosen so now there is opportunity for all kind of cittas. Best wishes Lukas #106026 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Mar 16, 2010 7:49 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Will, codetermination truth_aerator Hello Pt, all, >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > If on the other hand akusala cetana arises that's conditioned by >akusala dhammas in the present and past, but then right view arises >that understands that this akusala cetana is fully conditioned and >annata, then abstention will happen, precisely because there's >understanding of conditionality. In conventional terms, this can be >described something like - the person understands that his bad >habits are anatta, i.e. they are just impersonal habits that one >isn't obliged to follow when they arise. > >So, imo, understanding that cetana is fully conditioned by past and >present dhammas, all of which are anatta, is precisely what leads to >abstention from akusala deeds and therefore cannot be equaled to >fatalism. Of course, right view is also conditioned by past and >present dhammas. When it arises, there's abstention, when it doesn't >arise, there's no abstention. > > Best wishes > pt Thank you very much for your post. If the above is possible (abstention and abstinence through developing panna) then its not fatalism. With metta, Alex #106027 From: "Lukas" Date: Tue Mar 16, 2010 8:10 am Subject: Re: Abhidhamma series, no 1. szmicio Dear Nina, > N: It is more than reading, reading is not enough. Those who have > heard much, bahussutta, know that pariyatti leads to pa.tipatti. L: But the way of reading, this is so natural. If you would ask me what did I do to have less misery. I could not answer you. Maybe I had opportunity to hear Dhamma. And this is it. No need to think me doing this or that. Of course reading is not enough, but this is also enough ;> Best wishes Lukas #106028 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 16, 2010 8:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Will, and ultimate vs conventional teaching. nilovg Hi Howard, Op 16-mrt-2010, om 15:27 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > What I was after was whether, with regard to the possible arising of a > dhamma, D, there is a distinguishing between conditions that are > requisite > for it; i.e., none of which could be missing if D is to arise, and > conditions that are not necessary but contribute in some way to the > arising of D. > I conjectured that such might have a bearing on whether probability > plays any role in conditionality as dealt with in the Dhamma. I > suppose not. > Did the Buddha ever speak in terms of various things being "likely" or > "unlikely" or "possible"? (I know that he did speak of some things > being > "impossible," but that just means they never occur.) -------- N: He spoke about the knowledge of a.t.thaana and .thaana, the impossible and the possible, but that also is conditioned. We cannot escape conditions, only nibbaana is unconditioned. When we speak about something as being probable, we are just guessing and speculating. Nina. #106029 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Mar 16, 2010 4:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Will, and ultimate vs conventional teaching. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 3/16/2010 11:13:26 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@ xs4all.nl writes: Hi Howard, Op 16-mrt-2010, om 15:27 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > What I was after was whether, with regard to the possible arising of a > dhamma, D, there is a distinguishing between conditions that are > requisite > for it; i.e., none of which could be missing if D is to arise, and > conditions that are not necessary but contribute in some way to the > arising of D. > I conjectured that such might have a bearing on whether probability > plays any role in conditionality as dealt with in the Dhamma. I > suppose not. > Did the Buddha ever speak in terms of various things being "likely" or > "unlikely" or "possible"? (I know that he did speak of some things > being > "impossible," but that just means they never occur.) -------- N: He spoke about the knowledge of a.t.thaana and .thaana, the impossible and the possible, but that also is conditioned. We cannot escape conditions, only nibbaana is unconditioned. When we speak about something as being probable, we are just guessing and speculating. -------------------------------------------------- Might we not *know* about an imagined something being probable or not? Also, how about when, like the Buddha, we speak of something being "possible"? Might not possibility be a fact of nature and not just speculation? Does the Buddha say that "possibility" and "likelihood" are nonsense notions, or does he consider these to be meaningful qualities of conceived-of events? --------------------------------------------- Nina. ============================ With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #106030 From: Ken O Date: Tue Mar 16, 2010 10:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 ashkenn2k Dera Scott > >Scott: I've noticed that even the most inveterate 'no-control' advocate can founder at some point when it comes to exactly how much 'no-control' he or she is willing to accept. I think you are showing the limits of your abilities to tolerate the whole notion. > ?>Yes, so it is stated in the Visuddhimagga that a certain method was used and that the Path arose. Can one say anything more than that? Does this then suggest that one today should simply adopt this method as well? Such a notion is, to me, completely naive. There are so many unknown factors at this remove from both the text and the events the text reports that to take it as other than a report is to go way beyond the evidence. KO:???I think the thinking of no control is not very accurately understood.? To me, it is important to understand the terms of paramatha dhammas, the characteristics and not just simply judge that everything is anatta so there is no action.? ?? No control does not mean no action or doing which I said earlier.?? We go to read a book or listen to dhamma, is will by kamma, interest by chanda?accompanied by panna or kusala or?faith.? There is?action or doing but no control over the proccess since accumulations conditions it.?? So there is no need to doubt those who practise samantha, they may have such conditions and accumulations also.? We should?not judge?their action.? ? Also?no one should embark the this path without panna.? Without right view of dhammas or panna, samantha bhavana would?lead to wrong practise.? I have no doubt about this.? I felt we should not just reject?it, it may not be suitable for us but it does not mean we should reject it or keep denying this existence as they were describe clearly by Visud. >Scott: It was reported in the text that the Path arose, and that four months of recitation preceded this. I don't doubt that the Path arises, because there are countless examples of its having arisen in countless situations. I am trying to get you to comment more clearly on why you focus on the method itself. > >What about the story of the monk, apparently of lesser intellect, in whom the Path arose after being given a cloth to rub? Should we all run out and get our own cloths and start rubbing them to cause the Path to arise? I'd say the 'cloth-rubbing method' is in no way different than the recitation method. KO:? that is the example I have in mind.? thats all :-).? Cloth rubbing is not a samantha bhavana method describe?in the Visud, so it is not relevant.? I only speak of those in the text.? > >Scott: No, Ken, you and I are differing at the moment. These are the differing interpretations of the same text. Again, no need for another textual example. We have the one on which we differ now and that suffices. If you so much as tell me that you're right and I'm wrong I'll just have to stop immediately. ;-) > >So far all I read you to be saying is that the Path arose and that the recitation was the method that caused it to do so. I'm suggesting that you are missing a lot of other factors and cannot possibly make the determination that a) it was the recitation alone, as a method, that was the sole cause of the arising of the Path, and, b) that the texts are doing anything more than reporting an instance (with incomplete data) of an arising of the Path after a given person of given constitution went through a conventional set of actions. KO;??Interpretation must be?proved by text and not just simply said?interpretations.? ?As I said earlier, everyone could give their own?interpretation and?that is why?we have many new commentators.?? We should?come back to ancient interpretations.?? Definitely there are other factors involved in rectitation, without understanding arise with recitation there is on eradication of kilesa,???The point is that?there is no method for the development of the path is not substantiate by the text ? >Scott: You have yet to address the basis of your focus on method. Now we should switch from this hypothetical real person (don't even try to mention this again, man) and focus on you or I. It's one thing to discuss method intellectually, as we are doing. You are making some generalizations in the above, methinks. Inter-textual consistency is one thing but it isn't clear why you focus on this point and so it is irrelevant. So far all you are saying is that there are methods in the Visuddhimagga. >Why does one consider 'atta' or 'shortcut' in relation to 'method?' I'd think that this was obvious. Look at the world of popular 'buddhism.' Here one can find discussions as vacuous and misinformed as whether or not one should exercise before or after meditation. One finds teachers and methods and claims everywhere. You don't think that a voice of reason is required? And believe me, it's not a person to whom this makes sense (because either it does or it doesn't) and no method can force someone to buy the caveats dispensed by 'DSG.' Just read some of the long-standing dissenters. KO:? The obvious is because it is based on your presumption.??Visud is very clear, some do get enlightement through the method.? You must prove to me the text why this is not correct for this method?and not base on your presumption. ? >How do you know that 'they' forget that these did not work for them because of lack of pa~n~naa or accumulations? One can make too facile a use of these generalizations as well. I'm not into a pursuit of jhaana. I've had run-ins with some jhaana-addicts, yeah, but this isn't why I have no interest. I don't because I don't. The idea of the moment and the impersonal and very gradual development of pa~n~naa and sati for which I have to 'wait' makes more sense to me. Why? Because it does. So far, no 'method' has appeared to me. >I suggest that your focus on 'method' alone is narrow and restrictive and would ask that you please elaborate on why you are making such a stand. This is not yet clear to me. Thanks. > KO:??If it work for them, they will not have reject it so IMHO?it is very clear that?they do not?have the pre-requsite set by Visud.? the text is clear on this and I do not doubt it.? In my personal opinon and not against any meditators, most of them did not at first learn what is dhamma.? So those DSG who first practise it?in the past?are also not at the right track.? First panna then bhavana.?? To learn panna about the present moment, one must learn from AS.? I have no doubt on this also.?In fact, I have lots of respect for her on?her teaching of the?understanding of present moment.? I also have?deep respect to her?students esp Rob K for?as I learn?conceptual anatta from?them.? ? Why I am making such a stance because I find DSG keep circling over words and not dhammas.? They discuss words like do or not doing, choice or no choice, their?championing of?no control of anatta is too overuse and make them?presume?that anatta?is about no doing.??IMHO that is wrong?because cetana will, do or act, interest by chandha because they are anatta.? Definitely there?could be lobha with ditthi or just lobha with cetana and chandha.???Natural development is not about no doing or no choice, because reading a book or listening to dhamma is already doing that is willed by cetana and interest by chanda and accompanied by kusala.?So?Alex claim about?inaction is wrong, everytime when we?listen?to understand dhamma, that is already action arise with kusala with or?without?panna.? Natural development is about understanding dhamma at the present moment and?not immerse?in words.??Who is restrictive then? :-) Cheers Ken O #106031 From: "Jega" Date: Tue Mar 16, 2010 8:55 am Subject: contemplation tesan670 every single things in this world consist dualism...but not brightness and darkness.Brightness arise and disappeared but darkness is always there.thats the reason buddha discover suffering of birth and rebirth(dukka) and try to put to it. #106032 From: "Mike" Date: Tue Mar 16, 2010 1:34 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) mikenz66 Dear Sukinder, etc, To clarify my comments below that: "the arguments put forward on this forum about anatta, control, and so on, are much too simplistic", I agree with Ken O's contribution to another thread. Mike --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > Ken O: Why I am making such a stance because I find DSG keep circling over words and not dhammas. They discuss words like do or not doing, choice or no choice, their championing of no control of anatta is too overuse and make them presume that anatta is about no doing. IMHO that is wrong because cetana will, do or act, interest by chandha because they are anatta. Definitely there could be lobha with ditthi or just lobha with cetana and chandha. Natural development is not about no doing or no choice, because reading a book or listening to dhamma is already doing that is willed by cetana and interest by chanda and accompanied by kusala. So Alex claim about inaction is wrong, everytime when we listen to understand dhamma, that is already action arise with kusala with or without panna. Natural development is about understanding dhamma at the present moment and not immerse in words. Who is restrictive then? :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Mike" wrote: > > > Hi Sukinder, Thanks for your post. > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sukinder wrote: > > S: The more I consider the Dhamma, the more I am convinced that there is > > only ever the present moment to be known and therefore not see > > `meditation' as being part of the Path. What do you think I am missing > > here, in other words, what is it that you see that I do not? > > Mike: Basically, as I've said many times, I think that the arguments put forward on this forum about anatta, control, and so on, are much too simplistic. > > Mike: I don't see any point in repeating myself. I'll leave it at that. > > Metta > Mike > #106033 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Mar 16, 2010 3:35 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Scott > > > > >Scott: I've noticed that even the most inveterate 'no-control' advocate can founder at some point when it comes to exactly how much 'no-control' he or she is willing to accept. I think you are showing the limits of your abilities to tolerate the whole notion. > <. . .> > KO:???I think the thinking of no control is not very accurately understood.? To me, it is important to understand the terms of paramatha dhammas, the characteristics and not just simply judge that everything is anatta so there is no action.? ?? ---------- Hi Ken O and Scott, This has been a good discussion to listen-in on, thank you. I shouldn't interrupt, but DSG is a discussion *group* so I will. :-) As I see it, Ken is straying slightly from his strict understanding of anatta, and Scott is tactfully trying to bring him back into line. Enough tactfulness! :-) I'd like to remind Ken that an understanding of anatta cannot be taken too far. If it seems to be leading to ridiculous scenarios then that is because it is not being taken far enough! -------- KO: > No control does not mean no action or doing which I said earlier.?? -------- Yes it does! If there is a problem with that then the problem is due to an idea of self, not to an overstretching of no-control. ---------------- KO: > We go to read a book or listen to dhamma, is will by kamma, interest by chanda?accompanied by panna or kusala or?faith.? There is?action or doing but no control over the proccess since accumulations conditions it.?? ---------------- Is there really a process of action or doing? When we go to read a book or go to listen to Dhamma, how should "going" be understood? In the Satipatthana Sutta it is certainly not meant to be understood in the conventional sense. Here is an extract from the Commentary and Sub-commentary (taken from Nina's post # 52642): "Gacchanto va gacchamiti pajanati = "When he is going (a bhikkhu) understands: 'I am going.'" In this matter of going, readily do dogs, jackals and the like, know when they move on that they are moving. But this instruction on the modes of deportment was not given concerning similar awareness, because awareness of that sort belonging to animals does not shed the belief in a living being, does not knock out the percept of a soul, and neither becomes a subject of meditation nor the development of the Arousing of Mindfulness. Subcommentary: Date: Tue Mar 16, 2010 5:06 pm Subject: Beyond Release! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: Simple Satisfaction, Mental Liberation, and the Ultimate Release! The Blessed Buddha once said: There is the satisfaction of the flesh. There is a mental liberation not of this world. There is an ultimate release far beyond even subtle unworldly liberation! And what, Bhikkhus, is carnal satisfaction? Satisfaction with whatever form, or sensation is carnal satisfaction. And what is the mental liberation, which is not of this world? Liberation from any formless state is liberation, which is not of this world. Finally, friends, what is the ultimate release beyond unworldly liberation? When a Bhikkhu, whose mental fermentations are eliminated, reviews his stilled mind released from all lust, freed from any hatred, and entirely cleared from all confusion, then there occurs a transcendental deliverance. This is called the release beyond that release, which is not of this world... <...> Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book IV [235-7] Section 36:11 On Feeling: Vedana. Joys beyond this world ... http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/index.html Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samahita _/\_ Sri <...> #106035 From: Vince Date: Tue Mar 16, 2010 6:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Will, codetermination cerovzt@... Dear Alex, you wrote: >> "I do not believe in free will. > Neither do I. However there is a big difference between fatalism and > choice (within the alternatives possible of course) which allows > one to eventually drop akusala and develop kusala. fatalism or choice both only exist outside the present. Real freedom is not freedom FOR the self but freedom OF the self. We call fatalism to the lack of control in what we call "future". Choice and Fatalism can be conceived only when the action still is not performed. And Determinism only can be conceived when the action was already performed and known. Beyond all these mind-images about past and future, there is the final Reality, which is pure present. In the present this problem is absent. There is not choice neither determinism. We do what we do. > Buddha did deny the inaction doctrines such as "that the reason > person is a killer is all due to past kamma". > The present choice is a complex thing that is based on various factor: > 1) One's kamma > 2) One's vipaka > 3) Physical factors int/ext > 4) Other people's kamma who are near you > 5) Their vipaka but before all that, that action would be based on ignorance and a delusion of past and future. When there is not ignorance the person cannot be a killer. It is after the action when we try to explain ignorance. And then we can start see a conditioned world in where we can start to talk about kamma, vipaka, etc.. > The fact that there are more than two variables make the system far > more complex and outcome of conditionality more unpredictable. > Does the flowing river shape the river bed, or does the river bed > shape the flow of the river? it's your mind what shape the flow. Do you think the river or the bed has some idea about the other one to shape the flow?. Can they have any notion of "flow"? They do what they do. Also the mind she do what she do. In this case, shape the flow. And later she can ask about that, of course. There is not any error all the time but all is pervaded of an universal perfection. The only error is when there is not an experience of this all the time. > When 3 objects in space are orbiting around each other, which > object exerts force and has force exerted on it? All 3. they cannot build such complicated thing because they don't think about exerting force, they don't know what is force, orbit, etc... They don't have what you says, It's your own mind who is building all that. It doesn't mean what we see is not real. Just that there is an author of the explanation of Reality but there is the Reality as it is. > Unlike one billiard ball hitting the other billiard ball, mind has > far more than 1 choice. And the nature of the mind is far more > complex than simply 1 trillion of such little balls. The linear > formula that can be applicable to two dimensional variables, just > doesn't fit the complexities of the mind. our mind can build endless choices but in ultimate sense there is not any choice. You know, the number "zero" comes from latin "zephiro" which means "hidden". Fibonacci brought to the West the decimal system from the Arabs, who were heirs of the Indians mathematics. "Zero" in both arab("sifr") and in sanscrit("sunya") means "empty". Numbers are endless but all they can be divided by 0 to get 0. Numbers are another language for the mind, and zero exist because the mind can have endless representations in space and time (numbers), but just investigating the final reality of any of them, the rest can become unveiled in the same way. This is a natural property of mind regarding phenomena. Numbers are mind-phenomena but there is not much difference. Nibbana is natural element of mind, in the here and now. At least I understand one cannot ask about many choices implying endless phenomena of the universe. It would be a way to nowhere. One need to be focused in his immediate experience of the reality. Our immediate experience is not composed of thousand things and choices to be analyzed. It would be only truth in a later intellectual elaboration which we can use to clarify our auto-built questions and messes. Our immediate experience is in fact very direct and simple, there is not need of many experiences to clarify what is the experience. On my side I think so. best, Vince. #106036 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Mar 16, 2010 6:39 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) kenhowardau Hi Mike (Sukin and Ken O), -------------- Mike: Basically, as I've said many times, I think that the arguments put forward on this forum about anatta, control, and so on, are much too simplistic. > > Mike: I don't see any point in repeating myself. I'll leave it at that. --------------- KH: Certainly there's no point in repeating yourself but, rather than leaving it at that, perhaps you could say the same thing again in different words. That would keep the discussion going, which is always appreciated here. It could be your dana gift to DSG. :-) . . . Oh, sorry, reading your post more carefully, I see that you *have* added a bit more: ---------- M: > To clarify my comments below that: "the arguments put forward on this forum about anatta, control, and so on, are much too simplistic", I agree with Ken O's contribution to another thread. ----------- KH: I find some of Ken O's explanations difficult to follow. Rather than ask him again, as I am the other thread, I'd like to know what you understand him to be saying. ------------------ M: > In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > Ken O: Why I am making such a stance because I find DSG keep circling over words and not dhammas. They discuss words like do or not doing, choice or no choice, their championing of no control of anatta is too overuse and make them presume that anatta is about no doing. ------------------ KH: Strictly speaking anatta is a just characteristic, and so it is not "about" anything. What is meant here is that understanding anatta requires understanding that there is no doing. So there's a good question to start with. Is anatta about no doing? When we say "no doing" we mean, because of anatta, there are ultimately no actions or activities that extend beyond the present, momentary citta. There is always action of a momentary kind that involves dhammas conditioning other dhammas, but there are no actions beyond that. There are no actions of the kind that would involve people, places and conventional objects. So, on that basis, is anatta about no doing? ------------------------ > KO: > IMHO that is wrong because cetana will, do or act, interest by chandha because they are anatta. Definitely there could be lobha with ditthi or just lobha with cetana and chandha. Natural development is not about no doing or no choice, because reading a book or listening to dhamma is already doing that is willed by cetana and interest by chanda and accompanied by kusala. So Alex claim about inaction is wrong, every time when we listen to understand dhamma, that is already action arise with kusala with or without panna. Natural development is about understanding dhamma at the present moment and not immerse in words. Who is restrictive then? :-) ------------------------- KH: I agree that Alex's claim about inaction is wrong. I would also say his claims about action are wrong. Because he is talking about conventional action (lasting more than one citta). But what is KenO saying that you agree with so much? What is his point? I don't see it. Ken H #106037 From: "Mike" Date: Tue Mar 16, 2010 8:36 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) mikenz66 Hi KenH --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > KenH: When we say "no doing" we mean, because of anatta, there are ultimately no actions or activities that extend beyond the present, momentary citta. There is always action of a momentary kind that involves dhammas conditioning other dhammas, but there are no actions beyond that. There are no actions of the kind that would involve people, places and conventional objects. > > So, on that basis, is anatta about no doing? Mike: Well, this is the problem. You (the Collective) take this "no doing" idea as axiomatic, so as far as you are concerned any discussion about it basically gets turned back into: "You don't understand anatta, otherwise you wouldn't say that." Which may be true, but isn't particularly useful in a discussion. Perhaps the problem is that you (or I) are not clear about what "doing", "action" etc are. Mike: Here are a few random thoughts: Mike: Are the words "doing" and "action" you use above translations of Pali terms? If not, you'll have to define them carefully if you're going to use them to discuss your assertions about reality (just as, in Physics we are careful to define what "work" is [force times distance] and we don't get it mixed up with our jobs...). Mike: Also, I'm not completely clear about how you see the relationship between anatta and "momentariness" (I think the definition of that term is reasonably clear, though it could also perhaps do with some tidying up at some point). I tend to see them as two separate characteristics (which are, of course, related). Mike: All this stuff about "no actions beyond the present moment" actually seems like a completely trivial observation. Where else in time would actions happen? Where does anyone state otherwise? Presumably you are using "action" and "present moment" in a different way from how I would them, since you seem to be using it as the basis to argue your points, but to me the present is, by definition, where actions happen. Perhaps I've been in physics too long... Mike: Since there is the concept of "conditioning" the fact that dhammas rise and fall rapidly does not necessarily imply lack of some sort of long-time (imperfect) continuity. Otherwise we wouldn't have the results of kamma, or memory for that matter... Mike: That's probably enough random thoughts. Metta Mike #106038 From: Sukinder Date: Tue Mar 16, 2010 9:01 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) sukinderpal Hi Mike and Ken O, Mike: To clarify my comments below that: "the arguments put forward on this forum about anatta, control, and so on, are much too simplistic", I agree with Ken O's contribution to another thread. S: Then perhaps we can try again by way of discussing Ken?s comment below?.. ============= > Ken O: Why I am making such a stance because I find DSG keep circling over words and not dhammas. They discuss words like do or not doing, choice or no choice, their championing of no control of anatta is too overuse and make them presume that anatta is about no doing. IMHO that is wrong because cetana will, do or act, interest by chandha because they are anatta. Definitely there could be lobha with ditthi or just lobha with cetana and chandha. Natural development is not about no doing or no choice, because reading a book or listening to dhamma is already doing that is willed by cetana and interest by chanda and accompanied by kusala. So Alex claim about inaction is wrong, everytime when we listen to understand dhamma, that is already action arise with kusala with or without panna. Natural development is about understanding dhamma at the present moment and not immerse in words. Who is restrictive then? :-) S: I?m not quite sure which point you would like to draw my attention to. I wouldn?t have thought that you misunderstood the one point in the above that I have in mind, but since Ken appears to also think this way, I guess that you must too. The objection to ?doings? have always been about those associated with the idea of control over dhammas which then becomes more or less ?rite and ritual?. The various activities that we otherwise engage in, these are to be understood in fact, as being conditioned one moment by this accumulated tendency and another by that. They would in other words, be ?natural?. There is nothing wrong for example, for someone who is in the habit of having coffee to decide to go into Starbucks to buy one when he comes upon a particular outlet. Likewise, someone interested in Premier League ;-), to wake up early than usual to watch his favorite team play. Before being introduced to the Dhamma, we were interested in reading and acquiring knowledge from other sources and we had friends who were interested in the same subjects we did. After hearing and having some appreciation of the Dhamma, our interest in this caused us to spend time reading, discussing and also associating with people who are similarly inspired. And as one continues with this, one will also see the value of such activities and this understanding itself would add to the accumulations, increasing thence the tendency for the same in the future. All very natural, isn?t it? Of course, given the accumulated wrong view and tendency to rite and ritual, there would be times when one sits to read for example, because one believes that it is *what one should be doing*. This would then be wrong. Overall the effect may be that one engages in these activities sometimes with understanding, sometimes with no understanding and sometimes with wrong understanding. However this does not discount the value of the need to continue hearing and discussing the Dhamma. Can the same be said about ?meditation?? I don?t think so. I?ve said all this before, I know, but please allow me to explain again. With regard to the development of samatha, someone who hasn?t heard the Dhamma and has the right accumulations for this may ?naturally? engage in what you might call ?meditation?. For example, he may genuinely see danger in sense contacts and ended up living alone somewhere and occasionally has signs and counter-part signs of one of the 40 (except those associated particularly with the Dhamma, such as the Buddha and the Dhamma) which allows for deep concentration and calm to arise. And sure, someone who has heard and understood the Dhamma could also have similar accumulations and end up more or less in the same situation. And again, all this would be ?natural? to the person. However, this is never where the different meditators I?ve known come from. Not only they show no signs of having the required accumulation for the development of samatha of such level, they wrongly associate this path with that of the development of Right Understanding. Those who do not make the kind of connection but instead do what has come to be called ?vipassana meditation?, clearly insist that what they do at those times, can?t happen at other times. It is clear to me that they are therefore moved by ideas of time, place, posture and that of choosing particular objects to anchor / concentrate upon. And they never come in with the understanding about nama and rupa and about conditionality. But whether one insist on the need for samatha or pure vipassana meditation, my understanding is that these are result of thinking that this is *what one should be doing*. Indeed the latter is a conceiving which must necessarily be wrong and never right. Both however are conclusions made either or both from a particular interpretation of the Suttas or the influence of Buddhist teachers of today. The aim of the Dhamma may conventionally be expressed as, ?understanding who we are?, which means that instead of trying to change, *just understand*, naturally. And this would be the only way that any real change will ever occur. The idea of meditation, whether samatha or vipassana, is therefore seen as *unnatural* or something that?s to be brought into our lives which otherwise we wouldn?t do. Sure when a meditator actually does it, this would be natural of him. However in this case it is due to craving and wrong view rather than ?understanding?, yet he believes otherwise! Having such misunderstanding he then does what must then be a form of rite and ritual. Besides, of the four factors to Stream Entry, hearing the Teachings, association with the wise and wise consideration can be seen to be what happens sometimes when reading and discussing the Dhamma. Sitting and meditating at home and the idea of going on retreats is often insisted upon as being the last of these four, namely practice in accordance with the Dhamma. However, while even such people as Sariputta continued to pay attention to and give an interest in hearing the Dhamma, meditation teachers today actually discourage study and discussions at one time or the other. Not to mention disrespect for the Dhamma, this is actually quite a perversion reflecting strong attachment to wanting results, as far as I can see. From my perspective, just as the first three factors are, the fourth is reference to what is ?conditioned?, hence anatta. As much as one can?t will hearing the Dhamma, association with the wise and wise consideration into existence, so too the dhamma which is ?Patipatti?. For those of us who believe in the need to develop understanding on and on, including study and discussion, one application of this would be the understanding at those moments, that they are conditioned and anatta. And this would also then be an instance of one level of understanding conforming to another level, in other words, no rejection of the one while the other has arisen. Is this the kind of attitude which issues from the different meditation camps of today? This is longer than I expected, so I?ll just end here hoping that some important points have been clarified. Metta, Sukinder #106040 From: "Mike" Date: Tue Mar 16, 2010 11:20 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) mikenz66 Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) Hi Sukinder, I wrote some comments in my last post on this thread that are relevant, so I'll just make a few comments in this post. