#108800 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jul 29, 2010 7:09 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] family picture nilovg Dear Ryan, ha, ha. Now do send one with your complete family, Lizz included. It is good to do that. Nina. Op 29-jul-2010, om 18:20 heeft Ryan Brawn het volgende geschreven: > If I was going to have my picture with anyone on there I most > defintly should not have been looking for the newsest one of MYSELF > but for one with my Family. #108801 From: "Ken H" Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 12:02 am Subject: [dsg] Re: how to.... (att. Ken H) kenhowardau Hi Ryan, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ryan Brawn wrote: > > No problems, :) just one question swee boon his answer was his opinion right? > --------------------- Yes, it was his opinion, but his opinion on what? Here at DSG the main aim is to study the Dhamma *as it is found in Pali texts.* But people with other aims are still welcome. Provided they are willing to discuss those texts, people are welcome to find fault with them, or to compare them to other [preferred] doctrines, or whatever else they want to do. It would be unfair, however, if a newcomer like yourself were to direct a question to DSG and be given an answer from (say) a Mahayana perspective *and without that being made clear.* Long term DSG members know that Swee Boon (for example) rejects the Abhidhamma and the ancient commentaries. He has his own opinions on the Dhamma, which conflict with those texts. That is fine, and we all welcome him to do that. Just so long as we all know what's what. :-) Ken H #108802 From: Ryan Brawn Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 12:21 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: how to.... (att. Ken H) gr8fuldawg2010 Ken H Thanks :) #108803 From: Ryan Brawn Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 1:21 am Subject: RE: [dsg] how to.... gr8fuldawg2010 Swee Boon, Ryan: > Are you saying that you believe in Jesus Christ? Swee Boon: Yes, previously. Ryan: And how has kamma showed you anything about Christ divinity? Swee Boon: Nothing. There's no relation. Ok now you are confusing me. Swee Boon: I accepted Jesus into my life at the age of 15. I sincerely believed that he could heal my left ear which is deaf. I went to a healing session and was disappointed. It was all a lie. I hated him. Then I slowly withdrew myself from that fable and discovered it was not a lie. I had only cheated myself. Ryan: This certainly sounds like you believe in Jesus. Am I missing something? Peace & Love Ryan #108804 From: "Ken H" Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 3:38 am Subject: Re: Some ideas about dhamma starting to change kenhowardau Hi Kevin, No other replies yet? Let me be the first to blunder in. :-) ------------ <. . .> K: > I think we can see clearly from this passage that this is an instruction in meditation. I don't think there is any doubt that this is a direct instruction on meditation. ------------ I am sure we all agree with you that it is "an instruction in meditation" but we have different understandings as to what that means. I hope you are not suggesting, Kevin, that the Buddha wanted his monks to forget all he had taught them about conditioned dhammas. Because that is what they would have had to do in order to follow his instructions in the ordinary (conventionally known) way. --------- <. . .> K: > I think this meditation was taught by the Buddha with the purpose of developing wisdom in the individual. I am starting to think that it is profitable. --------- When did you ever have any doubts? Of course it is profitable, but you have to understand what it is. ------------------ K: > I also think that no matter what one does, if one does not have the Parami developed, one will not attain nibbana because there will be no cause or support for it. I think that this meditation works on a conceptual level. When one searches in the body for hardness or roughness as earth element, for example, one does not really see it; however one gets a strong concept that it is there. ------------------- It's there all right; no need for anyone to search! ------------------------------ K: > I think that this meditation can work to increase conceptual wisdom, which can lead to wisdom of actual satipatthana, and eventually to penetration of nibbana. I also think that intentional sila can support this. What do you guys think?? ------------------------------ Some of us guys and gals think there is just one citta following on after another. No control! Sometimes - under very rare conditions - a satipatthana citta will arise. What are those conditions, BTW Kevin, do you remember? Ken H #108805 From: "chandrafabian" Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 5:10 am Subject: Re: AN9.36 chandrafabian Dear Alex, I want to ask you one simple question, you may ask anyone, you may ask Ajahn Brahm, Ajahn Thanissaro or anyone you know. The question is: Is Samma-samadhi/right concentration must be Jhana? Mettacittena, fabian. #108806 From: "chandrafabian" Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 5:26 am Subject: [dsg] Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro chandrafabian Dear Swee Boon, To discuss Dhamma we must find the suitable person to make discussion, if that person not fulfill the criteria, that person is not suitable as a friend to talk to. The criteria's are; 1. Proper language and good manner in the spirit of discussing the truth in friendly manner. 