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sukinder wrote: ... > S: I'm not quite sure which point you would like to draw my attention > to. I wouldn't have thought that you misunderstood the one point in the > above that I have in mind, but since Ken appears to also think this way, > I guess that you must too. Mike: How about discussing the issue rather than continuing to resort to this debating tactic of implying that anyone who disagrees by definition has a wrong understanding? ... > S: Can the same be said about `meditation'? I don't think so. Mike: Your assumption. Please stick to the issue rather than beating on straw men/women... ... > For those of us who believe in the need to develop understanding on and > on, including study and discussion, one application of this would be the > understanding at those moments, that they are conditioned and anatta. > And this would also then be an instance of one level of understanding > conforming to another level, in other words, no rejection of the one > while the other has arisen. > > Is this the kind of attitude which issues from the different meditation > camps of today? Mike: "Meditation camps"? Presumably more people you disagree with. Mike: I've said many times that I see very little difference in understanding between the teachers I follow and what is said on this Forum. There is a need to fully understand the Dhamma, and, in particular, understand anatta (not just as a concept). The point of difference seems to involve some assertions that use words ("control", "doing", "action") that are conveniently fuzzy. As I asked in my last message, are these words translations of Pali terms, or your own particular technical language? If the latter, then can you point me to a definition, and how they relate to passages in the Tipitaka? They can refer to a number of different concepts in English. Metta Mike #106041 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Mar 17, 2010 12:21 am Subject: [dsg] Discussions in Bgk and K.K., no 3. nilovg Dear friends, Kh Sujin: What is the beginning of the development of right understanding? What is the object of right understanding? What can pa~n~naa understand if it is not the reality appearing at this moment? How does pa~n~naa develop? There must be conditions for all levels of pa~n~naa. Pa~n~naa leads to detachment from clinging and ignorance. One may follow attachment without realising it, but pa~n~naa can see attachment. We should not underestimate the function of pa~n~naa. Pa~n~naa can develop when there is awareness of the present reality. Awareness arises because of the proper conditions, not because of anyone?s will. The moments with awareness and without awareness can be known naturally. Whenever sati arises it is aware of a reality. It can be hardness, sound or visible object, whatever reality appears. If there is no understanding of visible object as just an element, a reality that can be seen, there is no detachment and we take it for ?something?. We should not be neglectful of visible object that appears all day long. Only one object appears at a time. If there is no understanding how could there be the distinction between visible object and seeing? How can they appear one at a time without right understanding as foundation? Right understanding does not move away from any reality that appears. How many times a day visible object is understood as just a reality? This is only the beginning of right understanding of visible object. Hardness appears and we say that it is ruupa, but this is just a word. When hardness appears at the present moment its characteristic can be directly known.> Lodewijk: Kh S: Sarah:< Even when we think: I should listen more, read more, it can be wishing. We are concerned about the self.> ******* Nina. #106042 From: "Sadhu Chew" Date: Wed Mar 17, 2010 1:36 am Subject: [dsg] Re: vsm revisited chewsadhu Dear Nina, That's really interesting. Thanks and Sadhu. May all beings be well and happy. With respect, Chew --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Chew, > Op 13-mrt-2010, om 16:34 heeft Sadhu Chew het volgende geschreven: > > > When compare with the aruupa jhaana citta, the object of ruupa > > jhaana citta is called the perceptions of resistance. And there are > > variety of objects for the ruupa jhaana citta, but not the aruupa > > jhaana citta, as for the first aruupa jhaana citta only takes the > > boundless space as object. > -------- > N: I thought, according to the dictionary, that perceptions of > resistance refers to sense objects, but in this context it may be > different. > I compared: The root of existence, Muulapariyaaya Sutta and co, > translated by Ven. Bodhi, p. 69. the section on Unity: where there is > a contrast between unity, ekatta and diversity, naanatta. The > attainer referring to both ruupajhaana and aruupajhaana : jhaana > occurs in a single mode on a single object, and it is called untiy. > The non-attainer: refers to sense sphere dhammas, naanatta. > > But this is in another context. > Nina. > #106043 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Mar 17, 2010 3:26 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 jonoabb Hi KenO (105935) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > ... > KO: Your reasoning is not in line with the text. It does not matter whether the person take his guidance from his teacher or not. > =============== J: If a person has a teacher, there'd be no reason to look to the Dispeller for guidance. Do you see the Dispeller as possibly standing in place of a teacher? I don't think it purports to do so. It simply summarises the knowledge of the time. > =============== > >J: As an instruction it is inadequate. As a description of how samatha is developed under the guidance of a teacher, it's perfectly fine. > > KO: Isnt that a method already :-) > =============== If you want to call it that ;-)) Shall we finish here? Last say to you. Jon #106044 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Mar 17, 2010 3:32 am Subject: Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 jonoabb Hi Alex (105939) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > ... > Akusala moments do not directly form part of practice. > =============== J: But *in the mind of the practitioner* all moments occurring during the course of a 'practice' form part of the practice, as s/he is unable to distinguish the akusala from the kusala moments as and when they arise. > =============== > > J: Yes, but how, in practice, can the meditator know which moments >are kusala and which are akusala? > > Through awareness and wisdom. > =============== J: So how does that awareness and wisdom come to be developed in the first place? > =============== > > Is the meditator likely to be aware of underlying clinging to >gaining more awareness, or subtle lobha for the arising of >particular mental states? > > Some meditators may, some may not be. Many meditation teachers do teach that one should not cling or crave for "wonderful" experiences. > =============== J: Knowing (or being told) that one should not cling or crave is not sufficient. Anyone can understand at an intellectual level the dangers involved in that. Actually seeing subtle clinging by direct experience is another matter altogether. > =============== > > The idea that practice makes perfect just doesn't apply in this context, since it is impossible for the meditator to discriminate on a moment-to-moment basis between the wholesome and the unwholesome, unless and until he/she has reached the stage described in the Satipatthana Sutta of 'setting mindfulness to the fore' and 'always mindful, breathes in', etc. > > Some meditators may, so not. > =============== J: If the ability to discriminate is not present at the beginning, it will not be developed by mistaking akusala for kusala. > =============== > >J: But a person reciting the parts of the body has no way of >ensuring that the reciting will be accompanied by panna. > > Person who studies under KS, and considers the Dhamma, can have the same problem! > =============== J: We are talking about the activity of recitation of the parts of the body (let's keep to the topic;-)). We have agreed that unless the recitation is accompanied by panna, it cannot be samatha bhavana. We've also agreed, I think, that the reciter has no way of ensuring that the reciting will be accompanied by panna. So it's really just reciting in the (mistaken) belief that kusala is being developed. > =============== > >Where is the panna involved in such an activity, as you understand >it? > > What one does has to be done for a purpose. The heart of Buddhist teaching is the 4NT. 32 parts recitation can help one to see the 1st NT, see and develop the other truths. > =============== J: Having the aim/goal/purpose of developing the path does not make one's mental state kusala. The recitation of the parts of the body is not per se kusala. So where is the panna involved in doing that? Jon #106045 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Mar 17, 2010 3:55 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) kenhowardau Hi Mike, Thanks for the random thoughts. --------- KH: > > So, on that basis, is anatta about no doing? > > Mike: > Well, this is the problem. You (the Collective) take this "no doing" idea as axiomatic, so as far as you are concerned any discussion about it basically gets turned back into: "You don't understand anatta, otherwise you wouldn't say that." Which may be true, but isn't particularly useful in a discussion. Perhaps the problem is that you (or I) are not clear about what "doing", "action" etc are. Mike: Here are a few random thoughts: Mike: Are the words "doing" and "action" you use above translations of Pali terms? If not, you'll have to define them carefully if you're going to use them to discuss your assertions about reality (just as, in Physics we are careful to define what "work" is [force times distance] and we don't get it mixed up with our jobs...). > --------- KH: They are defined as pannatti (concept). --------------- Mike: > Also, I'm not completely clear about how you see the relationship between anatta and "momentariness" (I think the definition of that term is reasonably clear, though it could also perhaps do with some tidying up at some point). I tend to see them as two separate characteristics (which are, of course, related). --------------- KH: If there was a self it would have to be more than momentary, wouldn't it? What would be the use of it otherwise? ------------------ Mike: > All this stuff about "no actions beyond the present moment" actually seems like a completely trivial observation. Where else in time would actions happen? Where does anyone state otherwise? Presumably you are using "action" and "present moment" in a different way from how I would them, since you seem to be using it as the basis to argue your points, but to me the present is, by definition, where actions happen. Perhaps I've been in physics too long... ------------------- I don't understand; are you saying that you tie your shoelaces (for example) in one moment? In one trillionth of a second. (?) Surely you can see that only conditioned dhammas can perform functions from beginning to end in that sort of timeframe. --------------------- Mike: Since there is the concept of "conditioning" the fact that dhammas rise and fall rapidly does not necessarily imply lack of some sort of long-time (imperfect) continuity. Otherwise we wouldn't have the results of kamma, or memory for that matter... ----------------------- Are you sure of that? Consider the dictionary meaning of continuity: "1. unchanging quality: the fact of staying the same, of being consistent throughout, or of not stopping or being interrupted measures to ensure continuity of care 2. consistent whole: something that remains consistent or uninterrupted throughout" (Encarta) Several DSG members insist there must be some kind of continuity of conciousness, or stream of consciousness. They refuse to call it a self, but what else could it be? In fact there is no continuity, there are only the fleeting namas and rupas of the present moment. Ken H #106046 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Wed Mar 17, 2010 5:06 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 scottduncan2 Dear Ken O., Regarding: KO: "I think the thinking of no control is not very accurately understood. To me, it is important to understand the terms of paramatha dhammas, the characteristics and not just simply judge that everything is anatta so there is no action. No control does not mean no action or doing which I said earlier. We go to read a book or listen to dhamma, is will by kamma, interest by chanda accompanied by panna or kusala or faith. There is action or doing but no control over the proccess since accumulations conditions it. So there is no need to doubt those who practise samantha, they may have such conditions and accumulations also. We should not judge their action." Scott: Hold on, man, you're preaching to the choir - except that now you're coming out of left field. You don't have to tell me about the importance of paramattha dhammas - I know that these are all that exist. I have not said that there is 'no action.' You've been dealing with Alex for too long - that's what he always misrepresents things to be. 'Action' is, as you know, a function of cetanaa-cetasika. This mental factor arises with each and every moment of consciousness. Cetanaa functions in the moment and contributes to kamma. Anatta means that one has to consider 'method' from a totally different perspective than the conventional. I see you to have slipped into a conventional mode regarding 'method.' I've repeatedly agreed that this 'method' was reportedly given by a teacher to one known to have the capabilities for samatha-bhaavanaa. We are not told, nor do we know, the intricacies that went into this particular determination and instruction. I'm 'judging,' therefore, not this particular 'person' but those today, you included, who seem to make something more of 'method' than I think is warranted. I agree that there are many kusala factors which contribute to the conventional 'actions' of reading or listening to Dhamma. I've learned that when it is said that one should 'listen to the Dhamma' this means that listening to the Dhamma *under the right conditions* can be condition for the development of pa~n~naa. This doesn't mean that one should methodically listen to the Dhamma in order for something else to happen. 'Accumulations' are dhammas, actually, arising due to conditions and functioning with given characteristics. You seem to be making some other use of the term - referring to 'accumulations' as some sort of conglomerate dynamic entity in and of itself which can 'condition' or 'control' action. In this you consider action to be, not the momentary mental factor, but a conventional non-momentary behavioural sequence. In this you've gone astray. And this is one of the many forms of the concept 'self' by another designation. I'm do not deny that there are many many moments of consciousness, mutually conditioned and conditioning (all dhammas) which contribute to kusala development. From the javana sequence to many of such related sequences development proceeds. K: "Also no one should embark the this path without panna. Without right view of dhammas or panna, samantha bhavana would lead to wrong practise. I have no doubt about this. I felt we should not just reject it, it may not be suitable for us but it does not mean we should reject it or keep denying this existence as they were describe clearly by Visud." Scott: Nothing arises to contribute to the development of the Path without pa~n~naa. To put in conventionally, as you have above, no one *can* embark on the path without pa~n~naa. 'Should' is the most misunderstand word in this whole debate. Again, I am not rejecting this example we are discussing. I'm saying that there is far too little information to make the assertions that you are making - to take it as anything more than a precis of a report of a teacher giving a student a certain meditation subject. KO: "Interpretation must be proved by text and not just simply said interpretations. As I said earlier, everyone could give their own interpretation and that is why we have many new commentators. We should come back to ancient interpretations. Definitely there are other factors involved in rectitation, without understanding arise with recitation there is on eradication of kilesa. The point is that there is no method for the development of the path is not substantiate by the text" Scott: In this you are also a commentator. You're interpretation of 'method' resembles my own in some respects ("Definitely there are other factors involved in rectitation, without understanding arise with recitation there is on eradication of kilesa") and differs in others. KO: "The obvious is because it is based on your presumption. Visud is very clear, some do get enlightement through the method. You must prove to me the text why this is not correct for this method and not base on your presumption." Scott: I've repeatedly said what you've said above - that the description is limited, doesn't give all the fine points related to the outcome and so, yes, it says it in the text but nothing more. There is no room for extrapolation nor hope to create a method that one can adopt today. In this, I think, we agree. KO: "If it work for them, they will not have reject it so IMHO it is very clear that they do not have the pre-requsite set by Visud. the text is clear on this and I do not doubt it. In my personal opinon and not against any meditators, most of them did not at first learn what is dhamma. So those DSG who first practise it in the past are also not at the right track. First panna then bhavana. To learn panna about the present moment, one must learn from AS. I have no doubt on this also. In fact, I have lots of respect for her on her teaching of the understanding of present moment. I also have deep respect to her students esp Rob K for as I learn conceptual anatta from them." Scott: I've never read or heard AS prescribe a method. Why not? Did you not ask about method when you spoke to her? How did that go? You think that 'methods' work. This, I think, is the flaw in your argument. You've succumbed to the seductive draw of thinking about wholes and persons behaving. Remember, she's not my teacher. Her take on the Dhamma seems to accord with my own - and I can't explain why - such that I think she is correct. I think 'teachers' and 'students' are difficult concepts to deal with. Too much room for getting caught up in notions about people. K: "Why I am making such a stance because I find DSG keep circling over words and not dhammas. They discuss words like do or not doing, choice or no choice, their championing of no control of anatta is too overuse and make them presume that anatta is about no doing. IMHO that is wrong because cetana will, do or act, interest by chandha because they are anatta. Definitely there could be lobha with ditthi or just lobha with cetana and chandha. Natural development is not about no doing or no choice, because reading a book or listening to dhamma is already doing that is willed by cetana and interest by chanda and accompanied by kusala. So Alex claim about inaction is wrong, everytime when we listen to understand dhamma, that is already action arise with kusala with or without panna. Natural development is about understanding dhamma at the present moment and not immerse in words. Who is restrictive then? :-)" Scott: Again, you've been swayed by Alex in your misrepresentation of the whole anatta thing. You think just as he does about the so-called DSG take on anatta. Natural development continues without any of the thinking that creates a self. Alex hasn't a leg to stand on since it is clear that he is entirely engulfed in belief about a self and has learned to mimic the terms and language of anatta to couch his beliefs in. Don't you do the same. I agree that the 'doing' is such because it is already being done. Whether pa~n~naa is involved or not has nothing to do with the thoughts about it. Sincerely, Scott. #106047 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Mar 17, 2010 7:47 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Will, codetermination truth_aerator Dear Vince, all, >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Vince wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > you wrote: > > >> "I do not believe in free will. > > Neither do I. However there is a big difference between fatalism and > > choice (within the alternatives possible of course) which allows > > one to eventually drop akusala and develop kusala. > > fatalism or choice both only exist outside the present. Real freedom > is not freedom FOR the self but freedom OF the self. I agree. In short, it is not freedom of desire, it is freedom FROM desire. All formations, including bare consciousness is unsatisfactory, and thank Nibbana, nothing remains when all 5 aggregates cease. > We call fatalism to the lack of control in what we call "future". In any case, I believe it is good to implant a teaching of "kusala can be developed by panna". In any case it is good to do "one's best while keeping anicca-dukkha-anatta" in mind. Can there be quality without Dharmin under it? Is there action without an actor? Is there change without an eternal substrate? Can there be volition without "The Self that chooses"? Can there be choice without "One who chooses"? Of course... With metta, Alex #106048 From: Sukinder Date: Wed Mar 17, 2010 7:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) sukinderpal Hi Mike, I?ll try to make this my last response. I sense that you are getting tired of me, with good reason of course. ;-) ======== Mike: I wrote some comments in my last post on this thread that are relevant, so I'll just make a few comments in this post. Suk: I hadn?t read that one, and in fact I haven?t read many of the other posts that you have written to others expressing your views. I?m even less sure now regarding what it is that you are saying and expect me to respond to. I generally never experience any clarity of thought, so I?m not surprised that I misread what others write and end up being quite confused in my responses. =====================... > S: I'm not quite sure which point you would like to draw my attention > to. I wouldn't have thought that you misunderstood the one point in the > above that I have in mind, but since Ken appears to also think this way, > I guess that you must too. Mike: How about discussing the issue rather than continuing to resort to this debating tactic of implying that anyone who disagrees by definition has a wrong understanding? Suk: Believe me when I say this, I am lost as to your point and don?t even want to go back and read your messages to try and pin down the main issue. And this is exactly my problem. I have difficulty with reading and such things as analyzing and understanding the gist. If by ?resort to this debating tactic? you imply that I did it knowingly, please understand that that there was no intention and thought along those lines. Perhaps I?m just so muddle headed that I don?t know what the motive is from moment to moment. This is possible. However this I know and see no reason not to assert; I understand the Dhamma one way and don?t see how there could be another equally valid interpretation. But not only this, I do base my judgments on what I read others to be saying and the impression I get is that theirs is a wrong understanding. I see no reason to doubt my interpretation, but I am ready to discuss. You seem to expect me not to feel so sure, indeed that it would be wise not to. Perhaps you can point out to me some basic truths which I need to consider in this respect?.? ========= ... > S: Can the same be said about `meditation'? I don't think so. Mike: Your assumption. Please stick to the issue rather than beating on straw men/women... Suk: OK, again it may be that I?m so very confused, but please allow me to clarify. I had thought that part of your argument was to establish that your teacher?s teaching and you?re following them to ?meditate? stood on the same ground as study and discussing the Dhamma. I tried therefore, though in my usual long winded way, to show why this was not the case. If this still sounds to you like I was beating on straw men, then I must have tackled the wrong point. ============= > For those of us who believe in the need to develop understanding on and > on, including study and discussion, one application of this would be the > understanding at those moments, that they are conditioned and anatta. > And this would also then be an instance of one level of understanding > conforming to another level, in other words, no rejection of the one > while the other has arisen. > > Is this the kind of attitude which issues from the different meditation > camps of today? Mike: "Meditation camps"? Presumably more people you disagree with. Suk: Are you are getting personal now or just pointing out the straw men thin? Anyway, from my perspective and as I said above, I interpret the Dhamma one way from where I see no ground for accepting any other interpretation. Indeed when expressed, the views coming from you and yes ALL ?meditation camps?, appear increasingly not to hold water and contradictory. Yes I am wary, of if not downright skeptical when meditators happen to come to a conclusion which on the surface is similar to what I would arrive at. But I can?t help being reminded about the basic views that are held and so indeed end up unwilling to agree. But are you by any chance thinking that I take pleasure in disagreeing with people? =========== Mike: I've said many times that I see very little difference in understanding between the teachers I follow and what is said on this Forum. Suk: Let?s just talk about you. What if I said that you do not understand anatta and conditionality the same way as I and some others here do? Could I then agree with you that your teachers understanding is the same as say Ken H?s? You say that you are looking to hear further explanations from us elucidating how our understandings are different. I for my part have tried to do this as best as I could, conditions permitting. Perhaps it is time for you to explain why for example, you believe that your teachers? understanding is the same as say, mine or Sarah?s. You stop at the seeming similar ?conclusions? made, and then go on to state that meditation on the one hand and study on the other, are both equally valid. But you have not, as much as I have read and recall, explained anything about why this is case. ============= Mike: There is a need to fully understand the Dhamma, and, in particular, understand anatta (not just as a concept). The point of difference seems to involve some assertions that use words ("control", "doing", "action") that are conveniently fuzzy. As I asked in my last message, are these words translations of Pali terms, or your own particular technical language? If the latter, then can you point me to a definition, and how they relate to passages in the Tipitaka? They can refer to a number of different concepts in English. Suk: As I said, I am generally quite muddle headed, so you?ll forgive me. But it sounds somewhat odd that you should ask us to clarify our use of terms such as these, when it is my perception that they have been used quite appropriately in context and for a long time. Regarding appealing to the Texts, I don?t know and I?m not very keen about it. As far as I?ve seen, quoting texts does not change the other person?s views and usually end up being argument about interpretation. Later on one or both sides lose interest and end up at best, agreeing to disagree. Sometimes people ask for references believing that those concepts are not even there, such that when the other person fails to quote anything, they go away feeling more confident about their own interpretation. I personally prefer to discuss based on certain basic principles and using reason to help clarify and explain. I trust Ken H and others who are discussing this with you, will do a better job than I can. I suggest then that you continue the discussion with them because I?d like to bow out. But of course this is mostly because I realize my own limitations, including that I?ll likely miss the point you are making. ;-) Metta, Sukin #106049 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Mar 17, 2010 4:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 upasaka_howard Hi, Jon & Ken - WOW! Flexibility rears it's lovely head! I am really delighted. :-) Mmm, maybe I shouldn't have said that! I can imagine minds doing somersaults and urgently searching for disclaimers at my words! ;-)) With metta, Howard In a message dated 3/17/2010 6:29:53 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, jonabbott@... writes: Hi KenO (105935) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > ... > KO: Your reasoning is not in line with the text. It does not matter whether the person take his guidance from his teacher or not. > =============== J: If a person has a teacher, there'd be no reason to look to the Dispeller for guidance. Do you see the Dispeller as possibly standing in place of a teacher? I don't think it purports to do so. It simply summarises the knowledge of the time. > =============== > >J: As an instruction it is inadequate. As a description of how samatha is developed under the guidance of a teacher, it's perfectly fine. > > KO: Isnt that a method already :-) > =============== If you want to call it that ;-)) Shall we finish here? Last say to you. Jon #106050 From: Ken O Date: Wed Mar 17, 2010 9:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 ashkenn2k Dear Scott >Scott: Hold on, man, you're preaching to the choir - except that now you're coming out of left field. You don't have to tell me about the importance of paramattha dhammas - I know that these are all that exist. > >I have not said that there is 'no action.' You've been dealing with Alex for too long - that's what he always misrepresents things to be. 'Action' is, as you know, a function of cetanaa-cetasika. This mental factor arises with each and every moment of consciousness. Cetanaa functions in the moment and contributes to kamma. Anatta means that one has to consider 'method' from a totally different perspective than the conventional. I see you to have slipped into a conventional mode regarding 'method.' KO:? method is not about convetional or paramatha dhamma.? Method is just a way of practise that suits a person's inclination as describe in Visud >I've repeatedly agreed that this 'method' was reportedly given by a teacher to one known to have the capabilities for samatha-bhaavanaa. We are not told, nor do we know, the intricacies that went into this particular determination and instruction. I'm 'judging,' therefore, not this particular 'person' but those today, you included, who seem to make something more of 'method' than I think is warranted. > KO:? I dont totally agreed with you about people today because I have yet come across a text that the Visud samantha bhavana is not for people today.? There could be such people, we dont know so we dont judge.? >I agree that there are many kusala factors which contribute to the conventional 'actions' of reading or listening to Dhamma. I've learned that when it is said that one should 'listen to the Dhamma' this means that listening to the Dhamma *under the right conditions* can be condition for the development of pa~n~naa. This doesn't mean that one should methodically listen to the Dhamma in order for something else to happen. > KO:? this does not take away the signficance of what is written in Visud.? >'Accumulations' are dhammas, actually, arising due to conditions and functioning with given characteristics. You seem to be making some other use of the term - referring to 'accumulations' as some sort of conglomerate dynamic entity in and of itself which can 'condition' or 'control' action. In this you consider action to be, not the momentary mental factor, but a conventional non-momentary behavioural sequence. In this you've gone astray. And this is one of the many forms of the concept 'self' by another designation. I'm do not deny that there are many many moments of consciousness, mutually conditioned and conditioning (all dhammas) which contribute to kusala development. From the javana sequence to many of such related sequences development proceeds. > KO:? what you like to eat today is accumulations :-)? definitely it consist of many sense and mind door process.? Even seeing the computer consist of many seeing cittas and?mind door cittas?:-). > >Scott: Nothing arises to contribute to the development of the Path without pa~n~naa. To put in conventionally, as you have above, no one *can* embark on the path without pa~n~naa. 'Should' is the most misunderstand word in this whole debate. Again, I am not rejecting this example we are discussing. I'm saying that there is far too little information to make the assertions that you are making - to take it as anything more than a precis of a report of a teacher giving a student a certain meditation subject. KO:?I have been saying no panna no development.? The text is clear, the 32 parts method do cause enlightement.??What is in between teacher and student. that is too much speculations.? I just said what is describe in the text.? If you have other text that show what is in between them, I am most happy to know.? >Scott: In this you are also a commentator. You're interpretation of 'method' resembles my own in some respects ("Definitely there are other factors involved in rectitation, without understanding arise with recitation there is on eradication of kilesa") and differs in others. KO:? I dont interpret, I let the text speak for itself.? If it said, there are people attain enlightement because of recitation, so there must be.? > >KO: "If it work for them, they will not have reject it so IMHO it is very clear that they do not have the pre-requsite set by Visud. the text is clear on this and I do not doubt it. In my personal opinon and not against any meditators, most of them did not at first learn what is dhamma. So those DSG who first practise it in the past are also not at the right track. First panna then bhavana. To learn panna about the present moment, one must learn from AS. I have no doubt on this also. In fact, I have lots of respect for her on her teaching of the understanding of present moment. I also have deep respect to her students esp Rob K for as I learn conceptual anatta from them." > >Scott: I've never read or heard AS prescribe a method. Why not? Did you not ask about method when you spoke to her? How did that go? You think that 'methods' work. This, I think, is the flaw in your argument. You've succumbed to the seductive draw of thinking about wholes and persons behaving. Remember, she's not my teacher. Her take on the Dhamma seems to accord with my own - and I can't explain why - such that I think she is correct. I think 'teachers' and 'students' are difficult concepts to deal with. Too much room for getting caught up in notions about people. KO:? IMHO, AS is the path of dry insightor, so I never doubt her way or question her way.? thats her accumulations and?you?should learn more from her, till date?she is best in this way.??? >Scott: Again, you've been swayed by Alex in your misrepresentation of the whole anatta thing. You think just as he does about the so-called DSG take on anatta. Natural development continues without any of the thinking that creates a self. Alex hasn't a leg to stand on since it is clear that he is entirely engulfed in belief about a self and has learned to mimic the terms and language of anatta to couch his beliefs in. Don't you do the same. >I agree that the 'doing' is such because it is already being done. Whether pa~n~naa is involved or not has nothing to do with the thoughts about it. KO:? I am not talking about Alex doing because his interpretation is about?a self trying to control thoughts.?I am talking about cetana.? That cetana will condition conventional action through many processes. And that cetana could be kusala or akusala.? If one think one could control thoughts, that is really the misunderstanding of anatta.??It is impossible to exercise power over our thoughts. There should be correct understanding of samantha bhavana.? Even for those in samantha bhavana, they are not controlling thoughts.??Doing samantha bhavana is the understanding of characteristics of kusala that arise on that moment of fixing the mind on the object.?? Fixing the mind on an object is not possible without strong sati, and strong sati is only possible with panna.? Just like when we crave for pleasant object, the craving is the strong conditioning factor on fixing on the pleasant object.? Fixing on an object without sati as a guard, one will be easily distracted by sense objects.? That is why jhanas is about withdrawal of sense objects with the understanding of the?unsatisfactory of sense objects.? Cheers Ken O #106051 From: Ken O Date: Wed Mar 17, 2010 10:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 ashkenn2k Dear Ken H ? >-------- > >Yes it does! If there is a problem with that then the problem is due to an idea of self, not to an overstretching of no-control. > KO:? does cetana will or act? >Is there really a process of action or doing? When we go to read a book or go to listen to Dhamma, how should "going" be understood? > >In the Satipatthana Sutta it is certainly not meant to be understood in the conventional sense. Here is an extract from the Commentary and Sub-commentary (taken from Nina's post # 52642): > >"Gacchanto va gacchamiti pajanati = "When he is going (a bhikkhu) >understands: 'I am going.'" In this matter of going, readily do dogs, >jackals and the like, know when they move on that they are moving. But this instruction on the modes of deportment was not given concerning similar awareness, because awareness of that sort belonging to animals does not shed the belief in a living being, does not knock out the percept of a soul, and neither becomes a subject of meditation nor the development of the Arousing of Mindfulness. > >Subcommentary: (end quote) KO:? Yes, it does not said there is no method :-)? If you think there is no method, pse show textual support.? It just say about understanding which I have said no understanding no development .? Visud just describe the methods and the pre-requsite of the person doing it.?? Why cant the person doing it have this?the understanding?as what you describe above.? Do we have the doubt those people describe in the Visud who do anapasati or 32 parts. >Correct me if I am wrong, Ken, but I think you are saying we shouldn't let our ultimate understanding of going mislead us into thinking there can be no going in the conventional sense. > >That's fair enough in its way, I suppose, but don't be misled into thinking the conventional way of going really does exist. It doesn't! I think that might be where you are straying off the path to some extent KO:? You are thinking of a self that will or cetana that will.? It is not about conventional way because everyone starts from conventional way, I am talking about samantha and vipassana bhavana.? If you think there is no samatha bhavana, then you show me the text that I am wrong.? If you thinking there is no method use in Visud, pse show textual support.? Remember we are talking about people describe in Visud who has the pre-requsite. Cheers Ken O #106052 From: Ken O Date: Wed Mar 17, 2010 10:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 ashkenn2k Dear Jon cheers :-)? with metta Ken O? > >? >Hi KenO > >(105935) >--- In dhammastudygroup@ yahoogroups. com, Ken O wrote: >> ... >> KO: Your reasoning is not in line with the text. It does not matter whether the person take his guidance from his teacher or not. >> ============ === > >J: If a person has a teacher, there'd be no reason to look to the Dispeller for guidance. Do you see the Dispeller as possibly standing in place of a teacher? I don't think it purports to do so. It simply summarises the knowledge of the time. > >> ============ === >> >J: As an instruction it is inadequate. As a description of how samatha is developed under the guidance of a teacher, it's perfectly fine. >> >> KO: Isnt that a method already :-) >> ============ === > >If you want to call it that ;-)) > >Shall we finish here? Last say to you. > >Jon > #106053 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Mar 17, 2010 12:39 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 jonoabb Hi Howard --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Jon & Ken - > > WOW! Flexibility rears it's lovely head! > =============== Yes, but only as a last-gasp strategy!! > =============== I am really delighted. :-) > =============== Don't hold your breath for a repeat ;-)) > =============== > Mmm, maybe I shouldn't have said that! I can imagine minds doing > somersaults and urgently searching for disclaimers at my words! ;-)) > =============== Right again. See above. Jon #106054 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Wed Mar 17, 2010 2:19 pm Subject: Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 scottduncan2 Dear Ken O., Regarding: KO:? "method is not about convetional or paramatha dhamma.? Method is just a way of practise that suits a person's inclination as describe in Visud" Scott: No, I don't agree. 'Method' at best is only a post-hoc designation for a series of conditioned moments of consciousness which amounted *in retrospect* to the development of kusala. It can only be the post-hoc thinking about wholes and people that would lead to a misconstruing of the term 'method' on the event. 'A way of practice' is a conventional description. KO:? "I dont totally agreed with you about people today because I have yet come across a text that the Visud samantha bhavana is not for people today.? There could be such people, we dont know so we dont judge." Scott: Oh, I don't know, Ken. I've never said that samatha-bhaavanaa is impossible today. What I do know for sure is that I've not interacted with a single fan of jhaana who has ever appeared to understand it, let alone attained it. I don't care, really, except that I find that these total amatures are the most vocal in proclaiming that I should get in line and chase rainbows along with them and that they and they alone know best. That's a total turn-off for me for sure. I don't really dig it when you tell me to do or not do certain things either, man. I just don't happen to think you are correct about the 'method' thing except in the most basic and banal sense of saying that for a certain person described in the Visuddhimagga recitation (whatever that really was) was part of the events leading to the arising of the Path. You are making your own interpretations after making this most basic statement - a truism really. KO:? "this does not take away the signficance of what is written in Visud...I have been saying no panna no development.? The text is clear, the 32 parts method do cause enlightement.??What is in between teacher and student. that is too much speculations.? I just said what is describe in the text.? If you have other text that show what is in between them, I am most happy to know." Scott: Yes, no pa~n~naa, no bhaavanaa. No, the text is not unequivocal on your point about 'method.' And what is the point of asking for another text that shows what goes on between the teacher and student. There isn't one. Neither you nor I can know these details. This is why I'm saying that your thesis is not based on enough information and hence speculative as well. This is your interpretation, and I think it is a rather concrete form of reasoning that leads you to interpret the text in this way. We can agree to disagree on this point - repeating the same point over and over again as you do is not a persuasive form of discussion as far as I'm concerned.? KO:? "I dont interpret, I let the text speak for itself.? If it said, there are people attain enlightement because of recitation, so there must be." Scott: We'll have to leave this point as well. Anyone who says that they 'don't interpret' or 'let the text speak for itself' in defense of their own interpretation of a text is simply and only saying that they think that their personal interpretation is correct. Not cool and certainly less than persuasive. KO:? "IMHO, AS is the path of dry insightor, so I never doubt her way or question her way.? thats her accumulations and?you?should learn more from her, till date?she is best in this way." Scott: Have you ignored my statement that I consider AS to make a lot of sense? You must have to be telling me what I should do in relation to what she says. It seems that you have a hard time seeing points of agreement. I think that your thesis about 'method' would not find a home in AS's way of seeing things. I thought you asked her about this and that it didn't go all that well for you. Can you elaborate your experience while you were there? Let's leave it at this, Ken. You're off track, as far as I'm concerned and we simply differ here. Sincerely, Scott.??? #106055 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Mar 17, 2010 10:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 3/17/2010 3:40:41 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, jonabbott@... writes: Hi Howard --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Jon & Ken - > > WOW! Flexibility rears it's lovely head! > =============== Yes, but only as a last-gasp strategy!! ---------------------------------------------------------- ;-)) --------------------------------------------------------- > =============== I am really delighted. :-) > =============== Don't hold your breath for a repeat ;-)) ---------------------------------------------------------- LOLOL! That's okay; this'll last me for a good while. :-) ----------------------------------------------------- > =============== > Mmm, maybe I shouldn't have said that! I can imagine minds doing > somersaults and urgently searching for disclaimers at my words! ;-)) > =============== Right again. See above. -------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------- Jon ============================= With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #106056 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Wed Mar 17, 2010 2:59 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "...Mmm, maybe I shouldn't have said that! I can imagine minds doing somersaults and urgently searching for disclaimers at my words! ;-))" Scott: Ha ha. Correct. I'm like, 'If Howard approves then there is likely something very wrong.' ;-) Sincerely, Scott. #106057 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Mar 17, 2010 11:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 3/17/2010 5:59:16 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "...Mmm, maybe I shouldn't have said that! I can imagine minds doing somersaults and urgently searching for disclaimers at my words! ;-))" Scott: Ha ha. Correct. I'm like, 'If Howard approves then there is likely something very wrong.' ;-) ------------------------------------ Zackly!! ;-)) ------------------------------------ Sincerely, Scott. ============================= With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #106058 From: Vince Date: Wed Mar 17, 2010 3:39 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Will, codetermination cerovzt@... Dear Alex, you wrote: > In any case, I believe it is good to implant a teaching of "kusala can be developed by panna". > In any case it is good to do "one's best while keeping anicca-dukkha-anatta" in mind. kusala or akusala are established in a natural way according the vanishing of ignorance. We have need of contemption because there is ignorance and then the need of kusala instead akusala to be detached. Choosing to develop kusala instead akusala can be by panna action but we deludedly can think it was our choice. Who knows! best wishes, #106059 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Mar 17, 2010 5:36 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 kenhowardau Hi Ken O, ---------- <. . .> KH: > > . . . "Here (in this discourse) the particular and not the general sense of awareness is to be taken." >(end quote) KO: > Yes, it does not said there is no method :-) If you think there is no method, pse show textual support. ---------- I just have! :-) Let me paraphrase the commentary I have just quoted: The general sense of "awareness of method" is not taught in the Buddha's Dhamma. Only the particular sense of "awareness of method" is taught. That is, awareness of dhammas performing their functions. The Vism (for example) says that a beginner samatha meditator counts each breath. But the Vism is not teaching us to be aware (in the general sense) of breath counting. It is teaching us to be aware (in the particular sense) of conditioned dhammas. Why isn't it teaching us to be aware in the general sense of breath counting? Because breath counting is only a concept. It has no efficacy - no impact in the real world. That kind of awareness is not the way out! ------------------ KO: > It just say about understanding which I have said no understanding no development . Visud just describe the methods and the pre-requsite of the person doing it. Why cant the person doing it have this the understanding as what you describe above. Do we have the doubt those people describe in the Visud who do anapasati or 32 parts. ------------------ When there is beginners' samatha bhavana, certain ways of thinking will be conditioned. A beginner might think, "I should count each breath," or, "I am counting each breath," etc. When there is intermediate-level samatha bhavana, different thinking will be conditioned (e.g., "I will simply note, 'in breath,' and, 'out breath.'" And so on it goes. Different concepts are created at different times. The texts are not teaching us to see those concepts as a method. That would be awareness in the general sense - fit for dogs and jackals. The texts are always teaching the particular sense of awareness - fit for monks. When there is weak samatha bhavana, the meditation object is being experienced by a weak level of panna cetasika that has a weak understanding of the difference between kusala and akusala. In so doing, it is strengthening kusala concentration and kusala effort etc. That is the real method. When there is medium samatha bhavana, a stronger panna cetasika is doing the same thing. And so on. The 'particular' sense of awareness experiences any of those dhammas as they perform their functions. That is the right understanding the term "method". Ken H #106060 From: Kevin Farrell Date: Wed Mar 17, 2010 7:38 pm Subject: "Dhamma Snippets" Site farrellkevin80 Dear Friends, I have begun creating a small new website. It will mostly house short but pertinent "snippets" of dhamma from various places including books by Nina van Gorkom and Ajahn Sujin, the Tipitika and Commentaries, and quotes from members of DSG and so forth (there are some really, really good "snipptes of dhamma" here). I will also look for quotations to use from past Dhamma Conversations that are preserved on the net. The website will remain small but I will add new "snippets" every so often. There is also a nice links sections linking to some good sites. In time, the website will grow. If you have any suggestions please let me know. If anybody has any problem with me quoting them please let me know and I will remove any quotes and make a note not to quote you in the future (see my contanct details below please). Please register at the site if you wish to leave comments and so forth. The web address is http://www.dhammasnippets.webs.com. Have a great day. Kevin F. (farrellkevin80@...) #106061 From: Kevin Farrell Date: Wed Mar 17, 2010 7:46 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] "Dhamma Snippets" Site (fixed link) farrellkevin80 Sorry, the correct link is http://www.dhammasnippets.webs.com #106062 From: Kevin Farrell Date: Wed Mar 17, 2010 7:49 pm Subject: Dhamma Snippets - Let's see if I can get the link right farrellkevin80 Let's try that again! http://www.dhammasnippets.webs.com : ) Kevin #106063 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Wed Mar 17, 2010 10:00 pm Subject: meditation centers/dsg rjkjp1 Dear Mike Lets see if I can summarise your points 1.you feel that Dsg members and acharn sujin are seeing/promoting the same truths as your own teachers. 2. you feel that study of the tipitaka by dsg members is equivalent ? control wise and doing wise ? as going to a meditation center. 3. that insight and satipatthana can arise at any time and any place. 4 however that insight and satipatthana are more likely to arise in a meditation setting. 5. techniques are not essential but they do work 6. deliberately focusing on various object in the present moment may not be satipatthana abut it helps to set up conditions for satipatthana. If you want to add or modify/clariffy any in this list please do and then I will respond. Robert #106064 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 17, 2010 10:13 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) sarahprocter... Dear Scott & all, I thought the following was a very neat and helpful summary: --- On Tue, 9/3/10, scottduncan2 wrote: >Scott: Since all dhammas are anatta, and since the characteristic of anatta is insusceptibility to control, it makes no sense, in my opinion, to consider an ability to 'create conditions.' Such a phrase is merely synonymous with 'control.' Not only does anatta mean that there is no one to observe and no one to create, the basis for this particular characteristic relies on the impermanence of any given dhamma - it is simply there and gone too quickly to allow for any element of control. If 'control' exists, it would surely only be a function of the pattern of impersonal conditions - also dhammas - that are or have been in place. .... Sarah: Good to see you back in great form! Metta Sarah ======= #106065 From: "ptaus1" Date: Wed Mar 17, 2010 10:25 pm Subject: Commentary to Dhatukatha ptaus1 Hi all, I was checking to see if there is a translation of Dhatukatha commentary in English - on ATI it says there is one by Narada, but I looked at PTS website and couldn't really find one. Does anyone know about this translation? This is what the ATI says: "Pañcappakaranatthakatha (Buddhaghosa; 5th c.). This commentary covers all five books. English translations exist for the portions concerning the Katthavatthu †(B.C. Law, 1940, PTS), Dhatukatha †(U Narada, 1962, PTS), and Patthana †(U Narada, 1969, PTS)" I'm pretty sure that kathavatthu portion is "The debates commentary". The patthana portion must be "Guide to conditional relations" by Narada. But I have no clue what's the dhatukatha portion? Best wishes pt #106066 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 17, 2010 10:34 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) sarahprocter... Dear Han (Ken O & all), The following relates to the discussions we had before about attanu di.t.thi and sakkaaya di.t.thi. #105521 --- On Fri, 26/2/10, han tun wrote: >When we met at the breakfast on 22 February 2010, you said you were surprised that I agreed to No. 16. 16. When there is an idea of the tangible object or visible object being a computer, a thing, a substance or whole, it is attanu di.t.thi, also an idea of atta, but not sakkaaya di.t.thi. >You remembered very well that I strongly disagreed with Ajahn Sujin, about two years ago, when she explained attanudi.t.thi with the examples of a biscuit tin and a glass. Why then I agreed now? >After that discussion two years ago, I read Samaadi.t.thi Diipanii by Ledi Sayaadaw. In Part Three of the Diipanii, Sayaadaw wrote that the word attaa is used to convey the following three interpretations: (1) asaaraka.t.thena- anattaa: on account of being without essence or substance it is called anattaa. (2) asaamika.t.thena- anattaa: on account of not having any owner or overlord it is called anattaa. (3) avasavattana. t.thena-anattaa: on account of its not yielding to another's will it is called anattaa. ... S: This is interesting and the explanation of the terms is helpful. .... >Sayaadaw elaborated further on these three interpretations, and under asaaraka.t.thena- anattaa, he wrote: "I shall explain the above with an example. There are such things as wooden bowl, earthen bowl, brass bowl, silver bowl and gold bowl. A bowl made of wood has wood as its substance and is called a wooden bowl; a bowl made of earth has earth as its substance and it is called an earthen bowl; a bowl made of iron has iron as its substance and is called an iron bowl; a bowl made of silver has silver as its substance and is called a silver bowl; and a bowl made of gold has gold as its substance and is called a gold bowl. Here, the word 'bowl' is merely the name by which is indicated a certain pictorial idea (sa.n.thaana- pa~n~natti) , and this conventional term of 'bowl' possesses no essence or substance as an ultimate thing". Han: Thus, in the context of the first interpretation by Ledi Sayaadaw, I agreed that when there is an idea of the tangible object or visible object being a computer, or a biscuit tin, or a glass, it is attanu di.t.thi, but not sakkaaya di.t.thi. .... S: Good. Yes, it's atta, but we don't take the 'bowl' for being oneself! ... I appreciated your sharing these comments a lot. Here's the "Butter-jar" quote again which I referred to before: From the commentary to the Kathavatthu, ch 1: "Thus it is said: The Enlightened One, best of speakers, spoke two kinds of truth, namely,the popular and that of highest meaning, a third is not got at (i.e known). Therein, discourse meeting with agreement is true and is by way of world convention. Highest meaning discourse expression is also true and, as such, characteristic of things (as they are). There is another way of putting it. The teaching of the Exalted One is of two kinds, the highest-meaning teaching consisting of the aggregates, and so forth, and the popular taching consisting of 'butter-jar,' and so forth. The Exalted One does not, indeed, overrun consistency. Hence, on the mere expression 'there is the person who,' must not command adherence. The highest meaning has been declared by the Teacher, without transgressing the concept. So another wise man also should not, in explaining the highest meaning, overrun a concept. The remaining meanings are clear everywhere. The controversy on ‘person’ is ended." .... >H: I do not expect others to agree with me, and if someone disagrees with me I will not defend my stand, and I have nothing more to add. .... S: Yes, I think it's very fair to state one's understanding and leave it at that - no obligation at all to continue any discussion:-). Metta Sarah ======== #106067 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 17, 2010 10:46 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] To Connie and Alex: Apadaana sarahprocter... Dear Connie, Han & all, --- On Fri, 26/2/10, connie wrote: >Yes, the Apadaana is quoted in the Udana Commentary, Meghiya Ch., 8. Sundari. You can find a copy named zMunaali.txt in the group's Files section. ... S: Connie, many, many thanks for your help and typing -most helpful as I never seem to be near my texts these days. [I'm slowly getting back into old threads - this afternoon, thanks to our both being grounded by some jelly-fish stings. Well, the other day, they were purple jelly-fish stings. Today, a more venomous "blue-bottle" gave Jon a particularly nasty sting. The hazards of ocean-living! And we thought we were playing safe by giving up surfing...No escape when time for past kamma to ripen!] I'll use the following as I continue my discussion with Han - (am quoting it here, so Han can easily see the translation too, if he wishes): >A] "On the delightful slab of rock, within the proximity of Lake Anotatta, ablaze with divers jewls, (lying) deep inside a diversely fragrant jungle, the Leader of the World, seated there ringed by a great order of monks, explained his own previous deeds, saying: 'Hear, monks, from me of which deed, preformed by me, (the result of) whose karmic remnant is (now) ripening even within Buddhahood: [B] [264] As the debauched individual named Munaali, I, previously, in some other birth, accused the flawless Paccekabuddha Surabhi. Through the ripening of that deed I long ran on in hell; I experienced painful sensation for many thousands of years. Through that deed's residue there is now, in this last becoming, acquired by me this accusation through the agency of Sundarikaa (Ap-a 119f). [C] Of an all-eclipsing Buddha there was a saavaka named Nanda; after accusing him was there by me long running on in hell. For ten thousand years I long ran on in hell; upon reaching the human frame I acquired abundant accusation. Through that deed's residue Ci~ncamaa.navikaa accused me with what did not take place in front of a body of folk (Ap-a 115-119). [D] A brahmin versed in s'ruti was I, respected and worshipped; in the Great Grove I had five hundred brahmin youths repeat the mantras. There did there cme a rishi, terrific, on in possession of the five abhi~n~naas, one of great potency; and, upon seeing that one come, that innocent one I accused, Whereupon I said to my students "One indulging in sense-desires is this rishi"; and, even as I spoke, the brahmin youths approved, After which those brahmin youths, as they were begging alms in this and that clan, all said to the people, "One indulging in sense-desires is this rishi". Through the ripening of that deed these five hundred monks have all acquired this accusation through the agency of Sundarikaa (Ap-a 121). [E] Previously, with wealth as the cause, a brother by a different mother I killed; I hurled him into a place where the going is difficult amidst the mountains and crushed him with a stone. Through the ripening of that deed Devadatta cast a stone; (landing) on my foot, a splinter from that rock crushed my bid toe (Ap-a 121f). [F] before, upon seeing a Paccekabuddha on the path as I was playing, as a child, on the highway, I cast a splinter. [265] Through the ripening of that deed was it that now, in this last becoming, Devadatta engaged assassins with the aim of murdering me (Ap-a 122f). [G] Before, when I was mounted on an elephant, the utmost Paccekamuni, who was roaming about in search of alms, I with my elephant assailed. Through the ripening of that deed it was that in Giribbaja, that most excellent of fortified cities, the careering, fierce elephant Naa.laagirii came upto me (Ap-a 123f). [H] A king was I who on foot killed men with a sword; through the ripening of that deed I was roasted severely in hell. As a result of the rest of that deed, he now has ruined the entire skin of my foot, for karma does not perish (Ap-a 124). [I] I was the child of a fisherman in a village of fishermen; upon seeing the small fish slain, I gave birth to a state of euphoria. Through the ripening of that deed I have (throughout) had headache, shilst all the Sakyans got killed (ha~n~ni.msu) at the time that Vi.uu.dabha thrashed (hani) them (Ap-1 125). [J] The saavakas in the Word of (the Buddha) Phussa I abused, saying "May you devour, may you eat, barley; may you not eat rice!" Through the ripening of that deed for three months barly was devoured at such a time as I, invited by the brahmin, resided at Vera~njaa (Ap-a 126). [K] When the fighting contest was in progress, the Mallas'son I foiled; through the ripening of that deed I have have (throughout) had backache (Ap-a 126). [L] When I was a doctor, I purged the son of a wealthy merchant; through the ripening of that deed there is (now) this diarrhoea of mine (Ap-a 127). [M] To the Sugata Kasspa I, Jotipaala, at that time said "How could ther be enlightenment for a bad-headed one, enlightenment being supremely hard to attain?" Through the ripening of that deed, I practised for six years abundant austerities at Uruvelaa, but failed thereby to reach enlightenment. [266] (Whereupon I thought) "Via this path I have not reached the utmost enlightenment; I must be seeking (same) via a bad path, being obstructed by a previous deed. (It is when) I have become one for whom meritorious and evil (deeds) are completely destroyed, one for whom all torments have been averted, (that I), grief-free, rid of despair, rid of aasavas, will attain nibbaana"' (Ap-a 114f). [N] So did the Conqueror, by whom the power of all the abhi~n~naas had been reached, explain (such things) in front of the order of monks at the great lake of Anotatta" (Ap i 299f).< **** Metta Sarah ====== #106068 From: han tun Date: Wed Mar 17, 2010 11:53 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] To Connie and Alex: Apadaana hantun1 Dear Sarah, Connie & all, I am sorry to know that you were grounded by jelly-fish stings. I hope you have fully recovered by now. I am also very grateful to Connie for her help. I have inserted below the Pali text to make it complete for your consideration. -------------------- A] "On the delightful slab of rock, within the proximity of Lake Anotatta, ablaze with divers jewls, (lying) deep inside a diversely fragrant jungle, the Leader of the World, seated there ringed by a great order of monks, explained his own previous deeds, saying: 'Hear, monks, from me of which deed, preformed by me, (the result of) whose karmic remnant is (now) ripening even within Buddhahood: 64. ‘‘Anotattasaraasanne, rama.niiye silaatale; Naanaaratanapajjote, naanaagandhavanantare. 65. ‘‘Mahataa bhikkhusa"nghena, pareto [upeto (udaana.t.thakathaaya.m 4 vagge, 8 sutte)] lokanaayako; AAsiino byaakarii tattha, pubbakammaani attano. 66. [su.naatha bhikkhave mayha.m, ya.m kamma.m pakata.m mayaa; eka.m ara~n~nika.m bhikkhu.m, disvaa dinna.m pilotika.m; patthita.m pa.thama.m buddha.m, buddhattaaya mayaa tadaa; pilotiyassa kammassa, buddhattepi vipaccati; gopaalako pure aasi.m, gaavi.m paajeti gocara.m; pivanti.m udaka.m aavila.m, gaavi.m disvaa nivaarayi.m; tena kammavipaakena, idha pacchimake bhave; vipaasito yadicchaka.m, na hi paatu.m labhaamaha.m (syaa.)] ‘‘Su.naatha bhikkhavo mayha.m, ya.m kamma.m pakata.m mayaa; Pilotikassa kammassa, buddhattepi vipaccati [su.naatha bhikkhave mayha.m, ya.m kamma.m pakata.m mayaa; eka.m ara~n~nika.m bhikkhu.m, disvaa dinna.m pilotika.m; patthita.m pa.thama.m buddha.m, buddhattaaya mayaa tadaa; pilotiyassa kammassa, buddhattepi vipaccati; gopaalako pure aasi.m, gaavi.m paajeti gocara.m; pivanti.m udaka.m aavila.m, gaavi.m disvaa nivaarayi.m; tena kammavipaakena, idha pacchimake bhave; vipaasito yadicchaka.m, na hi paatu.m labhaamaha.m (syaa.)]. -------------------- [B] [264] As the debauched individual named Munaali, I, previously, in some other birth, accused the flawless Paccekabuddha Surabhi. Through the ripening of that deed I long ran on in hell; I experienced painful sensation for many thousands of years. Through that deed's residue there is now, in this last becoming, acquired by me this accusation through the agency of Sundarikaa (Ap-a 119f). 67. ‘‘Munaa.li naamaha.m dhutto, pubbe a~n~naasu jaatisu [a~n~naaya jaatiyaa (udaana a.t.tha.)]; Paccekabuddha.m surabhi.m [sarabhu.m (sii.)], abbhaacikkhi.m aduusaka.m. 68. ‘‘Tena kammavipaakena, niraye sa.msari.m cira.m; Bahuuvassasahassaani, dukkha.m vedesi vedana.m. 69. ‘‘Tena kammaavasesena, idha pacchimake bhave; Abbhakkhaana.m mayaa laddha.m, sundarikaaya kaara.naa. -------------------- [C] Of an all-eclipsing Buddha there was a saavaka named Nanda; after accusing him was there by me long running on in hell. For ten thousand years I long ran on in hell; upon reaching the human frame I acquired abundant accusation. Through that deed's residue Ci~ncamaa.navikaa accused me with what did not take place in front of a body of folk (Ap-a 115-119). 70. ‘‘Sabbaabhibhussa buddhassa, nando naamaasi saavako; Ta.m abbhakkhaaya niraye, cira.m sa.msarita.m mayaa. 71. ‘‘Dasavassasahassaani, niraye sa.msari.m cira.m; Manussabhaava.m laddhaaha.m, abbhakkhaana.m bahu.m labhi.m. 72. ‘‘Tena kammaavasesena, ci~ncamaanavikaa mama.m; Abbhaacikkhi abhuutena, janakaayassa aggato. -------------------- [D] A brahmin versed in s'ruti was I, respected and worshipped; in the Great Grove I had five hundred brahmin youths repeat the mantras. There did there cme a rishi, terrific, on in possession of the five abhi~n~naas, one of great potency; and, upon seeing that one come, that innocent one I accused, Whereupon I said to my students "One indulging in sense-desires is this rishi"; and, even as I spoke, the brahmin youths approved, After which those brahmin youths, as they were begging alms in this and that clan, all said to the people, "One indulging in sense-desires is this rishi". Through the ripening of that deed these five hundred monks have all acquired this accusation through the agency of Sundarikaa (Ap-a 121). 73. ‘‘Braahma.no sutavaa aasi.m, aha.m sakkatapuujito; Mahaavane pa~ncasate, mante vaacemi maa.nave. 74. ‘‘Tatthaagato [tamaagato (ka.)] isi bhiimo, pa~ncaabhi~n~no mahiddhiko; Ta.m caaha.m aagata.m disvaa, abbhaacikkhi.m aduusaka.m. 75. ‘‘Tatoha.m avaca.m sisse, kaamabhogii aya.m isi; Mayhampi bhaasamaanassa, anumodi.msu maa.navaa. 76. ‘‘Tato maa.navakaa sabbe, bhikkhamaana.m kule kule; Mahaajanassa aaha.msu, kaamabhogii aya.m isi. 77. ‘‘Tena kammavipaakena, pa~nca bhikkhusataa ime; Abbhakkhaana.m labhu.m sabbe, sundarikaaya kaara.naa. -------------------- [E] Previously, with wealth as the cause, a brother by a different mother I killed; I hurled him into a place where the going is difficult amidst the mountains and crushed him with a stone. Through the ripening of that deed Devadatta cast a stone; (landing) on my foot, a splinter from that rock crushed my bid toe (Ap-a 121f). 78. ‘‘Vemaatubhaatara.m pubbe, dhanahetu hani.m aha.m; Pakkhipi.m giriduggasmi.m, silaaya ca api.msayi.m. 79. ‘‘Tena kammavipaakena, devadatto sila.m khipi; A"ngu.t.tha.m pi.msayii paade, mama paasaa.nasakkharaa. -------------------- [F] before, upon seeing a Paccekabuddha on the path as I was playing, as a child, on the highway, I cast a splinter. [265] Through the ripening of that deed was it that now, in this last becoming, Devadatta engaged assassins with the aim of murdering me (Ap-a 122f). 80. ‘‘Pureha.m daarako hutvaa, kii.lamaano mahaapathe; Paccekabuddha.m disvaana, magge sakalika.m [sakkhalika.m (ka.)] khipi.m [dahi.m (syaa.)]. 81. ‘‘Tena kammavipaakena, idha pacchimake bhave; Vadhattha.m ma.m devadatto, abhimaare payojayi. -------------------- [G] Before, when I was mounted on an elephant, the utmost Paccekamuni, who was roaming about in search of alms, I with my elephant assailed. Through the ripening of that deed it was that in Giribbaja, that most excellent of fortified cities, the careering, fierce elephant Naa.laagirii came upto me (Ap-a 123f). 82. ‘‘Hatthaaroho pure aasi.m, paccekamunimuttama.m; Pi.n.daaya vicaranta.m ta.m, aasaadesi.m gajenaha.m. 83. ‘‘Tena kammavipaakena, bhanto [danto (ka.)] naa.laagirii gajo; Giribbaje puravare, daaru.no samupaagami [ma.m upaagami (sii.)]. -------------------- [H] A king was I who on foot killed men with a sword; through the ripening of that deed I was roasted severely in hell. As a result of the rest of that deed, he now has ruined the entire skin of my foot, for karma does not perish (Ap-a 124). 84. ‘‘Raajaaha.m patthivo [pattiko (syaa. ka.), khattiyo (udaana a.t.tha.)] aasi.m, sattiyaa purisa.m hani.m; Tena kammavipaakena, niraye paccisa.m bhusa.m. 85. ‘‘Kammuno tassa sesena, idaani sakala.m mama; Paade chavi.m pakappesi [pakopesi (sii.)], na hi kamma.m vinassati. -------------------- [I] I was the child of a fisherman in a village of fishermen; upon seeing the small fish slain, I gave birth to a state of euphoria. Through the ripening of that deed I have (throughout) had headache, shilst all the Sakyans got killed (ha~n~ni.msu) at the time that Vi.uu.dabha thrashed (hani) them (Ap-1 125). 86. ‘‘Aha.m keva.t.tagaamasmi.m, ahu.m keva.t.tadaarako; Macchake ghaatite disvaa, janayi.m somanassaka.m [somanassaha.m (udaana a.t.tha.)]. 87. ‘‘Tena kammavipaakena, siisadukkha.m ahuu mama; Sabbe sakkaa ca ha~n~ni.msu, yadaa hani vi.ta.tubho [vi.ta.tubho (syaa. ka.)]. -------------------- [J] The saavakas in the Word of (the Buddha) Phussa I abused, saying "May you devour, may you eat, barley; may you not eat rice!" Through the ripening of that deed for three months barly was devoured at such a time as I, invited by the brahmin, resided at Vera~njaa (Ap-a 126). 88. ‘‘Phussassaaha.m paavacane, saavake paribhaasayi.m; Yava.m khaadatha bhu~njatha, maa ca bhu~njatha saalayo. 89. ‘‘Tena kammavipaakena, temaasa.m khaadita.m yava.m; Nimantito braahma.nena, vera~njaaya.m vasi.m tadaa. -------------------- [K] When the fighting contest was in progress, the Mallas'son I foiled; through the ripening of that deed I have have (throughout) had backache (Ap-a 126). 90. ‘‘Nibbuddhe vattamaanamhi, mallaputta.m nihe.thayi.m [nisedhayi.m (syaa. ka.)]; Tena kammavipaakena, pi.t.thidukkha.m ahuu mama. -------------------- [L] When I was a doctor, I purged the son of a wealthy merchant; through the ripening of that deed there is (now) this diarrhoea of mine (Ap-a 127). 91. ‘‘Tikicchako aha.m aasi.m, se.t.thiputta.m virecayi.m; Tena kammavipaakena, hoti pakkhandikaa mama. -------------------- [M] To the Sugata Kasspa I, Jotipaala, at that time said "How could ther be enlightenment for a bad-headed one, enlightenment being supremely hard to attain?" Through the ripening of that deed, I practised for six years abundant austerities at Uruvelaa, but failed thereby to reach enlightenment. [266] (Whereupon I thought) "Via this path I have not reached the utmost enlightenment; I must be seeking (same) via a bad path, being obstructed by a previous deed. (It is when) I have become one for whom meritorious and evil (deeds) are completely destroyed, one for whom all torments have been averted, (that I), grief-free, rid of despair, rid of aasavas, will attain nibbaana"' (Ap-a 114f). 92. ‘‘Avacaaha.m jotipaalo, sugata.m kassapa.m tadaa; Kuto nu bodhi mu.n.dassa, bodhi paramadullabhaa. 93. ‘‘Tena kammavipaakena, acari.m dukkara.m bahu.m; Chabbassaanuruve.laaya.m, tato bodhimapaapu.ni.m. 94. ‘‘Naaha.m etena maggena, paapu.ni.m bodhimuttama.m; Kummaggena gavesissa.m, pubbakammena vaarito. 95. ‘‘Pu~n~napaapaparikkhii.no, sabbasantaapavajjito; Asoko anupaayaaso, nibbaayissamanaasavo. -------------------- [N] So did the Conqueror, by whom the power of all the abhi~n~naas had been reached, explain (such things) in front of the order of monks at the great lake of Anotatta" (Ap i 299f).< 96. ‘‘Eva.m jino viyaakaasi, bhikkhusa"nghassa aggato; Sabbaabhi~n~naabalappatto, anotatte mahaasare’’ti. -------------------- Respectfully, Han #106069 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 17, 2010 11:33 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions withOUT A.Sujin February 2010 (8) sarahprocter... Dear pt & all, On kamma and vipaka - --- On Tue, 2/3/10, ptaus1 wrote: >When you return home, if you find some free time, please say a bit more about this as I also find it difficult to reconcile kamma/vipaka on conventional and paramattha levels. Thanks. >>S: 1. Kamma, vipaka, wealth and good birth, worldly conditions - correlating circumstances at birth vipaka and other paramattha dhammas. What is the vipaka, what are the rupas conditioned by kamma? Rob told us about a family in Kathmandu living above a foul-smelling toilet. Running the toilet was their livelihood. ... S: It is a controversial topic (as are all the ones you pick up on, of course!). [I'll start the discussion at a fairly basic level so that others who've not studied as much as you may be able to follow too.] As I see it, we can discuss many topics generally, broadly and conventionally, but the understanding has to get closer and closer to understanding the paramattha dhammas being experienced at this moment. So, in the suttas and Jatakas, for example, we read about all kinds of people performing all kinds of deeds and we also read about people being born rich/poor, beautiful/ugly, in all kinds of realms and circumstances according to past kamma. We even read about the misfortunes experienced by the Buddha as a result of past kamma. For many Buddhists or so-called Buddhists, they are content to accept the conventional explanations at face value: People performing good and bad deeds and various scenarios occurring as a result. It's easy from this to see anything bad in life, such as lost wealth or job, as the result of bad kamma and anything good in life as a result of good kamma. Often, it's all taken for 'Self' and 'Self's experiences'. In reality, as we know there are only cittas, cetasikas and rupas. Any kamma deeds are actually referring to cetana (intention) cetasika arising in the javana process. Such kamma (or cetana) accumulates and is capable of being kamma-patha (a complete course of action) when certain factors are in place. To give a common example which you'll be familiar with, for the cetana to kill to be of the degree of kamma-patha (complete course of action, capable of bringing results), there has to be not only the intention to kill, but also a living-being and the death to occur of that being. When it comes to the results of kamma, these can either be by way of vipaka cittas (mental results of kamma and associated mental factors) or rupas conditioned by kamma. Seeing consciousness is an example of a vipaka citta. Eye-sense is an example of a rupa conditioned by kamma. (Outside the body, all rupas are conditioned by temperature only.) So when the texts refer to results of kamma such as wealth and good birth, we have to consider what realities are being referred to. Otherwise we continue to think in terms of scenarios and situations and take these for being realities or the results of kamma. In the case of wealth, the texts are using this as a kind of short-hand, as I read them, to point to pleasant bodily feeling and other kusala vipakas which experience desirable visible objects, sounds, tastes, aromas and tangible objects. Now this doesn't mean that anyone born into a wealthy family automatically experiences more kusala vipaka that anyone born into a poor family. Clearly, this would be nonsense. Who can say that happy, smiling Indian children living in shacks by the way-side experience more akusala vipaka than rich, over-fed children in many developed countries? Only highly developed panna can tell at any moment whether kusala or akusala vipaka is arising - certainly not the panna or worldlings, I believe. The same applies to other examples of good birth, beauty and so on. Either they are pointing to the kusala vipakas at birth, such as the realm in which the patisandhi citta arises, or they are pointing to the rupas conditioned by past kamma, such as in the case of 'beauty'. Of course, different kammas from the past can condition factors at birth. There may have been the kusala kamma to condition a human birth, but other akusala kamma bringing such results as deformities. With regard to the example above about the poor family living above a foul-smelling toilet, again different citas, different 'causes', different results, all day. We generalise and say what bad vipaka for all the family, but moments of experiencing bad odours are so very brief in a day. One moment of smell and then many, many mind-door processes. It'll depend on accumulations whether kusala or akusala cittas arise after any of the sense door processes, just as in any other case, just as for us now. So, I think we have to always look to the present dhammas which are being illustrated. Now, there are 'rich' and 'poor' experiences all day as a result of past kamma. What is important, however, is the 'guarding' of the sense doors, the development of awareness and understanding of whatever reality appears now - whether it is pleasanat or unpleasant odour, desirable or undesirable visible object or any other dhamma. It really doesn't matter what is the result of what past kamma. What matters is the growth of understanding and detachment from whatever has arisen. If you or anyone have any sutta quotes you'd like to discuss in more detail, we could also do that. [More in U.P. under "Kamma & Vipaka" and other relevant topics.] Metta Sarah ======= #106070 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 12:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] To Connie and Alex: Apadaana sarahprocter... Dear Han, --- On Thu, 18/3/10, han tun wrote: >I am sorry to know that you were grounded by jelly-fish stings. I hope you have fully recovered by now. ... S: Jon's already got his appetite back, so he must be doing OK. The ones we got the other day were pretty mild. ... >I am also very grateful to Connie for her help. I have inserted below the Pali text to make it complete for your consideration. ... S: That's very helpful. I'll print it out and continue our discussion at my snail's pace:-) Metta Sarah ====== #106071 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 12:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Commentary to Dhatukatha sarahprocter... Hi pt, --- On Thu, 18/3/10, ptaus1 wrote: >I was checking to see if there is a translation of Dhatukatha commentary in English - on ATI it says there is one by Narada, but I looked at PTS website and couldn't really find one. Does anyone know about this translation? ... S: I'm pretty sure there isn't one, certainly not one I've seen or heard about. .... >This is what the ATI says: "Pañcappakaranatthak atha (Buddhaghosa; 5th c.). This commentary covers all five books. English translations exist for the portions concerning the Katthavatthu †(B.C. Law, 1940, PTS), Dhatukatha †(U Narada, 1962, PTS), and Patthana †(U Narada, 1969, PTS)" >I'm pretty sure that kathavatthu portion is "The debates commentary". ... S: Yes ... >The patthana portion must be "Guide to conditional relations" by Narada. .... S: This isn't a translation of the commentary. It's, as it says, a "Guide" or introduction to the Patthana. Very useful indeed and worth borrowing/purchasing. ... >But I have no clue what's the dhatukatha portion? ... S: No, I'm confused too. There are translated commentaries to the Dhammasangani, Vibhanga and Kathavatthu only that I'm aware of. The Yamaka itself has not been translated either. Others may be able to help further. Metta Sarah p.s Thx for your help to all with regard to the problem of "squiggles". ====== #106072 From: "Mike" Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 12:41 am Subject: Re: meditation centers/dsg mikenz66 Hi Robert, Nice to talk to you again,k --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > Dear Mike > Lets see if I can summarise your points > > R: 1.you feel that Dsg members and acharn sujin are > seeing/promoting the same truths as your own teachers. Mike: Yes, I haven't seen much here that I have not seen in other sources. Of course, I'm not saying all other sources are equal, there a lot of rubbish out there. > R: 2. you feel that study of the tipitaka by dsg members is > equivalent > ? control wise and doing wise ? as going to a meditation center. Mike: Yes, I have so far failed particularly dismally to understand why the decisions advocated here are are any less a "method" than anything else. > R: 3. that insight and satipatthana can arise at any time and any > place. Mike: Is this a trick question? If you mean there's nothing special about particular organised times and places, then of course. > R: 4 however that insight and satipatthana are more likely to arise > in a meditation setting. Mike: Depends what you mean by a "meditation setting". I don't see meditation "exercises" as the goal, as you talk about in the next question. > 5. techniques are not essential but they do work Mike: Sure, including your (non)-technique. :) > R: 6. deliberately focusing on various object in the present moment > may not be satipatthana abut it helps to set up conditions for > satipatthana. Mike: I don't think anyone I know really claims that it is satipatthana if you talk to them carefully. > R: If you want to add or modify/clariffy any in this list please do > and then I will respond. Mike: Well, I did write a bit on the other threads about the things I thought were unclear about terminology, which I'll go back to since evendently my understaning of time and continuity and so on is completely different from how some people understand it. Mike: I would also add that, as I pointed out on some other threads, I'm not interested in straw-man arguments with assumptions or implications about what other people are thinking or doing. In particular, I don't know anyone who thinks that they have control over ultimate dhammas. The whole point, as far as I can tell, is to realise that this stuff is uncontrollable. The disagreement seems to me is just over how to approach that realisation. Metta Mike #106073 From: "Mike" Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 12:52 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) mikenz66 Hi Sukinder, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sukinder wrote: > > Hi Mike, > > > I'll try to make this my last response. I sense that you are getting > tired of me, with good reason of course. ;-) Mike: Hmm, perhaps I'm just tired in general... I think I was just trying to make the point, perhaps a little strongly, that I have no interest in straw-man arguments which make blanket assumptions about how others think or about their understanding. I'm only interested in discussing the issues. I asked for clarification of the terms because people here use a lot of English words in ways that, it is becoming apparent to me, is a bit different from what I'm used to. Clearly my understanding of the present moment, continuity, and so on is different from many people here. I'll go look at the other messages and try to make sense of them... Metta Mike #106074 From: "Mike" Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 1:16 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) mikenz66 Hi Ken, thanks for the input. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > > > Hi Mike, > > Thanks for the random thoughts. > > --------- > KH: > > So, on that basis, is anatta about no doing? > > > > > Mike: > Well, this is the problem. You (the Collective) take this "no doing" idea as axiomatic, so as far as you are concerned any discussion about it basically gets turned back into: "You don't understand anatta, otherwise you wouldn't say that." Which may be true, but isn't particularly useful in a discussion. Perhaps > the problem is that you (or I) are not clear about what "doing", "action" etc are. > > Mike: Here are a few random thoughts: > > Mike: Are the words "doing" and "action" you use above translations of Pali terms? If not, you'll have to define them carefully if you're going to use them to discuss your assertions about reality (just as, in Physics we are careful to define what "work" is [force times distance] and we don't get it mixed up with our jobs...). > > > --------- > > KH: They are defined as pannatti (concept). Mike: Hmm, that doesn't help. I understand that they are concepts, but I was asking what you mean by those particular concepts. > --------------- > Mike: > Also, I'm not completely clear about how you see the relationship between anatta and "momentariness" (I think the definition of that term is reasonably clear, though it could also perhaps do with some tidying up at some point). I tend to see them as two separate characteristics (which are, of course, related). > --------------- > > KH: If there was a self it would have to be more than momentary, wouldn't it? What would be the use of it otherwise? Mike: Yes, I understand that, and of course I can see the relationship. But they are different characteristics. As far as I can understand, nibanna, is anatta, but not anicca. > ------------------ > Mike: > All this stuff about "no actions beyond the present moment" actually seems like a completely trivial observation. Where else in time would actions happen? Where does anyone state otherwise? Presumably you are using "action" and "present moment" in a different way from how I would them, since you seem to be using it as the basis to argue your points, but to me the present is, by definition, where actions happen. Perhaps I've been in physics too long... > ------------------- > > I don't understand; are you saying that you tie your shoelaces (for example) in one moment? In one trillionth of a second. (?) > > Surely you can see that only conditioned dhammas can perform functions from beginning to end in that sort of timeframe. Mike: We (or at lease I) seem to be confused. I understand the present moment as by definition as when things happen. (It happens to take quite a few present moments for the shoelaces to get tied.) What has already happened is in the past, what might happen is in the future. Perhsps I bring too much baggage from my (conceptual!) physics world, but I'm clearly completely confused about how you understand dhammas. > > --------------------- > Mike: Since there is the concept of "conditioning" the fact that dhammas rise and fall rapidly does not necessarily imply lack of some sort of long-time (imperfect) continuity. Otherwise we wouldn't have the results of kamma, or memory for that matter... > ----------------------- > > Are you sure of that? Consider the dictionary meaning of continuity: > > "1. unchanging quality: the fact of staying the same, of being consistent throughout, or of not stopping or being interrupted > measures to ensure continuity of care > > 2. consistent whole: something that remains consistent or uninterrupted throughout" (Encarta) Mike: No, none of those. Maybe I shouldn't use the word "continuity", but I can't think of a better word. Clearly one dhamma conditions the next (or some subsequent dhamma), otherwise there would be no kamma/vipaka, no arising of panna, and so on. Just random noise. I don't think anyone is asserting that. > > Several DSG members insist there must be some kind of continuity of conciousness, or stream of consciousness. They refuse to call it a self, but what else could it be? > > In fact there is no continuity, there are only the fleeting namas and rupas of the present moment. Mike: Which condition the next present moment, otherwise, as I said above, there would just be randomness, not causality. Mike: Thanks for the interesting thoughts. Mike #106075 From: Vince Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 2:53 am Subject: Re[2]: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) cerovzt@... Hi Sukinder, Do you remember of me? :-) Hope all goes well for you you says: > Suk: Why guess? Why not let the Dhamma be the guide? > If your real-life Buddhist friends believe as some of us do, in dhammas > being all there is at any given moment and that can be studied, what is > their reason for meditating? I share what you says about disposition to understand and seated meditation. However, also I think it can be something natural in some people. I mean, maybe it can happens by their own nature as for other people is the non-meditation. If we agree the restriction of senses and observation for a while, it can be another natural situation for the human being, then it would be just another ambit of practice. What do you think? best regards Vince, #106076 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 3:17 am Subject: Re: meditation centers/dsg rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Mike" wrote: > > Hi Robert, Nice to talk to you again,k Nice to talk to you too, I know you always consider these discussions seriously. > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > Dear Mike > > Lets see if I can summarise your points > > > > R: 1.you feel that Dsg members and acharn sujin are > > seeing/promoting the same truths as your own teachers. > Mike: Yes, I haven't seen much here that I have not seen in other sources. Of course, I'm not saying all other sources are equal, there a lot of rubbish out there. _____________ Sure I understand, wee need to look at things point by point, there is also some good Dhamma taught at some centers. However I often feel like the meditation advocates are less critical of techniques and more critical of texts. I had a discussion recently on Dhammawheel where things I quoted from the Commentaries were discounted because the same words weren't in the suttas. Yet they didn't expect to see quotes about the techniques that some of them follow rigorously for hours weeks and months. It seems odd to me? But this might be a strawman as you certainly aren't in that category. > > R: 2. you feel that study of the tipitaka by dsg members is > > equivalent > > ? control wise and doing wise ? as going to a meditation center. > Mike: Yes, I have so far failed particularly dismally to understand why the decisions advocated here are are any less a "method" than anything else. __________ These are these five rewards in listening to the Dhamma. Which five? "One hears what one has not heard before. One clarifies what one has heard before. One gets rid of doubt. One's views are made straight. One's mind grows serene. "These are the five rewards in listening to the Dhamma." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an...5.202.than.html and "When, Bhikkhus, a Noble Disciple listens carefully to the Dhamma, alert with keen ears, attending to it as a matter of crucial concern, as something of vital importance, directing his entire mind to it, in that very moment the Five Mental Hindrances are absent in him. On that occasion the Seven Links to Awakening develop towards complete fulfilment...> Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book [V: 95-6] section 46: The Links. 38: Unhindered... Now you don't see textual references saying the rewards of applying the various diverse techniques are a prerequisite for the arising of the wisdom factor- Because as you know without panna, wisdom, being present, one is merely doing some sort of ritual- whatever one is doing in regards to religious aims. ---------------------- > > > R: 3. that insight and satipatthana can arise at any time and any > > place. > Mike: Is this a trick question? If you mean there's nothing special about particular organised times and places, then of course. I just wanted to confim that you agree that anytime there can be satipatthana: One doesn't need to be sitting, walking slowly or quickly, or in a quiet place? > > R: 4 however that insight and satipatthana are more likely to arise > in a meditation setting. > Mike: Depends what you mean by a "meditation setting". I don't see meditation "exercises" as the goal, as you talk about in the next question. > > > 5. techniques are not essential but they do work > Mike: Sure, including your (non)-technique. :) Well maybe there is some difference betwen a nontechnique and a technique: I don't believe any method can lead to vipassana or satipatthana arising. let me rant a bit: what is patipatti, sometimes translated as right 'practice'? Panna, wisdom, is a mental factor, that arises when there are correct conditions. One may understand correctly a Dhamma sutta, and at that time there is panna arising. This is panna at the level of pariyatti. Then there may be direct knowing of a characteristic of a reality with panna - and this is patipatti. However, panna is a momentary reality that arises and passes away exactly as rapidly as citta. So panna can arise momentarily and know, do some degree, the nature of its object. Impossible for anyone to control this (i) because there is no one and (ii) it is all happening far too quickly, even if there was this imaginary person. Knowing this there will be detachment from trying to get something, letting go will happen naturally, and panna can then work its subtle ways. If there is not detachment then there is lobha (attachment) and this is combined with avijja (ignorance ) that is already so powerful. Thus without real understanding effort is counterproductive and is an aspect of wrong path. The pali term patipatti is taken to mean something one does. But genuine patipatti is momentary insight, it is not a matter of where or what one is doing, it is a mental phenomena. Majjima Nikaya 64, we read: "An untaught, ordinary person ... abides with a mind enslaved by adherence to rules and observances [silabbata-paramasa- pariyutthitena cetasa viharati]." Despite what this sutta says we might not feel we have much of this tendency to silabbataparamsa . However unknowingly, almost all efforts we make in the spiritual realm are tied in with this fetter. It is very powerful and most people are unaware of it. It gets worse if while trying to rise up out of the flood of concepts we struggle with subtle lobha and subtle selfview. Already there is avijja(ignoranace) and when it allies with lobha there is no way out. Unless that is, the lobha and subtle selfview are seen as they are; and if that happens these enemies become friends because they show the way, the way of insighting realities, elements, as they are. That is why it is convincing to me that the path should be about realties appearing now- not ones we think might better suit our lofty aims that arise while we are in a center or focusing etc. How subtle is the right way? Anguttara Nikaya (Tika-Nipata No. 128): Venerable Anuruddha said to Venerable Sariputta, "Friend Sariputta, with the divine eye that is purified, transcending human ken, I can see the thousandfold world-system. Firm is my energy, unremitting; my mindfulness is alert and unconfused; the body is tranquil and unperturbed; my mind is concentrated and one-pointed. And yet my mind is not freed from cankers, not freed from clinging." "Friend Anuruddha," said the Venerable Sariputta, "that you think thus of your divine eye, this is conceit in you. That you think thus of your firm energy, your alert mindfulness, your unperturbed body and your concentrated mind, this is restlessness in you. That you think of your mind not being freed from the cankers, this is worrying in you." And Venerable Anuruddha had genuine jhana, he had mastery of jhana.. Enough for now best robert #106077 From: Ken O Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 6:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 ashkenn2k Dear Ken H >---------- > >I just have! :-) Let me paraphrase the commentary I have just quoted: The general sense of "awareness of method" is not taught in the Buddha's Dhamma. Only the particular sense of "awareness of method" is taught. That is, awareness of dhammas performing their functions. > >The Vism (for example) says that a beginner samatha meditator counts each breath. But the Vism is not teaching us to be aware (in the general sense) of breath counting. It is teaching us to be aware (in the particular sense) of conditioned dhammas. > >Why isn't it teaching us to be aware in the general sense of breath counting? Because breath counting is only a concept. It has no efficacy - no impact in the real world. That kind of awareness is not the way out! >------------ ------ KO:? Yes breath counting is concept. Definitely there must be awareness to the dhamma because samantha bhavana requires strong sati and panna. ?That does not discount it as counting 1 to 10 as describe in Visud and the commentaries,?this is still a method.? >------------ ------ > >When there is beginners' samatha bhavana, certain ways of thinking will be conditioned. A beginner might think, "I should count each breath," or, "I am counting each breath," etc. > >When there is intermediate- level samatha bhavana, different thinking will be conditioned (e.g., "I will simply note, 'in breath,' and, 'out breath.'" > >And so on it goes. Different concepts are created at different times. > >The texts are not teaching us to see those concepts as a method. That would be awareness in the general sense - fit for dogs and jackals. The texts are always teaching the particular sense of awareness - fit for monks. > >When there is weak samatha bhavana, the meditation object is being experienced by a weak level of panna cetasika that has a weak understanding of the difference between kusala and akusala. In so doing, it is strengthening kusala concentration and kusala effort etc. That is the real method. > >When there is medium samatha bhavana, a stronger panna cetasika is doing the same thing. And so on. The 'particular' sense of awareness experiences any of those dhammas as they perform their functions. That is the right understanding the term "method". KO:??? The text including suttas?taught two approaches, samantha and vipassana.? Visud describe the steps clearly, that is the method despite what you have describe or explain.? If you said it is not, then you must show textual support.??the example of dogs and jackals are used to show that if we just do breathing without understanding of the object of breathing, we are no different from them.? ?Samantha bhavana must start from strong sati, without it, it could not?condition the mind to fix on the object because the 6 senses will keep craving for pleasureable objects.?? This method is not suitable for the beginners or those sati that is weak.??It is extremely difficult to undertake.?? I remember reading the text, out of one thousand of those who attain?access concentration only one attain jhanas.? So I always in favour of?the vipassana bhavana but I cannot discount those who wish to practise samantha.? It could be their accumulations or their lobha, so they have to be very mindful amd must have a correct understanding of samantha bhavana.? If they think of using it to control thoughts, that is very wrong.? It must be awareness of the samantha object and not observing or controlling. Cheers Ken O #106078 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 3:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 upasaka_howard Hi, KenH (and KenO) - In a message dated 3/17/2010 8:39:16 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: The general sense of "awareness of method" is not taught in the Buddha's Dhamma. Only the particular sense of "awareness of method" is taught. That is, awareness of dhammas performing their functions. The Vism (for example) says that a beginner samatha meditator counts each breath. But the Vism is not teaching us to be aware (in the general sense) of breath counting. It is teaching us to be aware (in the particular sense) of conditioned dhammas. Why isn't it teaching us to be aware in the general sense of breath counting? Because breath counting is only a concept. It has no efficacy - no impact in the real world. That kind of awareness is not the way out! ============================== Yes, of course! As regards the meditation taught by the Buddha, whether the particular meditating on a given occasion is slanted towards samatha or vipassana or is balanced/in tandem, thinking is at most a preliminary step leading towards the meditation proper. It is at most an initial thinking that directs attention. When actually meditating, there is no thinking about "breath" or "breathing." There is attending directly to bodily sensations (and the ebb and flow of other 5-sense-door and mind-door phenomena among all the foundations of mindfulness), and if the process is going well, with increasing equanimity and clarity. Self-conscious directing of attention is in play only at the early stages, after which attention shifts naturally and automatically based on prior study & contemplation and on current inclination, especially the natural inclination to relinquish sub-optimal qualities of the current mind state - for example, the relinquishing that leads to shifting from one jhana to the more peaceful, next-higher jhana. With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #106079 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 7:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] "Dhamma Snippets" Site nilovg Dear Kevin, Op 18-mrt-2010, om 3:38 heeft Kevin Farrell het volgende geschreven: > Dear Friends, I have begun creating a small new website. It will > mostly house short but pertinent "snippets" of dhamma from various > places ------- N: A good idea, but now people have to reach your website first. You could also quote some very small sections and mail these to dsg. In a similar way as Ken O did. Nina. #106080 From: Kevin Farrell Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 7:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] "Dhamma Snippets" Site farrellkevin80 Kevin: Hi Nina. Great idea! Hope you are well. Kevin Nina wrote: "Dear Kevin, Op 18-mrt-2010, om 3:38 heeft Kevin Farrell het volgende geschreven: > Dear Friends, I have begun creating a small new website. It will > mostly house short but pertinent "snippets" of dhamma from various > places ------- N: A good idea, but now people have to reach your website first. You could also quote some very small sections and mail these to dsg. In a similar way as Ken O did. Nina. #106081 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 7:48 am Subject: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Fives (319, 19) and commentary. nilovg Dear friends, Walshe DN 33.2.1(19) 'Five mental blockages (ceto-khiilaa): Here, a monk has [iii 238] doubts and hesitations (a) about the Teacher, is dissatisfied and cannot settle doubt in his mind. Thus his mind is not inclined and cannot settle in his mind. Thus his mind is not inclined towards ardour, devotion, persistence and effort; (b) about the Dhamma ...; (c) about the Sangha ...; (d) about the training ...; (e) he is angry and displeased with his fellows in the holy life, he feels depressed and negative towards them. Thus his mind is not inclined towards ardour, devotion, persistence and effort. (Pa~nca cetokhilaa. Idhaavuso, bhikkhu satthari ka'nkhati vicikicchati naadhimuccati na sampasiidati. Yo so, aavuso, bhikkhu satthari ka'nkhati vicikicchati naadhimuccati na sampasiidati, tassa citta.m na namati aatappaaya anuyogaaya saataccaaya padhaanaaya, yassa citta.m na namati aatappaaya anuyogaaya saataccaaya padhaanaaya, aya.m pa.thamo cetokhilo. Puna capara.m, aavuso, bhikkhu dhamme ka'nkhati vicikicchati, pe, sa'nghe ka'nkhati vicikicchati, sikkhaaya ka'nkhati vicikicchati, sabrahmacaariisu kupito hoti anattamano aahatacitto khilajaato. Yo so, aavuso, bhikkhu sabrahmacaariisu kupito hoti anattamano aahatacitto khilajaato, tassa citta.m na namati aatappaaya anuyogaaya saataccaaya padhaanaaya, yassa citta.m na namati aatappaaya anuyogaaya saataccaaya padhaanaaya, aya.m pa~ncamo cetokhilo.) --------- N: We read in the Dispeller of Delusion (II, p. 264) which gives a shorter version of the commentary, that cetokhiila are ?the hardened states, the useless states, the thorny states of the mind?. The co : thaddhabhaavaa, of a hard, stiff nature. The citta lacks sobhanacetasikas such as pliability, wieldiness that arise with kusala citta. As to doubt about the teacher, he doubts about his bodily features (the characteristics of a ?Great Man? (mahaapurisa) and about his qualities. He doubts: ?Is his body adorned with the thirtytwo supreme characteristics or is it not? ------ N: These are the special bodily features of a Buddha. ------------- Co: He also doubts about the teacher?s excellent qualities: Has he or has he not omniscient knowledge capable of knowing the past, future and present? As to the words, ?he is not inclined to ardour (aatappa), the co: he has no viriya, energy or effort. As to the word ?devotion (anuyoga), having devotion again and again. As to persistence (saatacca), persisting continuously. These words are at the end of each of the objects of doubt. As to doubt in the Dhamma, this is pariyatti dhamma and pa.tivedha dhamma. The co elaborates about pariyatti dhamma as the Dhamma as explained by the Buddha in the Tipi.taka with eightyfour thousand units of text. He doubts about this. He doubts about the pa.tivedha dhamma: whether or not it is so that the Path is the outcome of vipassanaa, that fruition is the outcome of the path, that relinquishment of all sa?nkhaara dhammas is nibbaana. He doubts about the Sangha. The Co. states that he doubts about the eight kinds of persons who have reached the four Paths and four Fruitions, who are of such conduct as is stated by the words ujupa.tipanno, who have entered on the straight way, etc. He doubts about the training. This is the threefold training of higher siila,adhisiila, higher concentration, adhicitta, higher pa~n~naa , adhipa~n~naa. As to the words:? he is angry and displeased with his fellows in the holy life?, this is the fifth item of the harsh nature of citta (thaddabhaavo), a useless state of mind. ----------- N: When right understanding of realities has not been developed sufficiently, one?s confidence in the teachings is not strong enough and doubts occur as to the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha and the threefold training. At the moment of right awareness and understanding of naama and ruupa there is higher siila, the guarding of the senses, higher citta, right concentration accompanying right understanding, and higher pa~n~naa. As we read, there is lack of ardour, devotion and energy to develop understanding of realities that eventually will lead to enligthenment. As we read, he doubts about pariyatti dhamma and pa.tivedha dhamma. If one carefully studies the scriptures there will be more understanding of all realities that appear, such as seeing, visible object, attachment to visible object or thinking. When the understanding of this level has become firm it will lead to pa.tipatti: direct awareness and understanding of naama and ruupa and then to pa.tivedha, the realisation of the truth. In this way doubts will gradually diminish. The sotaapanna does not take any reality for self or mine, and his confidence in the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha is unshakable. He has completely eradicated doubt. ******* Nina. #106082 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 7:52 am Subject: Abhidhamma series, no 3. nilovg > Dear friends, > > Abhidhamma series, no 3: Dhamma in detail. > > In all three parts of the Tipi?aka we are taught about ``dhamma'', > about everything which is real. Seeing is a dhamma, it is real. > Colour is a dhamma, it is real. Feeling is a dhamma, it is real. > Our defilements are dhammas, they are realities. > > When the Buddha attained enlightenment he clearly knew all dhammas > as they really are. He taught the ``Dhamma'', the teaching on > realities, to us in order that we also may know dhammas as they > are. Without the Buddha's teaching we would be ignorant of reality. > We are inclined to take for permanent what is impermanent, for > pleasant what is sorrowful and unsatisfactory (dukkha), and for > ``self'' what is non-self. The aim of all three parts of the > Tipi?aka is to teach people the development of the way leading to > the end of defilements. > In the Suttanta, the ``Discourses'', the Dhamma is explained to > different people at different places on various occasions. The > Buddha taught about all realities appearing through the ``six > doors'' of eyes, ears, nose, tongue, bodysense and mind. He taught > about cause and effect and about the practice leading to the end of > all sorrow. > > As regards the Abhidhamma, this is an exposition of all realities > in detail. The prefix ``abhi'' is used in the sense of > ``preponderance'' or ``distinction''. ``Abhidhamma'' means ``higher > dhamma'' or ``dhamma in detail''. The form of this part of the > Tipi?aka is different, but the aim is the same: the eradication of > wrong view and eventually of all defilements. Thus, when we study > the many enumerations of realities, we should not forget the real > purpose of our study. The intellectual understanding of realities > (pariyatti) should encourage us to the practice (pa.tipatti) which > is necessary for the realization of the truth (pa.tivedha). While > we are studying the different mental phenomena (n?mas) and physical > phenomena (r?pas) and while we are pondering over them, we can be > reminded to be aware of the n?ma and r?pa which appear at this > moment. In this way we will discover more and more that the > Abhidhamma explains everything which is real, that is, the > ``worlds'' appearing through the six doors of the senses and the mind. > > ****** > Nina. > > > #106083 From: Kevin Farrell Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 8:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] "Dhamma Snippets" Site farrellkevin80 Kevin: Hi again Nina. On second thought, we do get a lot of mail here already, so perhaps I will just send a monthly digest of all what I posted there to the list. : ) Kevin Nina wrote: Dear Kevin, Op 18-mrt-2010, om 3:38 heeft Kevin Farrell het volgende geschreven: > Dear Friends, I have begun creating a small new website. It will > mostly house short but pertinent "snippets" of dhamma from various > places ------- N: A good idea, but now people have to reach your website first. You could also quote some very small sections and mail these to dsg. In a similar way as Ken O did. Nina. #106084 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 8:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] "Dhamma Snippets" Site nilovg Dear Kevin, Op 18-mrt-2010, om 16:12 heeft Kevin Farrell het volgende geschreven: > Kevin: Hi again Nina. On second thought, we do get a lot of mail > here already, so perhaps I will just send a monthly digest of all > what I posted there to the list. : ) -------- N: Also a digest is a lot to read. I agree, we have so many mails. What about half a page or a whole page now and then? Nina. #106085 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 4:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) upasaka_howard Hi, mike (and Ken) - In a message dated 3/18/2010 5:11:42 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, mikenz66@... writes: Mike: No, none of those. Maybe I shouldn't use the word "continuity", but I can't think of a better word. ========================== Suggestion: 'gaplessness'? With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #106086 From: "sukinderpal" Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 9:14 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) sukinderpal Hello Vince and Pt, ========= > Do you remember of me? :-) > Hope all goes well for you S: Yes, I remember you and your girlfriend. I was glad to see you posting here and wanted to send a welcome note, but conditions were such that I could not do it at the time. ========== > you says: > > > Suk: Why guess? Why not let the Dhamma be the guide? > > If your real-life Buddhist friends believe as some of us do, in dhammas > > being all there is at any given moment and that can be studied, what is > > their reason for meditating? Vince: > I share what you says about disposition to understand and seated meditation. > However, also I think it can be something natural in some people. > > I mean, maybe it can happens by their own nature as for other people > is the non-meditation. If we agree the restriction of senses and > observation for a while, it can be another natural situation for the > human being, then it would be just another ambit of practice. > > What do you think? S: This is what I think: Yes, we don't know what the accumulations are, not only of others, but also our own. But then how do we ever come to know our own accumulations? First, it must be panna which knows this. Second, the object must be a reality and not some `general idea' based on conventional observation. I think for example, when strong attachment to a certain kind of food arises; panna could know this and a conclusion can be then made that one has the particular accumulations. Likewise if there is metta or any other kusala tendency, this is known in the moment by panna. Each person will have to find out for himself the kusala and akusala tendencies he or she has. When it comes to panna itself, I think this becomes especially important. After all, ignorance does not know that it does not know and when it comes to wrong view, the impression is that it knows correctly when in fact it must be wrong. So it helps to be patient in this regard and know that one can never hear and consider enough the Dhamma. Coming to the person who has accumulations for `seated meditation', sure, if he likes to sit, then he likes to sit. But then we are trying to determine whether this involves panna or something else and which may be taken for panna. With regard to the development of samatha in particular, we know that this is about knowing harm in attachment and the value of kusala which is freedom, though temporary, from the akusala. I wouldn't think therefore, that any of this circles around the fact that someone has the inclination to `sit in meditation' or not. Between any two persons, it is not like one develops samatha in daily life because this is his tendency and another likes to meditate because for him it is a better situation. As I said, rather it is about panna which knows harm in akusala and value of kusala. When it comes then to the level which sees danger in sense contacts, this must necessarily involve wisdom of even higher level. But still, it must be based on knowing one's own citta and not a matter simply, of having the senses restricted. With regard particularly to the Buddhists referred to by Pt, that was about the development of vipassana. The reference was to knowing nama and rupa at anytime, while still having the habit to sit in meditation. Again the habit to sit is the habit to sit, but what we need to find out is whether this is with right or wrong view. If it is Right View which understands nama and rupa and the reality / concept distinction, then thinking about development in terms of another and better time and place should not imo come in. The mention of `meditation' did not put it on the same ground as other activities such as watching TV. It was to show that it had a particular purpose which would then make it more or less necessary. Indeed even you while trying to make this sound as if it could be natural for some people to do this, see a need to qualify it with `ambit of practice', and I think this is wrong. There is ever only the present moment to be known, for someone with very high level of panna, the measure is that this can arise *at anytime*. It is never about greater frequency in some particular time, place and posture and less in others. To think along those lines must in fact be a hindrance. In other words, natural or not, the very thought to meditate, making this *different* from other times, this I believe can't be something that panna of the vipassana kind would entertain. What do you think? ;-) Metta, Sukinder #106087 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 9:20 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) scottduncan2 Dear Mike, Howard, and Ken, Regarding: Mike: "No, none of those. Maybe I shouldn't use the word 'continuity', but I can't think of a better word." H: Suggestion: 'gaplessness'?" Scott: These are just two sides of the same coin and both are problematic. 'Continuity' is, more often than not, just another way of referring to 'self' (i.e. 'the continuity' is somehow greater than the sum of its parts). Howard's 'gaplessness' will lead to the untenable notions of 'zero duration' and dhammas without individual characteristics. These are roads that have been travelled many times here. The solution is to keep in mind that each moment of consciousness arises (with duration) and falls away completely prior to the arising of the next moment and 'continuity' can only refer descriptively to the sequence of discrete dhammas. Sincerely, Scott. #106088 From: "sukinderpal" Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 9:06 am Subject: Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) sukinderpal Hi Mike, > > I'll try to make this my last response. I sense that you are getting > > tired of me, with good reason of course. ;-) > > Mike: Hmm, perhaps I'm just tired in general... I think I was just trying to make the point, perhaps a little strongly, that I have no interest in straw-man arguments which make blanket assumptions about how others think or about their understanding. I'm only interested in discussing the issues. > > I asked for clarification of the terms because people here use a lot of English words in ways that, it is becoming apparent to me, is a bit different from what I'm used to. Clearly my understanding of the present moment, continuity, and so on is different from many people here. I'll go look at the other messages and try to make sense of them... S: Again I failed to understand your intentions. :-/ And when I reread my post this morning it sounded quite self-righteous, something I am quick to notice in others but almost never in myself. So I should apologize for all this. Actually I did perceive that you were not satisfied with the responses from others like Ken H and not only from me, and I should have taken that into consideration when reading your post. Next time I hope that I can be more careful. Metta, Sukinder #106089 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 6:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) upasaka_howard Hi, Scott (and Mike & Ken) - In a message dated 3/18/2010 12:40:04 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Mike, Howard, and Ken, Regarding: Mike: "No, none of those. Maybe I shouldn't use the word 'continuity', but I can't think of a better word." H: Suggestion: 'gaplessness'?" Scott: These are just two sides of the same coin and both are problematic. 'Continuity' is, more often than not, just another way of referring to 'self' (i.e. 'the continuity' is somehow greater than the sum of its parts). Howard's 'gaplessness' will lead to the untenable notions of 'zero duration' and dhammas without individual characteristics. These are roads that have been travelled many times here. ------------------------------------------------- Abhidhamma admits of no gaps in consciousness. Also, I don't find untenable th notions of zero duration or own-nature. Perhaps untenability is in the eye of the beholder. :-) ---------------------------------------------- The solution is to keep in mind that each moment of consciousness arises (with duration) and falls away completely prior to the arising of the next moment and 'continuity' can only refer descriptively to the sequence of discrete dhammas. Sincerely, Scott. =============================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #106090 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 11:56 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "...Perhaps untenability is in the eye of the beholder. :-)" Scott: ;-) I think untenability is in the hands of the holder! Sincerely, Scott. #106091 From: han tun Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 3:13 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma Series, no 2. Paramattha dhamma and pa~n~natti. hantun1 Dear Nina, A Burmese Sayadaw once said that: (1) paramattha is covered by pa~n~natti. For an ordinary uninstructed person it is difficult to penetrate through pa~n~natti to see paramattha. (2) pa~n~natti is covered by kilesas. For an ordinary uninstructed person it is difficult to penetrate through kilesas to know pa~n~natti as pa~n~natti. What is your thought on the above? Respectively, Han #106092 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 5:07 pm Subject: Re: "Dhamma Snippets" Site kenhowardau Hi Kevin, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Kevin Farrell wrote: > > Dear Friends, I have begun creating a small new website. It will mostly house short but pertinent "snippets" of dhamma from various places including books by Nina van Gorkom and Ajahn Sujin, the Tipitika and Commentaries, and quotes from members of DSG and so forth ------------------------ Well done, Kevin, very commendable! I must admit, however, that I rarely go beyond DSG for Dhamma study. I am not a good reader - too lazy and too easily distracted - and so getting through all the daily posts here is about my limit. So I can't promise I will be a regular reader. But if you post extracts from your site to DSG I will be sure to read them. :-) Ken H #106093 From: "Mike" Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 5:43 pm Subject: Re: meditation centers/dsg mikenz66 Hello again, Robert, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Mike" wrote: > > > > Hi Robert, Nice to talk to you again,k > > Nice to talk to you too, I know you always consider these discussions seriously. Mike: Thanks for the post. I'll have to think about it for a while. Best Wishes, Mike #106094 From: Vince Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 6:07 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) cerovzt@... Dear Sukinder, > Yes, we don't know what the accumulations are, not only of others, > but also our own. But then how do we ever come to know our own > accumulations? First, it must be panna which knows this. agreed. Awakening is by panna action with independence of body. > Each person will have to find out for himself the kusala and > akusala tendencies he or she has. When it comes to panna itself, I > think this becomes especially important. After all, ignorance does > not know that it does not know and when it comes to wrong view, the > impression is that it knows correctly when in fact it must be wrong. > So it helps to be patient in this regard and know that one can never > hear and consider enough the Dhamma. I'm not sure about that. Panna cannot be a wrong knowledge because it means the contrary thing. I think a problem is that when we investigate the acquired knowledge of what we name "real" (instead "concept") also we can realize that we don't posses nothing at all, except a security of a right movement of the mind. However, remembrance of that movement doesnt' belongs to a mind-object and then our deluded mind needs to put some object to build a form in order to grasp it. This is something to consider around emptiness of consciousness and rest of paramata-dhammas. On my side also I think quite important regarding the distinction of "real" and "conceptual". Such division very repeated here and I agree. It is needed for the practice. Although als, one cannot fall in the obsession towards what is real in front what is conceptual, until the point to forget anatta. Our own obsessions regarding truth are like beloved pets because they entertain our knowledge and are guiding us. But also one should be aware they are like phantoms, and they must be vanished some day. I mean the investigation of what is real in front concept causes a right disposition for the arising of panna. However also there is a need of not forgetting emptiness of what is real. I had some discussions here with this matter, because I understand many times there is this invisible" view underlying some ideas around real and concept. Trying to unveil reality of objects (included paramatta-dhammas) is important but I understand also one must be aware of the empty nature of what is real. > Coming to the person who has accumulations for `seated meditation', > sure, if he likes to sit, then he likes to sit. But then we are > trying to determine whether this involves panna or something else > and which may be taken for panna. yes, of course. This is the main point. > I said, rather it is about panna which knows harm in akusala and > value of kusala. When it comes then to the level which sees danger > in sense contacts, this must necessarily involve wisdom of even > higher level. But still, it must be based on knowing one's own > citta and not a matter simply, of having the senses restricted. yes. There are episodes of Buddha recommending restriction of senses but to bikkhus who still were not arhant. So it is just another practice. But when wisdom is not enough there is practice. Even when somebody can understand death as delusion, still there are miles in order not fearing death. So restriction of senses can be understable according persons and situations. Of course somebody can be engaged in a practice without including restriction of senses but putting all confidence in wisdom. Another thing is until where restriction of senses really is not important in any situation. I don't know. > Again the habit to sit is the habit to sit, but what we > need to find out is whether this is with right or wrong view. yes, of course. > If it is Right View which understands nama and rupa and the reality > / concept distinction, then thinking about development in terms of > another and better time and place should not imo come in. but while there is not arhathood there are better or worse situations. Some people prefer to be engaged in seated meditation while others in study, faith, etc... In fact this discussion exists because that. At least I understand Buddha had both type of disciples according Suttas, and he explained the different ways to be alliberated. In all the ways panna would be the agent, in this point I agree. > The mention of `meditation' did not put it on the same ground as other > activities such as watching TV. It was to show that it had a > particular purpose which would then make it more or less necessary. > Indeed even you while trying to make this sound as if it could be > natural for some people to do this, see a need to qualify it with > `ambit of practice', and I think this is wrong. yes, "meditation" is a word absent in the Suttas but we find "bhavana" which means "cultivation". I think it depends of the person. As you says, there is the "meditator" who meditate trying something. But there are also "meditators" who meditate without intention. They understand seated meditation as an expression of non-effort and non-intention. Such thing exists in example in Japanese and Chinese Zen, and they have a lot of writings about that. I ignore if such scriptural development exists in Theravada but for sure there is some people (even if we think they are few) who also can keep a similar point. As you lives in Thailand and surrounded of people seated everywhere and expecting superpowers perhaps you think I'm very optimistic...hehe :-) > There is ever only the present moment to be known, for someone with > very high level of panna, the measure is that this can arise *at > anytime*. It is never about greater frequency in some particular > time, place and posture and less in others. To think along those > lines must in fact be a hindrance. In other words, natural or not, > the very thought to meditate, making this *different* from other > times, this I believe can't be something that panna of the vipassana > kind would entertain. > What do you think? ;-) unfortunately I agree with most of what you says but I'm trying to get some points to contradict these ideas until I can :-) best wishes, Vince. #106095 From: Kevin Farrell Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 6:23 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] "Dhamma Snippets" Site farrellkevin80 Nina van Gorkom wrote: " Dear Kevin, Op 18-mrt-2010, om 16:12 heeft Kevin Farrell het volgende geschreven: > Kevin: Hi again Nina. On second thought, we do get a lot of mail > here already, so perhaps I will just send a monthly digest of all > what I posted there to the list. : ) -------- N: Also a digest is a lot to read. I agree, we have so many mails. What about half a page or a whole page now and then? Nina." Kevin write: Dear Nina, excellent idea. I will simply post a message here containing new entries from the site after every few new entries. Here are the recent entries. I will post again after perhaps 5 or 6 more are added: Have a nice day, Nina. With metta, Kevin From www.dhammasnippets.webs.com: Blog view: full / summary Anatta Posted at 08:40 PM on March 18, 2010 comments (0) "As we cannot make rupa arise, how can we make nama to arise? Nobody can do anything. This is the firm foundation of understanding anattaness and reality as reality, anatta as anatta. Otherwise when we read about anatta but it is "I" who is trying, so it doesn't mean that we really understand the meaniing of anattaness. So keep on dhatu, element. Nama dhatu, rupa dhatu, anatta and we will never go wrong." - Ajahn Sujin Boriharnwanaket We Used to Think That a Cushion or a Chair Could be Experienced by Touch Posted at 06:42 PM on March 17, 2010 comments (0) "We used to think that a cushion or a chair could be experienced through touch. When we are more precise, it is hardness or softness which can be experienced through touch. Because of association and remembranceof former experiences we can think of a cushion or chair and we know that they are named “cushion” or “chair”. This example can remind us that there is a difference between ultimate realities and concepts we can think of but whichare not real in the ultimate sense." - Rupa: The Buddhist Teaching on Physical Phenomena by Nina van Gorkom Form is not-self Posted at 06:39 PM on March 17, 2010 comments (0) "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." "Is feeling permanent or impermanent?... "Is perception permanent or impermanent?... "Are determinations permanent or impermanent?... "Is consciousness permanent or impermanent?" — "Impermanent, venerable sir." — "Now is what is impermanent pleasant or painful?" — "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." "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.'" - The Buddha in the Anatta-lakhana Sutta Seeing is a Type of Consciousness Posted at 12:44 AM on March 17, 2010 comments (0) "Seeing is a type of consciousness, it is a reality which has its own characteristic. It is not the body, it is not tangible object, it is not materiality. It is an element which experiences visible object. Seeing is seeing for everyone, it dos not belong to any race of nationality. Also animals see. Seeing is the same, no matter how you call it. Thus it is absolute truth for everyone, it is an absolute reality. We do not have to use any names for realities, they have their own function, their own characteristic which can be directly experienced. Seeing sees visible object, no matter it is your seeing or my seeing. Seeing cannot touch visible object, it can only see it. Can you touch visible object? Do you see me? You can only see visible object. After seeing there is thinking of different shapes and forms and there is memory of different things and people. A person cannot be seen, there can only be thinking about a person. Thinking is another type of reality, arising at another moment. We can gradually develop more understanding of realities, and thus there will be lighter in our life." - www.dhammahome.com There are Ultimately no Actions That Extend Beyond the Current Citta Posted at 11:11 PM on March 16, 2010 comments (0) "...there are ultimately no actions or activities that extend beyond the present, momentary citta. There is always action of a momentary kind that involves dhammas conditioning other dhammas, but there are no actions beyond that. There are no actions of the kind that would involve people, places and conventional objects." - Ken Howard on DSG. First entry Posted at 10:52 PM on March 16, 2010 comments (0) Please enjoy our Dhamma snippets. _ } --> [ portions of this message have been removed] #106096 From: Kevin Farrell Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 6:28 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "Dhamma Snippets" Site farrellkevin80 Ken Howard wrote: "Hi Kevin, --- In dhammastudygroup@ yahoogroups. com, Kevin Farrell wrote: > > Dear Friends, I have begun creating a small new website. It will mostly house short but pertinent "snippets" of dhamma from various places including books by Nina van Gorkom and Ajahn Sujin, the Tipitika and Commentaries, and quotes from members of DSG and so forth ------------ --------- --- Well done, Kevin, very commendable! I must admit, however, that I rarely go beyond DSG for Dhamma study. I am not a good reader - too lazy and too easily distracted - and so getting through all the daily posts here is about my limit. So I can't promise I will be a regular reader. But if you post extracts from your site to DSG I will be sure to read them. :-) Ken H" Kevin: Dear Ken, no need to read the site. If you look you will see that you wrote part of the material! : D All the best, With metta, kevin #106097 From: "nori" Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 6:39 pm Subject: Nama vs Citta norakat147 Greetings All, I have not posted here in a while; I figured this was the place to ask... Hope all is well. --- In D.O. in Maha-Nidana Sutta; there is a cyclic (or two way) origin. Cognition has Name and Form as its cause, (naamaruupapaccayaa vi~n~naa.na.m) Name and Form with cognition as its cause, (vi~n~naa.napaccayaa naamaruupa.m) I believe vi~n~naa.na is synonymous with citta which I believe is 'heart' - that is, the phenomenon which gives rise to thoughts. This is consistent with the etymology and also the Pali Text Society's research; although I know it is more often translated as Consciousness. So anyway, the question is what is the difference between vi~n~naa.na/citta and nama? What are their characteristics/description? Appreciate any information. Kind Regards, Nori "It is as if two sheaves of reeds were to stand leaning against one another. In the same way, from name-&-form as a requisite condition comes consciousness, from consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form. From name & form as a requisite condition come the six sense media. From the six sense media as a requisite condition comes contact...." [Nalakalapiyo Sutta: Sheaves of Reeds SN 12.67] #106098 From: "Mike" Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 6:38 pm Subject: Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) mikenz66 Hi Sukinder, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sukinderpal" wrote: > S: And when I reread my post this morning it sounded quite self-righteous, something I am quick to notice in others but almost never in myself. So I should apologize for all this. That's OK, we're all likely to be SELF-righteous for a while yet... :) But it's good to have people to discuss the Dhamma with. Best Wishes, Mike #106099 From: Kevin Farrell Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 6:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] "Dhamma Snippets" Site farrellkevin80 Hi Nina. I wrote this before, but for some reason it went to the spam folder (probably because the messages in it I had copied and pasted from my site and being a free site that may have been detected by yahoo and registered as spam? I don't know). Anyway, I try again: Nina van Gorkom wrote: " Dear Kevin, Op 18-mrt-2010, om 16:12 heeft Kevin Farrell het volgende geschreven: > Kevin: Hi again Nina. On second thought, we do get a lot of mail > here already, so perhaps I will just send a monthly digest of all > what I posted there to the list. : ) -------- N: Also a digest is a lot to read. I agree, we have so many mails. What about half a page or a whole page now and then? Nina." Kevin write: Dear Nina, excellent idea. I will simply post a message here containing new entries from the site after every few new entries. Here are the recent entries. I will post again after perhaps 5 or 6 more are added: Have a nice day, Nina. With metta, Kevin From www.dhammasnippets. webs.com: Blog view: full / summary Anatta Posted at 08:40 PM on March 18, 2010 comments (0) "As we cannot make rupa arise, how can we make nama to arise? Nobody can do anything. This is the firm foundation of understanding anattaness and reality as reality, anatta as anatta. Otherwise when we read about anatta but it is "I" who is trying, so it doesn't mean that we really understand the meaniing of anattaness. So keep on dhatu, element. Nama dhatu, rupa dhatu, anatta and we will never go wrong." - Ajahn Sujin Boriharnwanaket We Used to Think That a Cushion or a Chair Could be Experienced by Touch Posted at 06:42 PM on March 17, 2010 comments (0) "We used to think that a cushion or a chair could be experienced through touch. When we are more precise, it is hardness or softness which can be experienced through touch. Because of association and remembranceof former experiences we can think of a cushion or chair and we know that they are named “cushion” or “chair”. This example can remind us that there is a difference between ultimate realities and concepts we can think of but whichare not real in the ultimate sense." - Rupa: The Buddhist Teaching on Physical Phenomena by Nina van Gorkom Form is not-self Posted at 06:39 PM on March 17, 2010 comments (0) "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." "Is feeling permanent or impermanent? ... "Is perception permanent or impermanent? ... "Are determinations permanent or impermanent? ... "Is consciousness permanent or impermanent? " — "Impermanent, venerable sir." — "Now is what is impermanent pleasant or painful?" — "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." "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.'" - The Buddha in the Anatta-lakhana Sutta Seeing is a Type of Consciousness Posted at 12:44 AM on March 17, 2010 comments (0) "Seeing is a type of consciousness, it is a reality which has its own characteristic. It is not the body, it is not tangible object, it is not materiality. It is an element which experiences visible object. Seeing is seeing for everyone, it dos not belong to any race of nationality. Also animals see. Seeing is the same, no matter how you call it. Thus it is absolute truth for everyone, it is an absolute reality. We do not have to use any names for realities, they have their own function, their own characteristic which can be directly experienced. Seeing sees visible object, no matter it is your seeing or my seeing. Seeing cannot touch visible object, it can only see it. Can you touch visible object? Do you see me? You can only see visible object. After seeing there is thinking of different shapes and forms and there is memory of different things and people. A person cannot be seen, there can only be thinking about a person. Thinking is another type of reality, arising at another moment. We can gradually develop more understanding of realities, and thus there will be lighter in our life." - www.dhammahome. com There are Ultimately no Actions That Extend Beyond the Current Citta Posted at 11:11 PM on March 16, 2010 comments (0) "...there are ultimately no actions or activities that extend beyond the present, momentary citta. There is always action of a momentary kind that involves dhammas conditioning other dhammas, but there are no actions beyond that. There are no actions of the kind that would involve people, places and conventional objects." - Ken Howard on DSG. First entry Posted at 10:52 PM on March 16, 2010 comments (0) Please enjoy our Dhamma snippets. ________________________________ From: Nina van Gorkom To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thu, March 18, 2010 11:30:25 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] "Dhamma Snippets" Site Dear Kevin, Op 18-mrt-2010, om 16:12 heeft Kevin Farrell het volgende geschreven: > Kevin: Hi again Nina. On second thought, we do get a lot of mail > here already, so perhaps I will just send a monthly digest of all > what I posted there to the list. : ) -------- N: Also a digest is a lot to read. I agree, we have so many mails. What about half a page or a whole page now and then? Nina. #106100 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 7:40 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 kenhowardau Hi Howard, ------------ <. . .> H: > As regards the meditation taught by the Buddha, whether the particular meditating on a given occasion is slanted towards samatha or vipassana or is balanced/in tandem, thinking is at most a preliminary step leading towards the meditation proper. It is at most an initial thinking that directs attention. ------------- Sorry, Howard, I can't agree. Attention is never directed by thinking. ------------------ H: > When actually meditating, there is no thinking about "breath" or "breathing." ------------------ I might mention, by the way, that a concept is a product of thinking. Therefore any citta that is mindful of breath (which is a concept) must be thinking. But perhaps the point you are making is that there is no longer *a particular kind* of thinking (namely, thinking of intentional directing). That would be a good start. :-) --------------------- H: > There is attending directly to bodily sensations (and the ebb and flow of other 5-sense-door and mind-door phenomena among all the foundations of mindfulness) ---------------------- That might apply to satipatthana, but I don't think samatha bhavana could be described in those terms, do you? A samatha meditator never concentrates on a sense-door object. He concentrates on a concept at the mind door. And he keeps to one concept only - rather than changing from one to another. Personally, I don't think it is a good description of vipassana bhavana either. There needs to be emphasis on the uncontrolled paramattha aspect, as distinct from the controlled pannatti aspect. ---------------------------- H: > and if the process is going well, with increasing equanimity and clarity. ---------------------------- What would make the process go well? Certainly not belief in the efficacy of processes! That would be wrong view and silabbataparamasa. ---------------------- H: > Self-conscious directing of attention is in play only at the early stages, ---------------------- There are a couple of things we need to be clear about: 1) Attention (sati) is a conditioned paramattha dhamma, not something that can be directed. 2) At any moment when there is ignorance of paramattha dhammas there is akusala consciousness. On that basis, an idea about directing sati would have to be akusala, wouldn't it? Not something to be encouraged! -------------------------------- H: > after which attention shifts naturally and automatically based on prior study & contemplation and on current inclination, especially the natural inclination to relinquish sub-optimal qualities of the current mind state - for example, the relinquishing that leads to shifting from one jhana to the more peaceful, next-higher jhana. ---------------------- When a beginner samatha-meditator thinks, "I will count breaths," he does so without any misconceptions about the efficacy of breath-counting. He knows that true calm is a product of kusala citta, and he knows it is developed by knowing kusala from akusala, not by counting breaths. He thinks, "I will count breaths," in the same way any of us might think, "I will log on to DSG." Without any idea of directing paramattha dhammas. Ken H #106101 From: Kevin Farrell Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 8:10 pm Subject: A Sutta for Mike farrellkevin80 Dear Mike, When I read this Sutta, I thought of your ideas about the necessity of choosing object for insight. I too once held the exact same views as you do. Do you think that one who enjoys drink as this great Sakyan did devotes much energy to meditation techniques? Do you think at the time of perishing, the individual decided to use some meditation technique? Did the Buddha ever once teach a meditation technique for the development of vipassana or were they only for samatha developmet? And if you doubt that many attained without jhana please read the Susima Sutta as well as others. Sarakaani Sutta: Sarakaani (Who Took to Drink) translated from the Pali by Maurice O'Connell Walshe © 2007–2010 The Pali title of this sutta is based on the PTS (Feer) edition. [At Kapilavasthu] Now at that time Sarakaani the Sakyan, who had died, was proclaimed by the Blessed One to be a Stream-Winner, not subject to rebirth in states of woe, assured of enlightenment. At this, a number of the Sakyans, whenever they met each other or came together in company, were indignant and angry, and said scornfully: "A fine thing, a marvelous thing! Nowadays anyone can become a Stream-Winner, if the Blessed One has proclaimed Sarakaani who died to be Stream-Winner... assured of enlightenment! Why, Sarakaani failed in his training and took to drink!" [Mahaanaama the Sakyan reported this to the Buddha who said:] "Mahaanaama, a lay-follower who has for a long time taken refuge in the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha — how could he go to states of woe? [And this can be truly said of Sarakaani the Sakyan.] How could he go to states of woe? "Mahaanaama, take the case of a man endowed with unwavering devotion to the Buddha, declaring 'He is the Blessed One...,'1 the Dhamma... the Sangha... He is joyous and swift in wisdom, one who has gained release.2 By the destruction of the cankers he has by his own realization gained the cankerless heart's release, the release through wisdom, in this very life, and abides in it. The man is entirely released from the hell-state, from rebirth as an animal,3 he is free from the realm of hungry ghosts, fully freed from the downfall, the evil way, from states of woe. "Take the case of another man. He is endowed with unwavering devotion to the Buddha... the Dhamma... the Sangha... he is joyous and swift in wisdom but has not gained release. Having destroyed the five lower fetters,4 he is reborn spontaneously5 where he will attain Nibbaana without returning from that world. That man is entirely released from... states of woe. "Take the case of another man. He is endowed with unwavering devotion to the Buddha, the Dhamma, the Sangha. But he is not joyous in wisdom and has not gained release. Yet by destroying three fetters6 and weakening lust, hatred and delusion, he is a Once-returner, who will return once more to this world and put an end to suffering. That man is entirely freed from... states of woe. "Take the case of another man. He is endowed with unwavering devotion to the Buddha, the Dhamma, the Sangha. But he is not joyous in wisdom and has not gained release. Yet by destroying three fetters he is a Stream-Winner, not subject to rebirth in states of woe, assured of enlightenment. That man is entirely freed... from states of woe. "Take the case of another man. He is not even endowed with unwavering devotion to the Buddha, the Dhamma, the Sangha. He is not joyous and swift in wisdom and has not gained release. But perhaps he has these things: the faculty of faith, of energy, of mindfulness, of concentration, of wisdom. And the things proclaimed by the Tathaagata are moderately approved by him with insight. That man does not go to the realm of hungry ghosts, to the downfall, to the evil way, to states of woe. "Take the case of another man. He is not even endowed with unwavering devotion to the Buddha, the Dhamma, the Sangha. He is not joyous and swift in wisdom and has not gained release. But he has just these things: the faculty of faith, of energy, of mindfulness, of concentration, of wisdom. Yet if he has merely faith, merely affection for the Tathaagata, that man, too, does not go to... states of woe.7 "Why, Mahaanaama, if these great sal trees could distinguish what is well spoken from what is ill spoken, I would proclaim these great sal trees to be Stream-Winners... bound for enlightenment, how much more so then Sarakaani the Sakyan! Mahaanaama, Sarakaani the Sakyan fulfilled the training at the time of death.'8 Notes 1. These are, of course, the standard formulations for referring to the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha. They seem to fit awkwardly into the context here and may have been interpolated. 2. These terms are used of Saariputta at SN 2.9 (not translated here). Cf. the distinction between difficult and easy progress in VM XXI, 117. 3. Theosophists and others maintain that rebirth as an animal, after a human existence, is impossible. This view is not supported by the Buddhist texts of any school. 4. Cf. n. 300. This is the anaagaamin or "Non-Returner." 5. I.e., not born from a womb by spontaneously arising in another world (in this case the "Pure Abodes" (suddhaavaasaa), where they will attain to final release without returning to this world). 6. These are the first three of the five lower fetters (orambhaagiya-sa.myojanaani Vol. I, n. 83), i.e., sakkaaya-di.t.thi "personality-view" or belief in a permanent, really existing self; vicikicchaa "doubt" (once the "personality-view" has been shattered, there can be no further fundamental doubt about the Dhamma); and siilabbata-paraamaasa "attachment to rites and rituals" (siila + vata). It is noteworthy that even at this (second) stage on the Path, sensuality (kaamaraaga) and ill-will (vyaapaada), the fourth and fifth fetters, are only weakened but not destroyed. Their destruction is, however, inevitable. 7. An encouraging message for many! Cf. the end of MN 22, and also the charming image of the new-born calf in MN 34. The Commentary (MA) to MN 22 says such people are termed "lesser stream-winners" (cuulasotaapannaa). This term is discussed in VM XIX, 27. The stress laid here on the importance of faith is interesting in view of later developments such as the Pure Land Schools (e.g., Jodo-Shishu or "Shin-Buddhism" in Japan). 8. Sarakaani in fact became a Stream-winner at the moment of death. www.accesstoinsight.org #106102 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 4:19 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 3/18/2010 3:01:24 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "...Perhaps untenability is in the eye of the beholder. :-)" Scott: ;-) I think untenability is in the hands of the holder! --------------------------------------------------------- Can't argue with that! (Or would that be tenability?) Hmmph, this discussion just may be getting out of hand!! ;-)) ------------------------------------------------------ Sincerely, Scott. ========================= With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #106103 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 5:08 pm Subject: Everything Converges on Feeling! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: Detached from Bodily and Mental Feeling! The Blessed Buddha once said: Bhikkhus, the uninstructed ordinary person feels pleasant feelings, painful feelings, and neither-painful-nor-pleasant feelings... Such does the instructed Noble Disciple also feel. What then is the difference, the variation, and the distinction between the instructed Noble Disciple and the uninstructed ordinary person? Bhikkhus, when the uninstructed ordinary person is being touched by a painful feeling, then he cries, grieves, moans, weeps, beats his breast and becomes bewildered! He feels actually two feelings: A bodily pain and a mental sadness...!!! Imagine they hit a man with a dart, and then they pricked him immediately after with another dart, then that man would indeed feel two feelings caused by both the two darts. Similarly is it in this case where this poor uninstructed ordinary person touched by a painful feeling, actually feels two feelings: A bodily pain and another mental frustration over that pain. Whenever touched by pain, he responds with aversion towards that painful feeling, then the latent tendency to aversion towards painful feeling grows even deeper. When touched by painful feeling, he seeks for sense pleasure! Why? Because the uninstructed ordinary person does not know any other escape from painful feeling than seeking to relief by new sense pleasure. When he seeks towards delight by sensual pleasure, the latent tendency to lust for pleasant feeling grows even deeper. He does not at all really understand as it really is neither the cause, nor the fading away, nor the satisfaction, nor the danger, nor the escape regarding these feelings! Not understanding any of these things, then when touched by a neutral neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling the latent tendency to ignorance also grows deeper. When feeling a pleasant feeling, he feels it as if attached to it, and as the owner ("my feeling") being involved in it. When feeling a painful feeling, he also feels this as if attached to it and involved in it. If he feels a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling, he feels it as if attached to it and involved in it... This, bhikkhus, is called an uninstructed ordinary person, who is attached & clings desperately to birth, aging, death, sorrow, pain, discontent, and despair. I tell you: What he clings to is Suffering ...! Bhikkhus, when the instructed Noble Disciple is being touched by a painful feeling, he neither cries, nor grieves, nor moans, nor weeps, nor beats his breast, nor does he become bewildered! He feels actually only one feeling: Bodily pain, yet no mental sadness or frustration! Imagine they hit a man with only one single dart, and not any other dart, then that man would feel a single feeling caused by only one single dart. So too, when the instructed Noble Disciple is contacted by a painful feeling, then he feels one feeling: A bodily pain, but not any mental sadness or frustration. Touched by that painful feeling, he neither develops nor reinforces any aversion towards it! Because he develops no aversion towards this painful feeling, the latent tendency to aversion towards painful feeling does not grow deeper! When touched by painful feeling, he does not wish for sense pleasure. For what reason? Because the instructed Noble Disciple knows another escape from painful feeling other than sensual pleasure! Since he does not seek delight in sensual pleasure, the latent tendency to lust for pleasant feeling does not grow deeper in him. He indeed understands as it really is, the cause, the fading away, the satisfaction, the danger, and the escape in the case of feelings. Since he understands all these things, the latent tendency to ignorance, when touched by a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling, does not grow deeper in him. When feeling a pleasant feeling, he feels it as if detached from it, as something remote, irrelevant and alien. When feeling a painful feeling, he also feels this as if detached from it, as if remote and alien. If he feels a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling, he feels even that neutrality as if disconnected from it, remote and alien. This, Bhikkhus, is called a Noble Disciple, who is released from birth, aging, and death! Who is separated from sorrow, lamentation, pain, discontent, and desperate despair... I tell you, such one is separated from Suffering. This, is the difference, variation, and distinction, between the learned Noble Disciple and an uninstructed ordinary person! The wise, clever and learned one does not feel the adjoined pleasant & painful mental feeling! This is the great difference between the wise and learned one and the ordinary person. For the learned one, who has comprehended the Dhamma, who clearly sees this world and the next, the desirable things do neither incite, nor stir up, nor stimulate his mind...Towards whatever disgusting, he has no aversion. All mental attraction and repulsion has ceased in him... Both have been extinguished, brought to silence. Having known this stain and sorrow-less state, such transcender of existence rightly understands: Pleasant feeling induces greed... Painful feeling produces hate... Neither-painful-nor-pleasant neutral feeling causes neglect and therefore generates ignorance... <...> Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book IV [208-10] section 36: Feeling. Vedana. The Dart. Sallatena. 6. http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/index.html Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samahita _/\_ Sri <...> #106104 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 4:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 3/18/2010 10:40:34 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, ------------ <. . .> H: > As regards the meditation taught by the Buddha, whether the particular meditating on a given occasion is slanted towards samatha or vipassana or is balanced/in tandem, thinking is at most a preliminary step leading towards the meditation proper. It is at most an initial thinking that directs attention. ------------- Sorry, Howard, I can't agree. Attention is never directed by thinking. --------------------------------------------- Yes, we disagree. :-) --------------------------------------------- ------------------ H: > When actually meditating, there is no thinking about "breath" or "breathing." ------------------ I might mention, by the way, that a concept is a product of thinking. Therefore any citta that is mindful of breath (which is a concept) must be thinking. ----------------------------------------------- When actually meditating, there is no seeming of breath. There are only various body-door rupas, and so on. --------------------------------------------- But perhaps the point you are making is that there is no longer *a particular kind* of thinking (namely, thinking of intentional directing). That would be a good start. :-) --------------------- H: > There is attending directly to bodily sensations (and the ebb and flow of other 5-sense-door and mind-door phenomena among all the foundations of mindfulness) ---------------------- That might apply to satipatthana, but I don't think samatha bhavana could be described in those terms, do you? A samatha meditator never concentrates on a sense-door object. He concentrates on a concept at the mind door. And he keeps to one concept only - rather than changing from one to another. ------------------------------------------- I consider my meditation to an in-tandem meditation, though how it is characterized, as 'samatha' or 'vipassana' or both of neither, matters little to me. What I can say is that for me there is no concentration on a concept once the meditation is actually underway. When it goes well, which is often, there is great calm and great clarity, and it is clear to me that I benefit from it. I do not endorse it for you or anyone else. --------------------------------------------- Personally, I don't think it is a good description of vipassana bhavana either. There needs to be emphasis on the uncontrolled paramattha aspect, as distinct from the controlled pannatti aspect. ---------------------------- H: > and if the process is going well, with increasing equanimity and clarity. ---------------------------- What would make the process go well? ---------------------------------------------- Not "me". ---------------------------------------------- Certainly not belief in the efficacy of processes! That would be wrong view and silabbataparamasa. ---------------------- H: > Self-conscious directing of attention is in play only at the early stages, ---------------------- There are a couple of things we need to be clear about: 1) Attention (sati) is a conditioned paramattha dhamma, not something that can be directed. 2) At any moment when there is ignorance of paramattha dhammas there is akusala consciousness. On that basis, an idea about directing sati would have to be akusala, wouldn't it? Not something to be encouraged! -------------------------------- H: > after which attention shifts naturally and automatically based on prior study & contemplation and on current inclination, especially the natural inclination to relinquish sub-optimal qualities of the current mind state - for example, the relinquishing that leads to shifting from one jhana to the more peaceful, next-higher jhana. ---------------------- When a beginner samatha-meditator thinks, "I will count breaths," he does so without any misconceptions about the efficacy of breath-counting. He knows that true calm is a product of kusala citta, and he knows it is developed by knowing kusala from akusala, not by counting breaths. He thinks, "I will count breaths," in the same way any of us might think, "I will log on to DSG." Without any idea of directing paramattha dhammas. Ken H ==================================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #106105 From: "Mike" Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 9:18 pm Subject: Re: A Sutta for Mike mikenz66 Hi Kevin, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Kevin Farrell wrote: > > Dear Mike, > > When I read this Sutta, I thought of your ideas about the necessity of choosing object for insight. I too once held the exact same views as you do. Do you think that one who enjoys drink as this great Sakyan did devotes much energy to meditation techniques? Do you think at the time of perishing, the individual decided to use some meditation technique? Did the Buddha ever once teach a meditation technique for the development of vipassana or were they only for samatha developmet? And if you doubt that many attained without jhana please read the Susima Sutta as well as others. Mike: As far as I can remember I've not talked about the "necessity" of anything in particular. I'm also not sure why you mention Jhana. I haven't said anything about Jhana. Perhaps you are confusing me with someone else... Perhaps you held the same views as I do. Perhaps you didn't. What would it prove either way? Metta Mike #106106 From: "Mike" Date: Thu Mar 18, 2010 11:50 pm Subject: Re: meditation centers/dsg mikenz66 Hi Robert, Thank you for the interesting post. I'll just extract a few things to discuss a little: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > R: Then there may be direct knowing of a characteristic of a reality with panna - and this is patipatti. > > R: However, panna is a momentary reality that arises and passes away exactly as rapidly as citta. So panna can arise momentarily and know, do some degree, the nature of its object. > > R: Impossible for anyone to control this (i) because there is no one and (ii) it is all happening far too quickly, even if there was this imaginary person. > > R: Knowing this there will be detachment from trying to get something, letting go will happen naturally, and panna can then work its subtle ways. If there is not detachment then there is lobha (attachment) and this is combined with avijja (ignorance ) that is already so powerful. Thus without real understanding effort is counterproductive and is an aspect of wrong path. The pali term patipatti is taken to mean something one does. But genuine patipatti is momentary insight, it is not a matter of where or what one is doing, it is a mental phenomena. Mike: I don't think we disagree about the importance of abandoning "trying to get something". (Oops, there I go again, trying to get the something at is abandoning "trying to get something"...). Mike: I guess what I'm not so clear about is how this happens. You seem to be saying that listening and studying that Dhamma makes it happen. I'm curious, though, about what you say later: > R: ... That is why it is convincing to me that the path should be about realties appearing now- not ones we think might better suit our lofty aims that arise while we are in a center or focusing etc. Mike: When you say "realities appearing now" are you talking about paying some attention to those realities, or understanding that such realities exist by hearing and considering Dhamma? Mike: There is a common argument here that seems to go like this: "Because dhammas rise and fall so fast anything we perceive is already gone, so we can't learn anything from those perceptions." Unlike the "control" argument, I don't find that argument particularly convincing. When gathering information it is not an insurmountable problem if the gathering is slow or incomplete (though of course slowness or incompleteness degrade the information). I'll stop there, since it seems pointless to raise too many issues at once. Thanks again, Mike #106107 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 1:37 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 kenhowardau Hi Ken O, ----------- <. . .> KO:??? The text including suttas?taught two approaches, samantha and vipassana.? ------------ What if I said the texts taught only one thing - satipatthana (right understanding of the presently arisen conditioned reality). Would you agree with that? If I am right, then how would the texts want us to understand a "method"? (Remembering that they are teaching satipatthana only.) Your way wouldn't fit would it? No way ordinary way of knowing a method (no ordinary way of knowing *anything*) could possibly fit with satipatthana. ----------- KO: > Visud describe the steps clearly, that is the method despite what you have describe or explain.? If you said it is not, then you must show textual support.??the example of dogs and jackals are used to show that if we just do breathing without understanding of the object of breathing, we are no different from them.? ? ----------- No, it doesn't say that. It says the kind of "knowing" that is taught in the suttas is not the kind of knowing that is common to ordinary people and animals. That covers everything. The ordinary way of knowing a posture, a method, a computer, a walk in the park - anything - is not the way taught by the Buddha. Ken H #106108 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 2:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] "Dhamma Snippets" Site nilovg Dear Kevin, It is so good to reminded of the truth, even when we have heard it many times. Refreshing. Thank you. Nina. Op 19-mrt-2010, om 2:51 heeft Kevin Farrell het volgende geschreven: > Seeing is a type of > consciousness, it is a reality which has its own characteristic. It is > not the body, it is not tangible object, it is not materiality. It is > an element which experiences visible object. Seeing is > seeing for everyone, it dos not belong to any > race of nationality. Also animals see. Seeing is the same, no matter > how you call it. Thus it is absolute truth for everyone, it is an > absolute reality. We do not have to use any names for realities, > they have their own function, their own characteristic which can be > directly experienced. #106109 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 4:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama vs Citta sarahprocter... Hi Nori, Good to read you after a long break! Always good to see our 'old' members around:-) --- On Fri, 19/3/10, nori wrote: >In D.O. in Maha-Nidana Sutta; there is a cyclic (or two way) origin. >Cognition has Name and Form as its cause, (naamaruupapaccayaa vi~n~naa.na. m) Name and Form with cognition as its cause, (vi~n~naa.napaccaya a naamaruupa.m) >I believe vi~n~naa.na is synonymous with citta which I believe is 'heart' - that is, the phenomenon which gives rise to thoughts. This is consistent with the etymology and also the Pali Text Society's research; although I know it is more often translated as Consciousness. >So anyway, the question is what is the difference between vi~n~naa.na/ citta and nama? >What are their characteristics/ description? ... S: Good questions. Vi~n~naa.na is usually synonymous with citta as you say. However, we always need to look at the context. In the context of the khandhas, for example, vi~n~naa.na refers to all cittas. In the context of D.O., however, as in the Mahaanidaana Sutta, vi~n~naa.na refers to patisandhi citta (birth citta), the vipaka citta which is a result of past kamma, and also to all subsequent vipaka ('result') cittas only. Examples of other vipaka cittas are the 5 pairs of sense consciousness and bhavanga cittas which arise in deep sleep and between sense-door and mind-door processes. In other words, when there is thinking in the mind-door processes, we cannot say that most the cittas (and cetasikas) involved are vi~n~naa.na, as referred to in D.O. In summary, cittas arise throughout the day. They are the 'leading' namas (mental phenomena) which experience an object. Citta is synonymous with vi~n~naana, but in D.O., vi~n~naana has a more limited meaning, just referrring to the cittas which are the results of kamma only, beginning with the first citta of life, the patisandhi citta. Without this first citta, there could not be all the cittas arising as we write. As for naama, usually this term refers to all mental phenomena, all cittas and cetasikas. These are all the dhammas which can experience an object. For example, seeing is naama, it experiences visible object. Visible object is rupa, it cannot experience anything. The mental factors which accompany seeing, such as feeling, contact, perception or concentration, are also naama. However, again in D.O. naama has a very specific and limited meaning. In this context, as in the sutta you refer to, it refers to the cetasikas (the mental factors) which accompany the patisandhi and other vipaka cittas included in vi~n~naana which we just discussed. So naama here is also referring to vipaka dhammas only, to the mental factors which accompany the vipaka cittas. At the moment of birth (the first citta of life in the womb), kamma conditions the vipaka citta and accompanying cetasikas and kamma-produced rupas to arise at the first instant. The citta and cetasikas condition each other to arise also and at this first moment of life, the rupas are conditioned to arise at the same instant, conditioned not only by the past kamma (remember, sankhaara paccaya vi~n~naana), but also by the citta. Likewise, the ruupa are a condition or support for the citta. We can see how at birth and even now, how intricate the conditioning of all kinds of realities are, all depending on other realities for support. By appreciating that there are only ever these various conditioned dhammas, conditioned and conditioning other dhammas, the understanding develops that in life there is nothing at all other than such dhammas - no Self, no Entity, no Being, no Person at all. Hence, as you say, the text refers to: >Cognition has Name and Form as its cause, (naamaruupapaccayaa vi~n~naa.na. m) Name and Form with cognition as its cause, (vi~n~naa.napaccaya a naamaruupa.m) ***** I don't know if you've seen or have a copy of B.Bodhi's excellent translation of the Mahaanidaana Sutta and commentaries (BPS)? It includes a lot of helpful detail including all the different kinds of conditions that are in operation here. I don't have a copy with me, otherwise I'd quote from it. You may also like to read more in "Useful Posts" under: 'Citta', 'Vinnana', 'Dependent Origination - vi~n~naa.napaccaya naamaruupa.m' and 'Mahaanidaana Sutta'. Please let me know if any of my comments are unclear or if you have any further questions. Metta Sarah ======== #106110 From: Ken O Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 5:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 ashkenn2k Dear Ken H ><. . .> >KO:??? The text including suttas?taught two approaches, samantha and vipassana.? >------------ > >What if I said the texts taught only one thing - satipatthana (right understanding of the presently arisen conditioned reality). Would you agree with that? > >If I am right, then how would the texts want us to understand a "method"? (Remembering that they are teaching satipatthana only.) > >Your way wouldn't fit would it? No way ordinary way of knowing a method (no ordinary way of knowing *anything*) could possibly fit with satipatthana. KO:? The text is about eradication of kilesa by panna, that is the only path.? There are different approaches to the only path.? The texts do not discount any samantha bhavana as a basis for panna,?samantha bhavana is not itself panna that eradicates kilesa because the moment the object is still conceptual.? This bhavana serves as a strong paccaya for the arising of panna to understand nama and rupa because of the?strong clarity of the object?by the kusala cittas?and also?they must know? dhamma.? If there is?no knowledge of dhamma, these practitioners likely to be born in the brahmas worlds.???Method does not matter whether it fits with satipatthana or not, as long as it is describe clearly in the texts, we have to admit that there is such methods.??And who practise it, is clearly states in the text and commentaries.? > >----------- >KO: > Visud describe the steps clearly, that is the method despite what you have describe or explain.? If you said it is not, then you must show textual support.??the example of dogs and jackals are used to show that if we just do breathing without understanding of the object of breathing, we are no different from them.? ? >----------- > >No, it doesn't say that. It says the kind of "knowing" that is taught in the suttas is not the kind of knowing that is common to ordinary people and animals. > >That covers everything. The ordinary way of knowing a posture, a method, a computer, a walk in the park - anything - is not the way taught by the Buddha. KO:? I always said samantha bhavana is not for?ordinary people or beginner, I always said the people base on the?criteria?of Visud.????That does not cover everything because animals do not have panna, they cannot develop panna.? Secondly, we also, breath, if we are not different from the animals so you are implying we all cannot be enlighted. So your explanation is not consistent with the text.? Cheers Ken O #106111 From: Kevin Farrell Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 5:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] "Dhamma Snippets" Site farrellkevin80 Nina, it is a pleasure-- thank you. Sincerely, Kevin The Lost Trailers: www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmyXzBqdMOA ________________________________ From: Nina van Gorkom To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Fri, March 19, 2010 5:35:03 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] "Dhamma Snippets" Site Dear Kevin, It is so good to reminded of the truth, even when we have heard it many times. Refreshing. Thank you. Nina. Op 19-mrt-2010, om 2:51 heeft Kevin Farrell het volgende geschreven: > Seeing is a type of > consciousness, it is a reality which has its own characteristic. It is > not the body, it is not tangible object, it is not materiality. It is > an element which experiences visible object. Seeing is > seeing for everyone, it dos not belong to any > race of nationality. Also animals see. Seeing is the same, no matter > how you call it. Thus it is absolute truth for everyone, it is an > absolute reality. We do not have to use any names for realities, > they have their own function, their own characteristic which can be > directly experienced. #106112 From: Ken O Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 6:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) ashkenn2k Dear Mike >Mike: Also, I'm not completely clear about how you see the relationship between anatta and "momentariness" (I think the definition of that term is reasonably clear, though it could also perhaps do with some tidying up at some point). I tend to see them as two separate characteristics (which are, of course, related). KO:? There are three aspectsof momentariness - it describe the impermanence of rise and fall of cittas, it demonstrate that it is dukkha as there is suffering in the rise and falls and it shows anatta because we cannot stop the rise and fall of cittas > >Mike: Since there is the concept of "conditioning" the fact that dhammas rise and fall rapidly does not necessarily imply lack of some sort of long-time (imperfect) continuity. Otherwise we wouldn't have the results of kamma, or memory for that matter... KO:? Due to rise and fall, there is no continuity.???If one view there is some sot of long-time?contintuity, there is a belief?of?eternalism,?miccha ditthi.?? If there is?continuity, then?the three characteristics?would not be relevant.?? Impermance, dukkha and anatta?characteristics would not?exhibit.??As long as?kamma does not?conditon cuti citta to arise, our?nama and rupa will continue to arise and fall in this human plane. Cheers Ken O #106113 From: Ken O Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 6:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) ashkenn2k Dear Sukin The objection to ‘doings’ have always been > about those associated with the idea of control over dhammas which then > becomes more or less ‘rite and ritual’. The various activities that we > otherwise engage in, these are to be understood in fact, as being > conditioned one moment by this accumulated tendency and another by that. > They would in other words, be “natural”. There is nothing wrong for example, > for someone who is in the habit of having coffee to decide to go into > Starbucks to buy one when he comes upon a particular outlet. Likewise, > someone interested in Premier League ;-), to wake up early than usual to > watch his favorite team play. KO: Anusaya definitely do condition our lobha etc. Also asaya also conditons our panna. But panna cannot will, only cetana will. So without them we would not be able to listen to the dhammas because we require these cetasikas (chanda and cetana) to function to listen. Panna only eradicates kilesa. Panna understand characteristics of the object and when panna arise with chanda, chanda which is interest, willl continue to be interested in dhamma, or faith that arise with chanda which will condition the interest in dhamma. Cheers Ken O #106114 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 3:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Mike) - In a message dated 3/19/2010 9:39:28 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, ashkenn2k@... writes: Dear Mike >Mike: Also, I'm not completely clear about how you see the relationship between anatta and "momentariness" (I think the definition of that term is reasonably clear, though it could also perhaps do with some tidying up at some point). I tend to see them as two separate characteristics (which are, of course, related). KO: There are three aspectsof momentariness - it describe the impermanence of rise and fall of cittas, it demonstrate that it is dukkha as there is suffering in the rise and falls and it shows anatta because we cannot stop the rise and fall of cittas > >Mike: Since there is the concept of "conditioning" the fact that dhammas rise and fall rapidly does not necessarily imply lack of some sort of long-time (imperfect) continuity. Otherwise we wouldn't have the results of kamma, or memory for that matter... KO: Due to rise and fall, there is no continuity. If one view there is some sot of long-time contintuity, there is a belief of eternalism, miccha ditthi. If there is continuity, then the three characteristics would not be relevant. Impermance, dukkha and anatta characteristics would not exhibit. As long as kamma does not conditon cuti citta to arise, our nama and rupa will continue to arise and fall in this human plane. ------------------------------------------------------ Ken, 'continuity' doesn't always have the same meaning. Since there is constant change, nothing continues. That is "no continuity". On the other hand, there are no gaps in consciousness, and that is "continuity." Metaphorically, think of a flowing stream. It's content is always changing, and no state of it continues, but there are no "non-stream gaps" either; the stream continues to flow. This is a 'continuity' that is also a non-continuity, and diametrically opposite to eternalism. This continuity of change, with nothing remaining "as is" for any time at all is a more radical anicca that moment-by-moment, discrete change. This continuity is, at the very same time, a radical non-continuity, with nothing continuing "as is" for any time at all! And this, I believe, is the way things are. ---------------------------------------------------- Cheers Ken O =========================== With metta, Howard Impermanence /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom and a dream/ (From the Diamond Sutra) #106115 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 7:49 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "Ken, 'continuity' doesn't always have the same meaning. Since there is constant change, nothing continues...Metaphorically, think of a flowing stream. It's content is always changing, and no state of it continues, but there are no 'non-stream gaps' either; the stream continues to flow...This continuity is, at the very same time, a radical non-continuity.." Scott: I knew it was coming. Couldn't stop the flow, could you Howard? ;-) Sincerely, Scott. #106116 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 8:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Q. Abhidhamma Series, no 2. Paramattha dhamma and pa~n~natti. nilovg Dear Han, Op 18-mrt-2010, om 23:13 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > A Burmese Sayadaw once said that: > > (1) paramattha is covered by pa~n~natti. For an ordinary > uninstructed person it is difficult to penetrate through pa~n~natti > to see paramattha. > > (2) pa~n~natti is covered by kilesas. For an ordinary uninstructed > person it is difficult to penetrate through kilesas to know > pa~n~natti as pa~n~natti. > > What is your thought on the above? --------- N: These words are well worth considering. 1: We always assumed that self sees, hears, thinks. Before hearing Dhamma we did not know that what we call a person is citta, cetasika and ruupa. Thanks to the Buddha we can begin to see paramattha dhammas. They arise because of their own conditions and have no owner, no self who can direct them. Pa~n~natti has more than one meaning. It can also be a term denoting paramattha dhammas and then it is very helpful. Citta, cetasika and ruupa are terms, pa~n~nattis, denoting what is true: paramattha dhammas. 2. Pa~n~natti can be known as pa~n~natti when we have understood what paramattha dhammas are: realities each with their own unalterable characteristic. Seeing is always seeing and we do not have to call it seeing, it has its own characteristic, the experience of visible object through the eyesense. We may give it another name, but its characteristic cannot be changed. Whatever is not a paramattha dhamma is pa~n~natti. We may well be confused by kilesas. Because of ignorance and clinging we may not wish to see the truth. We cling so much to the self that we do not wish to see that self or person are pa~n~nattis, not true in the ultimate sense. We do not like to hear that there is no person. It upsets the world we are familiar with for so many lives. It is difficult to become detached from the idea of self. Only understanding of the reality appearing at this moment leads to detachment. -------- Nina. #106117 From: Ken O Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 8:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) ashkenn2k Dear Sarah ? Han: Thus, in the context of the first interpretation by Ledi Sayaadaw, I agreed that when there is an idea of the tangible object or visible object being a computer, or a biscuit tin, or a glass, it is attanu di.t.thi, but not sakkaaya di.t.thi. >After that discussion two years ago, I read Samaadi.t.thi Diipanii by Ledi Sayaadaw. In Part Three of the Diipanii, Sayaadaw wrote that the word attaa is used to convey the following three interpretations: (1) asaaraka.t.thena- anattaa: on account of being without essence or substance it is called anattaa. (2) asaamika.t.thena- anattaa: on account of not having any owner or overlord it is called anattaa. (3) avasavattana. t.thena-anattaa: on account of its not yielding to another's will it is called anattaa. .... S: Good. Yes, it's atta, but we don't take the 'bowl' for being oneself! ... KO:?? Now according to suttas, the wordings of sakkayditthi is the same as attanuditthi.? a.??? Since bowl is not an aggregate, so where does attanuitthi comes from? b.????We would say this is my bowl, will we say?I am this bowl or take bowl for oneself??? c.??? Now on (1): In other words, only when we take being as essence or substance that is atta.? It is clear it is?being and not bowls, because this is wrong view of self or a being.? And not?being on bowls or self on bowls or there is a self in bowls.? ?d.??? Even if?we said that taking bowl for being oneself,?it is the?thinking of mental object as oneself.? That thinking is the fifth aggregate.? If that is the fifth aggregate, then there is sakkayaditthi and attanudtthi. The sutta and?Dispeller of?Delusion?said?that attanuditthi is sakkayaditthi.? Cheers Ken O #106118 From: Ken O Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 9:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Will, codetermination ashkenn2k Dear Alex Lets examine >IMHO, the Buddha didn't preach fatalism ala Makkhali Gosala. Vipaka is the result of kamma as you know it.? Falatism only happens when the result is the cause of kamma.?? During the arisen of seeing citta, it is the result of kamma.? Seeing citta can never be the cause because kamma cannot be cause and result at the same citta.? It would? mean fatalism The cause of kamma arise after the seeing citta has fallen away,?the other cittas that arise during javana.? It is the javana cittas that is the cause, and at time it is not the result.? So the Abihidhamma explanation of seeing is a process is a correct one even though it is not describe clearly in the suttas .? That is?seeing citta when arise cannot be result and cause because it would be fatalism.? When the sutta describe craving of a pleasant visible object due to seeing, that is refering to the javanas and not the moment when seeing citta arise.? Cheers Ken O #106119 From: Kevin Farrell Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 9:23 am Subject: Fw: [dsg] Re: A Sutta for Mike farrellkevin80 ----- Forwarded Message ---- From: Kevin Farrell To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Fri, March 19, 2010 12:34:19 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sutta for Mike Kevin: Hi Mike. My apologies if you did not mention the "necessity" of anything. I may have had you wrong. I also know that you do not hold a view that jhana is necessary for insight development, but the point was that the techniques given by the SammasamBuddha were/are for the development of samatha bhavana, which is different from vipassana bhavana which roots out defilements through the removal of delusion. I simply thought that you might enjoy the Sutta and that it might show that insight is available at any time and one need not "try". The conditions for it to arise need to be in place. So just like Sarakaani we can develop wisdom if we have heard and reflected upon the dhamma wisely. All the best, Take care. Kevin The Lost Trailers: www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmyXzBqdMOA Mike: ________________________________ "Hi Kevin, --- In dhammastudygroup@ yahoogroups. com, Kevin Farrell wrote: > > Dear Mike, > > When I read this Sutta, I thought of your ideas about the necessity of choosing object for insight. I too once held the exact same views as you do. Do you think that one who enjoys drink as this great Sakyan did devotes much energy to meditation techniques? Do you think at the time of perishing, the individual decided to use some meditation technique? Did the Buddha ever once teach a meditation technique for the development of vipassana or were they only for samatha developmet? And if you doubt that many attained without jhana please read the Susima Sutta as well as others. Mike: As far as I can remember I've not talked about the "necessity" of anything in particular. I'm also not sure why you mention Jhana. I haven't said anything about Jhana. Perhaps you are confusing me with someone else... Perhaps you held the same views as I do. Perhaps you didn't. What would it prove either way? Metta Mike" #106120 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 9:42 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Will, codetermination truth_aerator Dear KenO, all, >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Alex > > Lets examine >IMHO, the Buddha didn't preach fatalism ala Makkhali >Gosala. > > Vipaka is the result of kamma as you know it.? Right. > Fatalism only happens when the result is the cause of kamma.?? As I understand it and what I mean is "predetermination to be a killer, with no alternative". > The cause of kamma arise after the seeing citta has fallen >away,?the other cittas that arise during javana.? It is the javana >cittas that is the cause, and at time it is not the result.? And these javana cittas, are they fatalistically predetermined to react only in one certain way? Thank you very much for your post, With metta, Alex #106121 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 9:59 am Subject: Reading one's way to awakening. truth_aerator Hello Kevin, RobertK2, Mike, All, If I may enter. IMHO Sarakani may have had good accumulations. Perhaps when he was a Monk, he did a lot of meditation (satipatthana). Kevin, I am astonished... Susima sutta does NOT ever mention that they have not had Jhana. The sutta merely states that those Arahants did not possess super powers and Aruppa states. Even someone with as much wisdom as Sariputta, had to go through Jhanas, immaterial states and cessation of perception & feelings. Maybe Sarakani had much more faith than we do, so even if his meditation training was limited, his faith carried him through. In these sceptical times, I do not think it is possible for all to have so much faith. RobertK2, As to reaching states by listening to talk. Again, for some people who have relatively few defilements and who are very faithful, devoted, wise, they may achieve stream-entry through hearing a discource. The commentaries that you believe so much do say that highest two types of people (Ugghatitannu & Vipancitannu) can reach stream-entry through meeting a Buddha in person and hearing his discourse. But as I remember, Robert, you are the one claiming that we today belong to the lower types. These lower types cannot achieve anything even if they read 1000 discources. They need to practice! ==== (1) A Ugghatitannu : an individual who * encounters a Buddha in person, and * who is capable of attaining the Holy Paths and the Holy Fruits through the mere hearing of a short concise discourse. (2) A Vipancitannu: an individual who * encounters a Buddha in person, but * who is capable of attaining the Paths and the Fruits only when the short discourse is expounded to him at some length. At the present day, only the following Neyya and Padaparama classes of individuals remain. (3) A Neyya : an individual who needs * to study the sermon and the exposition, and then * to practise the provisions contained therein for 7 days to 60 years, to attain the Paths and the Fruits during this lifetime if he tries hard with guidance from the right teacher. (4) A Padaparama : is an individual who * cannot attain the Paths and the Fruits within this lifetime. * can attain release from worldly ills in his next existence if he dies while practising samatha or vipassana and attains rebirth either as a human being or a deva within the present Buddha Sasana. Necessary Conditions of Practice for Neyya and Padaparama Individuals Neyya-puggala An individual of the Neyya class can become a Sotpanna in this present life, if he faithfully practises the bodhipakkhiya-dhamma comprising satipatthana (four Applications of Mindfulness), sammapadhana (Right Exertion), etc. If he is lax in his practice, he can become a Sotapanna only in his next existence after being reborn in the deva planes. If he dies while still aloof from these (bodhipakkhiya-Dhammas) he will become a total loss so far as the present Buddha Sasana is concerned, but he can still attain release from worldly ills if he encounters the Sasana of the next Buddha. Padaparama-puggala An individual of the Padaparama class can attain release only within the present Buddha Sasana after rebirth in the deva planes in his next existence, if he can faithfully practise the bodhipakkhiya-Dhammas in his present existence. The present Buddha Sasana will continue to exist so long as the Tipitakas remain in the world. The Padaparama class of individuals have to accumlate as much of the nuclei or seeds of Parami as they can within this lifetime. http://www.triplegem.plus.com/individu.htm ============================================================== With metta, Alex #106122 From: Ken O Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 10:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Part 2 : Jhanas -> 4 stages of Awakening ashkenn2k Dear Alex >> Somebody can realize nibbana without cultivating Jhanas, > >By following the Noble 7Fold vehicle? KO:? Nope that is wrong.? The description of right concentration is of two type, one is jhanas and the other is concentration is arisen with panna. > >I agree with KenO that there is possibility that some people achieve split-second jhana during or close to maggaphala moment. > KO:? I said for the dry insightors, when lokkuttara citta arise, the object is exceeding clear and that conditon is close to jhanas but it is not jhanas. Cheers Ken O #106123 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 10:36 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Part 2 : Jhanas -> 4 stages of Awakening truth_aerator Dear KenO, all, >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Alex > > >> Somebody can realize nibbana without cultivating Jhanas, > > > >By following the Noble 7Fold vehicle? > KO:? Nope that is wrong.? The description of right concentration is of two type, one is jhanas and the other is concentration is arisen with panna. > Buddhist Jhanas require panna. So one cannot have real Buddhist Jhana without panna. The Samma-Samadhi (8th factor of N8P) is described as 4 Jhanas. Also, I don't remember any sutta passage that conclusively establishes that Jhana is not required for Awakening. > > > > >I agree with KenO that there is possibility that some people achieve split-second jhana during or close to maggaphala moment. > > > KO:? I said for the dry insightors, when lokkuttara citta arise, >the object is exceeding clear and that conditon is close to jhanas >but it is not jhanas. So they have achieve the path through N7P and the Buddha taught un-needed, un-necessary, going off-a-tangent instructions (such as Jhana, samatha, etc)? With metta, Alex #106124 From: Ken O Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 10:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Will, codetermination ashkenn2k Dear Alex >As I understand it and what I mean is "predetermination to be a killer, with no alternative" . KO:? there is no??pre-determine killer.? There is a person who is more incline to violence as they have more?anusaya for violence.? Anusaya conditions?the person dosa but does not?determine?the person will kill.??Because the person will have asaya conditons also, that will?conditon for the arisen of kusala with or?without panna.? These asaya conditions could be due to?understanding of the dhamma now.? His?accumulations of violence?will lessen due to the arisen of panna?that understanding the characteristics of dosa.? Or?some?other conditions like the accumulation of adosa due to kusala or hiri or otappa, these?kusala could?due to other wordly conditions like upbringing, education or culture or environment or wise persons.?? The meaning of condition to kill is not talking about past kamma, it is talking about when you kill, it is conditioned first by dosa which will conditons the bodily actions to commit the killing.? If you have panna or kusala, it would not condition you to kill.??? So that is why we emphasis on the development of panna by understanding reality right now. >> The cause of kamma arise after the seeing citta has fallen >away,?the other cittas that arise during javana.? It is the javana >cittas that is the cause, and at time it is not the result.? > >And these javana cittas, are they fatalistically predetermined to react only in one certain way? > KO:? Nope, if they are fatalistically predetermined, there is no salvation.? There are many factors involved as I said above.? Accumulations or anusaya does not predetermined, it just decribed the tendency of inclination?of the akusala?cittas to arise. ??Arising of dosa cittas do not mean you will kill.? Cheers Ken O #106125 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 11:12 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Will, codetermination truth_aerator Dear KenO, Thank you very much for your reply. With metta, Alex --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Alex > > > >As I understand it and what I mean is "predetermination to be a killer, with no alternative" . > > KO:? there is no??pre-determine killer.? There is a person who is more incline to violence as they have more?anusaya for violence.? Anusaya conditions?the person dosa but does not?determine?the person will kill.??Because the person will have asaya conditons also, that will?conditon for the arisen of kusala with or?without panna.? These asaya conditions could be due to?understanding of the dhamma now.? His?accumulations of violence?will lessen due to the arisen of panna?that understanding the characteristics of dosa.? Or?some?other conditions like the accumulation of adosa due to kusala or hiri or otappa, these?kusala could?due to other wordly conditions like upbringing, education or culture or environment or wise persons.?? The meaning of condition to kill is not talking about past kamma, it is talking about when you kill, it is conditioned first by dosa which will conditons the bodily actions to commit the killing.? If you > have panna or kusala, it would not condition you to kill.??? So that is why we emphasis on the development of panna by understanding reality right now. > > > >> The cause of kamma arise after the seeing citta has fallen >away,?the other cittas that arise during javana.? It is the javana >cittas that is the cause, and at time it is not the result.? > > > >And these javana cittas, are they fatalistically predetermined to react only in one certain way? > > > KO:? Nope, if they are fatalistically predetermined, there is no salvation.? There are many factors involved as I said above.? Accumulations or anusaya does not predetermined, it just decribed the tendency of inclination?of the akusala?cittas to arise. ??Arising of dosa cittas do not mean you will kill.? > > > > Cheers > Ken O > > #106126 From: Ken O Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 11:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Part 2 : Jhanas -> 4 stages of Awakening ashkenn2k Dear Alex >Buddhist Jhanas require panna. So one cannot have real Buddhist Jhana without panna. The Samma-Samadhi (8th factor of N8P) is described as 4 Jhanas. > >Also, I don't remember any sutta passage that conclusively establishes that Jhana is not required for Awakening. KO:? Only those who practise jhanas will have supramundane jhanas.? those who do not practise jhanas, will not have supramundane jhanas.? Below are three suttas where there is no jhana involved ?Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn56/sn56.011.nymo.html <> Shows that Ven Kondanna does not have jhanas and he is enlighted as sotapanna. Anatta-lakkhana Sutta http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.059.nymo.html <> No jhanas here also Adittapariyaya Sutta: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.028.nymo.html <> Also no jhanas here. >> KO:? I said for the dry insightors, when lokkuttara citta arise, >the object is exceeding clear and that conditon is close to jhanas >but it is not jhanas. > >So they have achieve the path through N7P and the Buddha taught un-needed, un-necessary, going off-a-tangent instructions (such as Jhana, samatha, etc)? > KO:? Concentraton?could be?samma or miccha.? The sutta has text reference for miccha samadhi also.? I forget which sutta but there is.? So when concentration arise with samma ditthi, it is samma samadhi.? that is the meaning of 8NP.? Cheers Ken O #106128 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 12:21 pm Subject: Jhanas -> 4 stages of Awakening (corrected) truth_aerator Dear KenO, All, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Alex > > > >Buddhist Jhanas require panna. So one cannot have real Buddhist >Jhana without panna. The Samma-Samadhi (8th factor of N8P) is >described as 4 Jhanas. > > > >Also, I don't remember any sutta passage that conclusively >establishes that Jhana is not required for Awakening. > > KO: Only those who practise jhanas will have supramundane jhanas. those who do not practise jhanas, will not have supramundane jhanas. Below are three suttas where there is no jhana involved > > Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn56/sn56.011.nymo.html > <> > Shows that Ven Kondanna does not have jhanas and he is enlighted as sotapanna. > > Anatta-lakkhana Sutta > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.059.nymo.html > < Now during this utterance, the hearts of the bhikkhus of the group of five were liberated from taints through clinging no more.>> > No jhanas here also > > Adittapariyaya Sutta: > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.028.nymo.html > <> > Also no jhanas here. > > > >> KO: I said for the dry insightors, when lokkuttara citta arise, >the object is exceeding clear and that conditon is close to jhanas >but it is not jhanas. > > > >So they have achieve the path through N7P and the Buddha taught un-needed, un-necessary, going off-a-tangent instructions (such as Jhana, samatha, etc)? > > > KO: Concentraton could be samma or miccha. The sutta has text reference for miccha samadhi also. I forget which sutta but there is. So when concentration arise with samma ditthi, it is samma samadhi. that is the meaning of 8NP. > > > Cheers > Ken O Those suttas do NOT refute Jhana merely through not mentioning it and everything that they did before that sermon. Those suttas do not mention the fact that those ascetics had parents, have bodily functions, etc, but we understand that it is a given that any one has to have had both parents and have bodily functions, etc. Every sutta cannot contain absolutely everything that they did. So mere absence of mention is no guarantee that they didn't have it. We have to take suttas in the context, such as N8P. Does the sutta state anywhere that "these people had never achieved Jhana" (or something close to Jhana prior to hearing the discourse)? The Sutta on N8P, btw, did teach about Jhana (as part of N8P) being the path to cessation of stress. ""The way leading to cessation of suffering, as a noble truth, is this: It is simply the noble eightfold path, that is to say, right view, right intention; right speech, right action, right livelihood; right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn56/sn56.011.nymo.html So it is hard to say that they didn't achieve Jhana, if Jhana was mentioned as being one of the factors of the path. Those 5 ascetics could have achieved Jhana or something similar to it prior to hearing the discourse. Because they were ascetics, their hindrances already were suppressed/weakened quite well before hearing the Buddha's lesson. So it is not surprising if they've got jhana just before, or during maggaphala moment since their state (from ascetic practices) was with weakened sensual desire and other hindrances, thus very close to Jhana. They already had some development from their system, some of which may have carried through to Dhamma. Maybe *they* needed just a little more guidance and pointing to in order to get to real Jhanas, and complete paths and fruits. In any case, you can read that discource 100 times, and read 100 more discourses... Yet did you achieve maggaphala? If you just emerged from a Jhana (following 'mundane' N8P) or near Jhana state - then maybe you could achieve maggaphala and became a stream enterer or higher through listening to a discource. And maybe if one were a (Ugghatitannu & Vipancitannu) class of person, then maybe you could achieve stream from listening. ==== (1) A Ugghatitannu : an individual who * encounters a Buddha in person, and * who is capable of attaining the Holy Paths and the Holy Fruits through the mere hearing of a short concise discourse. (2) A Vipancitannu: an individual who * encounters a Buddha in person, but * who is capable of attaining the Paths and the Fruits only when the short discourse is expounded to him at some length. At the present day, only the following Neyya and Padaparama classes of individuals remain. (3) A Neyya : an individual who needs * to study the sermon and the exposition, and then * to practise the provisions contained therein for 7 days to 60 years, to attain the Paths and the Fruits during this lifetime if he tries hard with guidance from the right teacher. (4) A Padaparama : is an individual who * cannot attain the Paths and the Fruits within this lifetime. * can attain release from worldly ills in his next existence if he dies while practising samatha or vipassana and attains rebirth either as a human being or a deva within the present Buddha Sasana. Necessary Conditions of Practice for Neyya and Padaparama Individuals Neyya-puggala An individual of the Neyya class can become a Sotpanna in this present life, if he faithfully practises the bodhipakkhiya-dhamma comprising satipatthana (four Applications of Mindfulness), sammapadhana (Right Exertion), etc. If he is lax in his practice, he can become a Sotapanna only in his next existence after being reborn in the deva planes. If he dies while still aloof from these (bodhipakkhiya-Dhammas) he will become a total loss so far as the present Buddha Sasana is concerned, but he can still attain release from worldly ills if he encounters the Sasana of the next Buddha. Padaparama-puggala An individual of the Padaparama class can attain release only within the present Buddha Sasana after rebirth in the deva planes in his next existence, if he can faithfully practise the bodhipakkhiya-Dhammas in his present existence. The present Buddha Sasana will continue to exist so long as the Tipitakas remain in the world. The Padaparama class of individuals have to accumlate as much of the nuclei or seeds of Parami as they can within this lifetime. http://www.triplegem.plus.com/individu.htm ============================================================== With metta, Alex #106129 From: "Mike" Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 12:30 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) mikenz66 Hi Ken, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > >Mike: Since there is the concept of "conditioning" the fact that dhammas rise and fall rapidly does not necessarily imply lack of some sort of long-time (imperfect) continuity. Otherwise we wouldn't have the results of kamma, or memory for that matter... > > KO:? Due to rise and fall, there is no continuity.???If one view there is some sot of long-time?contintuity, there is a belief?of?eternalism,?miccha ditthi.?? If there is?continuity, then?the three characteristics?would not be relevant.?? Impermance, dukkha and anatta?characteristics would not?exhibit.??As long as?kamma does not?conditon cuti citta to arise, our?nama and rupa will continue to arise and fall in this human plane. Mike: It seems I'm not expressing myself clearly enough. [Not that it helps, but I can't help thinking of the Frank Zappa Lyric: "What is your conceptual continuity?"] Mike: I admit that "continuity" might be the wrong word, but the Abhidhamma (or, at least, the commentaries) is full of moment-to-moment causality. Dhammas don't just rise and fall randomly. Metta Mike #106130 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 8:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Will, codetermination upasaka_howard Hi, Alex (and Ken) - In a message dated 3/19/2010 12:43:03 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Dear KenO, all, >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Alex > > Lets examine >IMHO, the Buddha didn't preach fatalism ala Makkhali >Gosala. > > Vipaka is the result of kamma as you know it. Right. > Fatalism only happens when the result is the cause of kamma. As I understand it and what I mean is "predetermination to be a killer, with no alternative". ---------------------------------------------------- I think that 'fatalism' means "the absence of so-called free will." If so, then the question is what exactly is meant by 'free will'. I suspect that there are numerous alternative meanings assigned to that term. One of them is "the ability to act on the basis of one's wishes, whether those wishes were based directly (and solely) on one's general inclinations or based also on a decision process of some sort involving cognitive and/or emotive deliberation. With *that* meaning, one could say that people always exhibit free will except when blocked from doing so. Thus, there is often free will (in this sense) but sometimes not. Incidentally, for 'free will' meaning "intention that is not predetermined," I do not see how there can be such a thing. It would require that events affect only *probabilities* of particular acts of volition. With this meaning, volition being "free" would mean that on any given occasion whether one wills a particular thing or not is undetermined and random, though influenced by the probabilistic "weight" assigned to it by prior events. After eating a tremendous meal, for example, it might be 99.44% unlikely that an impulse to continue eating arises, and yet such an impulse could nonetheless quite randomly arise for no reason whatsoever. In what way could such random willing be considered to be "free will"? Moreover, what in the world be desirable about such "free will"? For will to be "free" at all seems to me to require that it be lawful, not random - that willing be "for a reason". -------------------------------------------------- > The cause of kamma arise after the seeing citta has fallen >away, the other cittas that arise during javana. It is the javana >cittas that is the cause, and at time it is not the result. And these javana cittas, are they fatalistically predetermined to react only in one certain way? -------------------------------------------------- The only alternative is that willing occurs (or not) randomly and without causal basis. That makes no sense to me. ------------------------------------------------- Thank you very much for your post, With metta, Alex =============================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #106131 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 12:40 pm Subject: "Man proposes and conditions disposes" truth_aerator Hello Howard, all, You have said some interesting arguments that I have read them myself from a non-Buddhist philosopher. I had some interesting insights, so I am not going to argue here. In any case I believe that one should do one's best develop understanding (in all postures and activities) as much as possible. "Man proposes and conditions disposes". With metta, Alex #106132 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 10:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Will, codetermination upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Alex) - In a message dated 3/19/2010 1:52:08 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, ashkenn2k@... writes: Dear Alex >As I understand it and what I mean is "predetermination to be a killer, with no alternative" . KO: there is no pre-determine killer. There is a person who is more incline to violence as they have more anusaya for violence. Anusaya conditions the person dosa but does not determine the person will kill. Because the person will have asaya conditons also, that will conditon for the arisen of kusala with or without panna. These asaya conditions could be due to understanding of the dhamma now. His accumulations of violence will lessen due to the arisen of panna that understanding the characteristics of dosa. Or some other conditions like the accumulation of adosa due to kusala or hiri or otappa, these kusala could due to other wordly conditions like upbringing, education or culture or environment or wise persons. The meaning of condition to kill is not talking about past kamma, it is talking about when you kill, it is conditioned first by dosa which will conditons the bodily actions to commit the killing. If you have panna or kusala, it would not condition you to kill. So that is why we emphasis on the development of panna by understanding reality right now. >> The cause of kamma arise after the seeing citta has fallen >away, the other cittas that arise during javana. It is the javana >cittas that is the cause, and at time it is not the result. > >And these javana cittas, are they fatalistically predetermined to react only in one certain way? > KO: Nope, if they are fatalistically predetermined, there is no salvation. There are many factors involved as I said above. Accumulations or anusaya does not predetermined, it just decribed the tendency of inclination of the akusala cittas to arise. Arising of dosa cittas do not mean you will kill. Cheers Ken O ================================ Does not this talk of inclination and tendency but non-determination come down to conditions arising or not on the basis of probability, leaving open uncaused events? With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #106133 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 10:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] "Man proposes and conditions disposes" upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 3/19/2010 3:44:07 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hello Howard, all, You have said some interesting arguments that I have read them myself from a non-Buddhist philosopher. I had some interesting insights, so I am not going to argue here. In any case I believe that one should do one's best develop understanding (in all postures and activities) as much as possible. -------------------------------------------------- Me, too! And in part because I believe that, I do work on that. Conditions! ;-) ------------------------------------------------- "Man proposes and conditions disposes". ------------------------------------------------- :-) ------------------------------------------------ With metta, Alex ============================ With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #106134 From: han tun Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 3:05 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Q. Abhidhamma Series, no 2. Paramattha dhamma and pa~n~natti. hantun1 Dear Nina, > > Han: A Burmese Sayadaw once said that: (1) paramattha is covered by pa~n~natti. For an ordinary uninstructed person it is difficult to penetrate through pa~n~natti to see paramattha. (2) pa~n~natti is covered by kilesas. For an ordinary uninstructed person it is difficult to penetrate through kilesas to know pa~n~natti as pa~n~natti. What is your thought on the above? --------- > Nina: These words are well worth considering. 1: We always assumed that self sees, hears, thinks. Before hearing Dhamma we did not know that what we call a person is citta, cetasika and ruupa. Thanks to the Buddha we can begin to see paramattha dhammas. They arise because of their own conditions and have no owner, no self who can direct them. Pa~n~natti has more than one meaning. It can also be a term denoting paramattha dhammas and then it is very helpful. Citta, cetasika and ruupa are terms, pa~n~nattis, denoting what is true: paramattha dhammas. 2. Pa~n~natti can be known as pa~n~natti when we have understood what paramattha dhammas are: realities each with their own unalterable characteristic. Seeing is always seeing and we do not have to call it seeing, it has its own characteristic, the experience of visible object through the eyesense. We may give it another name, but its characteristic cannot be changed. Whatever is not a paramattha dhamma is pa~n~natti. We may well be confused by kilesas. Because of ignorance and clinging we may not wish to see the truth. We cling so much to the self that we do not wish to see that self or person are pa~n~nattis, not true in the ultimate sense. We do not like to hear that there is no person. It upsets the world we are familiar with for so many lives. It is difficult to become detached from the idea of self. Only understanding of the reality appearing at this moment leads to detachment. -------- Han: Thank you very much for the above explanation. It is very useful. Respectfully, Han #106135 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 4:15 pm Subject: Re: "Man proposes and conditions disposes" scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding' A: "Man proposes and conditions disposes". Scott: May I ask who you are quoting here? This is absolute drivel, in my opinion - pop-buddhism at its worst. Sincerely, Scott. #106136 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 5:48 pm Subject: The Intention is the Kamma! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: The Buddha on Kamma (Intentional Action): I am the owner of my actions (kamma), inheritor of my actions, born of my actions, created by my actions, and have my own actions as my judge! Whatever I do, good or evil, I will feel the resulting effects of that ... Source: AN V 57 Intention, Bhikkhus, is what I call action, for through intention one initiates these actions through the door of the body, speech or mind. There is kamma (intentional action), Bhikkhus, that ripens in hell.... There is kamma that ripens in the animal world.. There is kamma that ripens in the world of humans.... There is kamma that ripens in the divine world.... Threefold, however, is this ripening fruit of kamma: ripening during here in this life, or ripening in the next rebirth life, or ripening in even later rebirths ... Source: AN VI 63 The 10 advantageous courses of action (=Good Kamma): The 3 bodily actions: Avoidance of killing, stealing, and abusive sexuality. The 4 verbal actions: Avoidance of lying, slandering, angry & empty speech. The 3 mental actions: Doing Withdrawal, Good-will, and Right Views. Source: MN 9 Greed, Bhikkhus, is a condition for the arising of kamma. Hate is a condition for the arising of kamma. Confusion is a condition for the arising of kamma. Source: AN III 109 One who kills & harms goes either to hell or will be short-lived elsewhere. One who torments others will be afflicted with disease or disability. The angry one will look ugly, the envious one will be without influence. The stingy one will be poor, the stubborn will be placed low and stupid. The lazy will be without knowledge, understanding and certainty. In the contrary case, one will be reborn in heaven or reborn as man. One will be long-lived, beautiful, influential, highborn and intelligent! Source: MN 135 There are 10 meritorious actions leading to human or divine rebirth: 1: Giving. 2: Morality. 3: Meditation. 4: Reverence by paying respect to monks and elders. 5: Performing services to others. 6: Transference of merits to others. 7: Rejoicing in others' merit. 8: Learning this true Dhamma. 9: Teaching this true Dhamma. 10: Correcting one's wrong views. To the extent that there are beings, past, and future, dying & re-arising, all beings are the owners of their actions, inheritor to their actions, are born of their actions, created by their action, conditioned by their actions, related to their actions, and are dependent on the effect of past actions. Whatever they do, for good or for evil, from that will they feel the result... Source: AN V 57 Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! http://What-Buddha-Said.net The Intention is the Kamma! #106137 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 6:47 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 kenhowardau Hi Ken O, --------------- <. . .> KH: > > What if I said the texts taught only one thing - satipatthana (right understanding of the presently arisen conditioned reality). Would you agree with that? <. . .> >> KO: >The text is about eradication of kilesa by panna, that is the only path. --------------- I am not sure if you are agreeing or disagreeing. Right understanding of the present conditioned reality does eradicate kilesa. So you could be agreeing. --------------------------------- KO: > There are different approaches to the only path. --------------------------------- Maybe so; that will depend on the definition of approach. If the path is what I said it was - right understanding of the present conditioned reality - then an approach will have to be something that has already been conditioned to apply now. -------------------------- KOL > The texts do not discount any samantha bhavana as a basis for panna, samantha bhavana is not itself panna that eradicates kilesa because the moment the object is still conceptual. This bhavana serves as a strong paccaya for the arising of panna to understand nama and rupa because of the strong clarity of the object by the kusala cittas and also they must know dhamma. --------------------------- I'm not sure if that is right. But in any case, to be of any use it has to help us understand the present reality. If it relates to some hypothetical right understanding in the future then it is of no use for satipatthana. --------------------------------------- <. . .> KO: > Method does not matter whether it fits with satipatthana or not, as long as it is describe clearly in the texts, we have to admit that there is such methods. ----------------------------------------- The texts describe people, places, methods, cats, dogs and Sal trees, but that doesn't mean we have to admit there are such things. We have to know them in the "particular" sense, not in the "general" sense. Ken H #106138 From: "Mike" Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 7:23 pm Subject: Re: "Man proposes and conditions disposes" mikenz66 Hi Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > A: "Man proposes and conditions disposes". > > Scott: May I ask who you are quoting here? This is absolute drivel, in my opinion - pop-buddhism at its worst. Dont panic, it's just a play on an old theistic saying... http://www.answers.com/topic/man-proposes-god-disposes Metta Mike #106139 From: Gemunu Rohana Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 7:27 pm Subject: Learn Abhidharma the easy way - Roopa Samuttana - Causes of all 28 Roopa gemunu.rohana There are four causes of Roopa. 1. Karma - Kamma - Kusal/Akusal - Merits/Sins 2. Chitta - Mind 3. Ruthu - Temperature/Climate 4. Ahara - Food Some roopa are caused by all 4 of them, Some are caused by 3 of them, Some are caused by 2 of them, Some are caused by only 1 one of them and some are caused by none (they are simply state properties of roopa). Then from individual cause point of view, you can count total number of roopa per cause. All these are detailed in this image. N.B. The real world equivalent of "Roopa Skanda" (AKA all the physical matter) is just "Foam" as preached in Gem Dhamma. That is why the backgound is made somewhat look alike. May the Triple Gem Bless You! May You Attain Sowan (Nirwaana) in This Very Life! Visit http://sinhaladharmastore.blogspot.com/ for freely downloadable sinhala Dharma content. #106140 From: Sukinder Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 8:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) sukinderpal Hello Vince, > > Yes, we don't know what the accumulations are, not only of others, > > but also our own. But then how do we ever come to know our own > > accumulations? First, it must be panna which knows this. Vince: > agreed. Awakening is by panna action with independence of body. S: I have no idea Vince, what you are referring to. Could you explain? ======================== > > Each person will have to find out for himself the kusala and > > akusala tendencies he or she has. When it comes to panna itself, I > > think this becomes especially important. After all, ignorance does > > not know that it does not know and when it comes to wrong view, the > > impression is that it knows correctly when in fact it must be wrong. > > So it helps to be patient in this regard and know that one can never > > hear and consider enough the Dhamma. Vince: > I'm not sure about that. Panna cannot be a wrong knowledge because it > means the contrary thing. > I think a problem is that when we investigate the acquired knowledge > of what we name "real" (instead "concept") also we can realize that we > don't posses nothing at all, except a security of a right movement of > the mind. However, remembrance of that movement doesnt' belongs to a > mind-object and then our deluded mind needs to put some object to > build a form in order to grasp it. This is something to consider > around emptiness of consciousness and rest of paramata-dhammas. S: I?m not sure, but are you saying that one can mistake intellectual understanding for direct understanding? I?d say given the accumulated ignorance and attachment, anything can happen. And so again I come to the conclusion that hearing and considering the Dhamma cannot be done enough. ;-) =================== Vince: > On my side also I think quite important regarding the distinction of > "real" and "conceptual". Such division very repeated here and I agree. > It is needed for the practice. S: Without intellectual understanding there can never be right practice. Panna accumulates as sankhara and there is no ?self? who decide when and how Patipatti will arise. =================== Vince: > Although als, one cannot fall in the > obsession towards what is real in front what is conceptual, until the > point to forget anatta. Our own obsessions regarding truth are like > beloved pets because they entertain our knowledge and are guiding us. S: As I said to Mike in another context, ?it helps to be patient and know that one can never hear and consider enough the Dhamma?. Also it is good to keep in mind, the distinction between Pariyatti, Patipatti and Pativedha and between Suttamaya Panna, Cintamaya Panna and Bhavanamaya Panna and also Saccannana, Kiccannana and Katannana. ================ Vince: > But also one should be aware they are like phantoms, and they must be > vanished some day. I mean the investigation of what is real in front > concept causes a right disposition for the arising of panna. However > also there is a need of not forgetting emptiness of what is real. S: Again I am not sure what you are saying and need you to explain more. ================ Vince: > I had some discussions here with this matter, because I understand > many times there is this invisible" view underlying some ideas around > real and concept. Trying to unveil reality of objects (included > paramatta-dhammas) is important but I understand also one must be > aware of the empty nature of what is real. S: But wouldn?t you say that understanding paramattha dhamma is to know also that they are anatta / empty? How else is anatta known if not by way of a paramattha dhamma becoming object of panna? =============== > > I said, rather it is about panna which knows harm in akusala and > > value of kusala. When it comes then to the level which sees danger > > in sense contacts, this must necessarily involve wisdom of even > > higher level. But still, it must be based on knowing one's own > > citta and not a matter simply, of having the senses restricted. Vince: > yes. There are episodes of Buddha recommending restriction of senses > but to bikkhus who still were not arhant. So it is just another practice. S: Are you saying that the Buddha recommended this to Stream Enterers, Once Returners and Non Returners? And are you saying that the Buddha thought that it was good for some Bhikkhus to restrict the senses? To what end would this be? ================ Vince: > But when wisdom is not enough there is practice. Even when somebody > can understand death as delusion, still there are miles in order not > fearing death. So restriction of senses can be understable according > persons and situations. Of course somebody can be engaged in a > practice without including restriction of senses but putting all > confidence in wisdom. Another thing is until where restriction of > senses really is not important in any situation. I don't know. S: What you are saying is that if wisdom / right view is not developed enough, for some people the practice of samatha is needed, but for others with strong confidence in wisdom, this alone could be enough to lead to the goal. I think although all kinds of kusala support the development of wisdom, this is so for everyone regardless of whether he has inclinations for Jhana or not. But when we think in terms of the Path leading to the eradication of the defilements, there is only one, namely the Noble Eightfold Path. When the texts mention the difference between those who attained enlightenment using Jhana as base and those who don?t, this is not to be understood as different Paths. The Path will always be one, such that the person with Jhana would have in his rounds in samasara, needed to hear the Dhamma, associated with the wise, wisely reflected and practiced in accordance with the Dhamma as much as the one who ends up being a Dry Insighter. In conclusion I don?t think it right to try and justify samatha as a practice to be undertaken as ?support? for vipassana. The imperative for all, whether he is a Jhana master or a house holder living a busy life, is the development of Right Understanding of present moment realities. ================== > > If it is Right View which understands nama and rupa and the reality > > / concept distinction, then thinking about development in terms of > > another and better time and place should not imo come in. Vince: > but while there is not arhathood there are better or worse situations. > Some people prefer to be engaged in seated meditation while others in > study, faith, etc... In fact this discussion exists because that. > At least I understand Buddha had both type of disciples according > Suttas, and he explained the different ways to be alliberated. > In all the ways panna would be the agent, in this point I agree. S: And the point is whether such thinking is right thinking. ;-) Personal preference has nothing to do with it. The four factors to Stream Entry, namely hearing the Dhamma and so on, these involve resultants, causes, as well as accumulated tendency to right view. Preference plays no part in any of this. Several questions could be asked. Does one read, listen and discuss the Dhamma with the aim of gaining something, if so, is this the right cause? Can there be practice while reading, if so, was this willed? How would the natural tendency to ?practice? manifest? Is any decision to sit and meditate an instance of correct intellectual understanding, if so of what? Is the interest likewise kusala, if so, by virtue of what? These and many other questions could be asked. In the end however, only panna would know. ================ > > The mention of `meditation' did not put it on the same ground as other > > activities such as watching TV. It was to show that it had a > > particular purpose which would then make it more or less necessary. > > Indeed even you while trying to make this sound as if it could be > > natural for some people to do this, see a need to qualify it with > > `ambit of practice', and I think this is wrong. Vince: > yes, "meditation" is a word absent in the Suttas but we find "bhavana" > which means "cultivation". > I think it depends of the person. As you says, there is the > "meditator" who meditate trying something. But there are also > "meditators" who meditate without intention. S: Yes, Patipatti has a very specific meaning in the Dhamma and each time that it arises, this is bhavana. It refers to a particular dhamma arisen in the moment by conditions beyond control. And is not what is conventionally understood, as in ?sitting for a particular length of time? which is then taken collectively to be ?practice?. If we really believe in the fact of cittas arising and falling away by conditions beyond control and if we really knew how much ignorance there is and how little understanding of all this, I don?t think we would go on to *believe in* such conventional practices. ============= > They understand seated > meditation as an expression of non-effort and non-intention. S: ?Seated meditation? is concept / a conventional idea. This can?t be the object of any level of Right Understanding as far as I can see. And what is this idea of ?non-effort? and ?non-intention?? Effort and intention must arise with every instance of impulsion. It seems that you are involved in some conventional ideas and forgetting to consider the nature of the different realities?? ============= Vince: > Such thing exists in example in Japanese and Chinese Zen, and they > have a lot of writings about that. I ignore if such scriptural > development exists in Theravada but for sure there is some people > (even if we think they are few) who also can keep a similar point. S: But I don?t think that any of them are correct??.:-/ ============ Vince: > As you lives in Thailand and surrounded of people seated everywhere > and expecting superpowers perhaps you think I'm very optimistic...hehe :-) S: No, I wasn?t having such people in mind. ============= > > There is ever only the present moment to be known, for someone with > > very high level of panna, the measure is that this can arise *at > > anytime*. It is never about greater frequency in some particular > > time, place and posture and less in others. To think along those > > lines must in fact be a hindrance. In other words, natural or not, > > the very thought to meditate, making this *different* from other > > times, this I believe can't be something that panna of the vipassana > > kind would entertain. > > What do you think? ;-) Vince: > unfortunately I agree with most of what you says but I'm trying to get > some points to contradict these ideas until I can :-) S: Do you agree with this part above: ?the measure is that this can arise *at anytime*?? Thank you Vince, for the discussion. :-) Metta, Sukinder #106141 From: "nori" Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 10:20 pm Subject: Re: Nama vs Citta norakat147 Hi Sarah, Good to hear from you; long time. Appreciate you explaining this for me. I have not seen B.Bodhi's translation of the Mahaanidaana Sutta, but I just got his Manual on Abhidhamma from BPS. So citta (or each citta) is ephemeral and not continuous, but a thing which continually comes into existence and passes away dependent upon conditions of other things like rupas? There is no aspect of a continuous witness/observer? So citta - that (ephemeral thing) which experiences the object; does it also have inclination/will/kamma and also emotion or an emotional nature/system (I don't mean feelings; but maybe a condition for mental/citta conditioned feelings because my understanding is that citta also conditions thoughts.)? Do you think D.O. (also the sequence that begins with Avijja & Sankharas) is representing 3 consecutive lives? I should, and will eventually get to studying and discovering these things but I couldn't help myself from asking... With Metta, Nori --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Nori, > > Good to read you after a long break! Always good to see our 'old' members around:-) > ---snip--- #106142 From: Ken O Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 11:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) ashkenn2k Dear Mike >Mike: It seems I'm not expressing myself clearly enough. [Not that it helps, but I can't help thinking of the Frank Zappa Lyric: "What is your conceptual continuity?" ] > >Mike: I admit that "continuity" might be the wrong word, but the Abhidhamma (or, at least, the commentaries) is full of moment-to-moment causality. Dhammas don't just rise and fall randomly. > KO:?In the sense and mind door process, it is of fixed order.? Even in the fixed order, the process may not run its full course depending on the strength of the object as describe in Abhidhamma sanghata.? I would not said randomly.? Just like when we are walking, we could be distracted by sound of the car, or someone walk pass us or we suddenly remember to forget to do something.???I would said depends on the object that present itself in the sense doors including the mind door.? Also depends on the four cause of rupa like we would not be aware how nutriments?condition the body rupas.?? Also it cannot be a fixed order.? It would mean?means ignorance and lobha cannot be erdicate as they would keep condition the ignorance and lobha to arise, that would mean fatalism.? IMHO, it must be object dependent and not random or fixed order. cheers ken O #106143 From: Ken O Date: Fri Mar 19, 2010 11:58 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 ashkenn2k Dear Ken H >------------ --- > >I am not sure if you are agreeing or disagreeing. > >Right understanding of the present conditioned reality does eradicate kilesa. So you could be agreeing. > KO:? I never disagree on vipassana bhavana :-).? I?am a proponent?of vipassana bhavana. I just want to say there?is also samantha bhavana.? Also even one who practise jhanas and attain supernomal powers,?must emerge from it to develope right understand of conditional reality in order to eradicate kilesa.? >------------ --------- --------- --- > >Maybe so; that will depend on the definition of approach. If the path is what I said it was - right understanding of the present conditioned reality - then an approach will have to be something that has already been conditioned to apply now. > KO:? that will depends on one accumulations and understanding.? >------------ --------- ------ > >I'm not sure if that is right. But in any case, to be of any use it has to help us understand the present reality. If it relates to some hypothetical right understanding in the future then it is of no use for satipatthana. > >------------ --------- --------- --------- KO:? Maybe let me quote an extract from commentary of anapasati, written by Ven Namoli. Pg 35 of the book <> >------------ --------- --------- --------- -- > >The texts describe people, places, methods, cats, dogs and Sal trees, but that doesn't mean we have to admit there are such things. We have to know them in the "particular" sense, not in the "general" sense. KO:? Yes in a?particuluar sense but the texts does not disclaim method in samantha bhavana. Cheers Ken O #106144 From: Ken O Date: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Will, codetermination ashkenn2k Dear Howard >============ ========= ========= == >Does not this talk of inclination and tendency but non-determination >come down to conditions arising or not on the basis of probability, leaving >open uncaused events? > >With metta, >Howard KO:???Honestly no.?Other than the result due to kamma as vipaka cittas.??The other caused events must be?conditioned by our?kusala or?akusala cittas which is influenced?by our inclination or tendency.? Cheers Ken O #106145 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sat Mar 20, 2010 2:55 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions withOUT A.Sujin February 2010 (8) ptaus1 Dear sarah, Thanks very much for your reply on kamma/vipaka. > S: If you or anyone have any sutta quotes you'd like to discuss in more detail, we could also do that. pt: Thanks, I'm hoping to discuss this topic in a bit more detail, once I find some time. Btw, sorry to hear abou your jellyfish stings. You're really brave, whenever I'm in Australia I make sure never to stray too far off asphalt. Seems the only way to avoid all the sharks, snakes, jellyfish and whatnot. Except for all the stuff that flies around...:) Best wishes pt #106146 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sat Mar 20, 2010 3:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Commentary to Dhatukatha ptaus1 Dear Sarah, Thanks for the clarification. Must be a mistake on ATI. I think dhatukatha was also published around 1962, so maybe that's the source of confusion. Best wishes pt > S: No, I'm confused too. There are translated commentaries to the Dhammasangani, Vibhanga and Kathavatthu only that I'm aware of. The Yamaka itself has not been translated either. #106147 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sat Mar 20, 2010 3:04 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) ptaus1 Hi Sukin, Re #106015 Thanks for your post. I hope to reply in detail when I find a bit of time. Thanks for further discussion on the topic with Mike, KenO and KenH. Best wishes pt > ... > Thanks for the discussion Pt. > > Metta, > > Sukinder #106148 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sat Mar 20, 2010 3:23 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) ptaus1 Hi Scott, > S: The solution is to keep in mind that each moment of consciousness arises (with duration) and falls away completely prior to the arising of the next moment and 'continuity' can only refer descriptively to the sequence of discrete dhammas. Could you please say a bit more about your understanding momentariness and especially about duration of citta, as I find the topic confusing. Just recently I was going through Kathavatthu XV.3 (around page 295 in the edition I had a look at) - as far as I could understand what the Theravadin side was saying - there's no duration of a moment other than as a "time-notion" what I understood to mean that duration is a concept. Perhaps I'm wrong as Kathavatthu translation is really hard to follow. Sorry I can't quote the passage now, I'll write it down next time I come across that book. Thanks. Best wishes pt #106149 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Mar 20, 2010 3:29 am Subject: Re: "Man proposes and conditions disposes" scottduncan2 Dear Mike, Regarding: A: "Man proposes and conditions disposes". Me: "May I ask who you are quoting here? This is absolute drivel, in my opinion - pop-buddhism at its worst." M: "Dont panic, it's just a play on an old theistic saying..." Scott: Thanks, Mike. No panic. Can you stick around with me long enough to suggest how such a play on an old theistic saying carries any relevance whatsoever? What do you think such an aphorism means? Sincerely, Scott. #106150 From: "Mike" Date: Sat Mar 20, 2010 3:53 am Subject: Re: "Man proposes and conditions disposes" mikenz66 Hi Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > Scott: Thanks, Mike. No panic. Can you stick around with me long enough to suggest how such a play on an old theistic saying carries any relevance whatsoever? What do you think such an aphorism means? It does have some vague relevance. I'm no expert, but when modern, reasonably sane (e.g. the Anglicans we have down here), Christians talk about "God's will" (which is what the aphorism refers to, I think) they often mean that what happens is not under their control. Therefore, they have to let go of the idea of making life perfect. Of course, from a Buddhist point of view the lack of control isn't due to God, but at a certain practical day-to-day level the message is similar. Metta Mike #106151 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Mar 20, 2010 3:54 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) scottduncan2 Dear pt, Regarding: pt: "Could you please say a bit more about your understanding momentariness and especially about duration of citta...as far as I could understand what the Theravadin side was saying - there's no duration of a moment other than as a 'time-notion' what I understood to mean that duration is a concept. Perhaps I'm wrong as Kathavatthu translation is really hard to follow." Scott: I think: 1) given that a dhamma has a characteristic and, 2) given that this dhamma with characteristic is real - i.e. is present when it is present, and is really what it is when it is present - and, 3) given that this dhamma falls away completely, 4)then, while 'duration' or 'time' is concept, a dhamma which is a reality actually arises, actually is present, and actually falls away. Sincerely, Scott. #106152 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Mar 20, 2010 3:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Learn Abhidharma the easy way - Roopa Samuttana - Causes of all 28 Roopa nilovg Dear Gemunu, Thank you for your contribution. I went to the website. In case you live in Colombo, Acharn Sujin Boriharnwanaket is coming to the All Ceylon Buddhist Congress HQ for Dhamma discussion in Colombo. On March 30, between 3-5 p.m. The contact person: Mr. Jagath Sumathipala, President, All Ceylon Buddhist Congress. Tel. 0777 69 9655. Please tell your friends. In case you live in Kandy, please tell me, since she travels all over Sri Lanka. Acharn Sujin always reminds me that the Abhidhamma is not theoretical, that it pertains to this moment. Ruupas like eyesense is produced by kamma. This moment of seeing would not be possible if kamma would not produce eyesense. Some ruupas are produced by citta. For instance, when we are displeased, we may frown, and then dosa-muulacitta produces ruupas. Nina. Op 20-mrt-2010, om 3:27 heeft Gemunu Rohana het volgende geschreven: > There are four causes of Roopa. > > 1. Karma - Kamma - Kusal/Akusal - Merits/Sins > 2. Chitta - Mind > 3. Ruthu - Temperature/Climate > 4. Ahara - Food > #106153 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Mar 20, 2010 4:09 am Subject: Re: "Man proposes and conditions disposes" scottduncan2 Dear Mike, Regarding: M: "It does have some vague relevance. I'm no expert, but when modern, reasonably sane (e.g. the Anglicans we have down here), Christians talk about 'God's will' (which is what the aphorism refers to, I think) they often mean that what happens is not under their control. Therefore, they have to let go of the idea of making life perfect. Of course, from a Buddhist point of view the lack of control isn't due to God, but at a certain practical day-to-day level the message is similar." Scott: I'm no expert either. Just opinionated. I'd thought as much (you know, vaguely). I don't like aphorisms. I don't like the popularisation of things. I think such a statement is worse than trivial because it purports to have meaning and then people imagine that it actually does have some 'practical day-to-day' relevance. God and man are concepts. 'Will', given that one refers in this to cetanaa-cetasika, is not a concept. 'Man' doesn't will. Thinking thinks thoughts about a person who is free to will this or that but this is not the case. Sincerely, Scott. #106154 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Mar 20, 2010 4:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) nilovg Dear pt, Op 20-mrt-2010, om 11:23 heeft ptaus1 het volgende geschreven: > there's no duration of a moment other than as a "time-notion" what > I understood to mean that duration is a concept. Perhaps I'm wrong > as Kathavatthu translation is really hard to follow. ------- N: The term addhaa is used and this has several meanings. Visuddhimagga, XIV, 187. (for details, see the file) Intro: as the Vis. states, there are four aspects according to which ruupa can be seen as past, future and present, namely: according to (a) extent (addhaa), (b) continuity (santati), (c) period (samaya) and (d) moment (kha.na). In this section the Vis. deals with the meaning of extent. -------- Text Vis. 187. Herein, (a) firstly, 'according to extent': in the case of a single becoming of one [living being], previous to rebirth-linking is 'past', subsequent to death is 'future', between these two is 'present'.[71] ------ N: Extent is the translation of the Pali addhaa which has the meanings of: length of space or time, period, lifetime. ------ Text Tiika: But when it is delimited in the ultimate sense as in the Addhaaniruttipatha Sutta thus, "Bhikkhus, there are three extents, the past extent, the future extent, and the present extent" (Iti.53), then it is appropriate as delimited by moment. Herein, the existingness of the present is stated thus, "Bhikkhus, of matter that is born ... manifested, it is said that 'It exists'" (S.iii,72), and pastness and futureness are respectively called before and after that' (Pm.496). ------- N: This sutta (S. III, ? 62, Mode of reckoning) states the same for the other khandhas. The Tiika to Vis. 187 adds that extent, addhaa can also be used in the ultimate sense (paramatthato) with the meaning of moment (kha.na). The Diigha Nikaaya, Sangiiti Sutta, the threes, XXIV, states: The word addhaa is used here. The Co. to this passage explains that there is the Suttanta method and the Abhidhamma method of explanation. In the Suttanta method past, future and present periods are used in conventional sense, as lifespan. In the Abhidhamma method, addhaa is used in the sense of moment. -------- The Tiika to the Vis. 187 adds that in other suttas addhaa means most of the time the lifespan limited by birth and death. ----------- The ?Dispeller of Delusion?(I, p. 7) also refers to the the two methods of explanation. It states with regard to the Suttanta method: --------- Text Vis.188: (b) 'According to continuity': that [materiality] which has like or single origination [72] by temperature and single origination by nutriment, though it occurs successively, is 'present'. ------ Visuddhimagga Ch XIV, 189. 189. (c) 'According to period': any period among those such as one minute, morning, evening, day-and-night, etc., that occurs as a continuity, is called 'present'. Previous to that is 'past'. Subsequent is 'future'. ****** N: Period is the translation of samaya which can mean: time, moment, occasion, opportunity or condition. We read further on in the Tiika that ?any period?(ta..mta.msamayanti) ( that occurs as a continuity) refers to ruupa. As to the expression previous to that is 'past', means, that it has accomplished the moments [of arising, presence and falling away]. As to future: this refers to ruupa that has not yet arisen (anuppannattaa). **** Ruupa lasts seventeen moments longer than citta. There is the arising moment, the moments of its presence and the moment of its falling away. ******* We read in the ?Expositor? (p. 78):