2. Sufficient Knowledge of Dhamma. And the way you make discussion, is not suitable for a discussion, you don't even know Jhana meditation has been around for centurie prior to Prince Siddhattha's birth. It is obvious you don't have manners, and rude. You are lacking this both criteria. Therefore I will not respond further to your comments. Mettacittena, fabian. > #108807 From: "chandrafabian" Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 5:55 am Subject: Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro chandrafabian Dear Ken, I am sorry to hear you never know anyone who has attain Jhana, for your information my community is surropunding by people who has experienced Jhana and insight. I just say to you, just for your information because probably you you would refute by saying "my community has achieved Miccha jhana or corruption of Insight". I am not blaming you for that, after all previously I am a sceptic myself. I also sometimes making bad remarks to meditation teacher which I think may be a dreamer or something similar to that. After I read Visuddhi Magga, we should ask forgivenes for insulting or making bad jokes about these meditation masters, and practice meditation under the the guidance of these masters, I know they are not a theoriticians, but they are "atttainer". I didn't mean I know how far they're achievement, but we can have a wise guess by comparing our experience, to the scriptures and if they know far more than that (if they know our experience and have experienced also), it means their attainment far more than our experience. Experiencing is the best teacher. Talking without experiencing is like talking of manggo without ever tasting it.... About your statement attaining Jhana only 1 in 1000, in Visuddhi Magga, it is explained only for people who practice to achieve Jhana with direct kasina method not Anapanasati. Anapanasati much easier.... Mettacittena, fabian. > #108808 From: "gazita2002" Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 6:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Visuddhimagga IV,78 gazita2002 Hallo Nina, this is very interesting. I had not considered bhavangva cittas in these realms, in fact, had not thought too much about them at all, other than knowing that they 'exist' I tended to think that beings in these realms were quite 'pure' but of course, why wouldnt they still have lobha mula cittas if they hadnt yet been eradicated. I imagine that beings who had attained to higher states eg sotapattimagga, and who experienced these jhana cittas could be 'reborn' in these realms - have I got this right? patience, courage and good cheer azita #108809 From: "chandrafabian" Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 6:32 am Subject: Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro chandrafabian Dear Ken, ================= Hi again Fabian, Continuing on: ----------- <. . .> FABIAN: > As far as I know in meditation we should not thinking, wandering, judging or analyzing the mind, whether it is kusala or akusala. We just note everything as they really are, note as they arises. KEN H: Which kind of meditation notes everything as it arises? I think all of the samatha meditations (including jhana) concentrate on just one object throughout, don't they? And there is no noting in satipatthana. The objects of satipatthana are conditioned dhammas (billionths-of-a-second phenomena), and they have come and gone before anyone can note them. FABIAN: Dear Ken, Allow me to say, you are not familiar with practicing, what you say is true for Samatha meditation, but for Vipassana it is different, in Vipassana we must not involved in thoughts (should not actively thinking), we must become active observer, not a thinker. In Vipassana knowledge come by itself together with experience. for example: can explain the taste of apricot to a person who has never tasted apricot? People might make discussion, debate over the nature and taste of apricot, numerous books can be written about the taste of apricot. After you taste the apricot yourselves, do you need theory? Yes you still need theory, but only to help you to explain the taste of apricot to other people. Or to compare to your own experience. But the books doesn't help you to give knowledge about the taste of it, you know the taste by yourself. The knowledge about the taste comes together with tasting experience. So in practitioner view, the knowledge come together with experience, but the knowledge is better for people who experiencing and also learning theory. ====================================================================== FABIAN: As I told you in Satipatthana you should not thinking, you just observe, see everything as they are, not theoryzing, judging or analyzing. -------------- KEN H: No that is not satipatthana. The form of meditation you have just described was invented in quite recent times. There is no mention of it in the Pali texts. The real satipatthana occurs irrespective of whatever the 'meditator' (if we can call him that) is doing. So he can be thinking or theorising or walking or talking etc. A real satipatthana meditator goes about his normal daily life without attempting to control the flow of dhammas in any way. That is because he understands their conditioned nature. They are beyond control. Ken H FABIAN: I am not saying a satipatthana meditator should control his mind, I am saying he should not get involved in thinking, judging or analyzing. We can not control the condition Dhamma to arise, but we can see the arisen condition Dhamma without getting involved. Like an obeserver of the cloud can not prevent the cloud from arising. But the observer can observe the cloud without attempting to alter, or to get, or to change the cloud. In the same way a meditator can not prevent anger to arise, but the meditator can prevent himself from following, thinking, or analyzing, or judging, or attached to that anger which has arisen. Mettacittena, fabian #108810 From: "chandrafabian" Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 7:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Common misconception on in & out breathing in Vipassana. chandrafabian Dear Nina, Dear Fabian, Op 28-jul-2010, om 7:49 heeft chandrafabian het volgende geschreven: FABIAN: > I Agree with you, in Sammasana nana all ten kilesa might arises, > due to stronger mindfullness and concentration (correct me if I'm > wrong). NINA: I think this is due to accumulated clinging, not to mindfulness. Mindfulness is always kusala. FABIAN: Dear Nina, In my opinion, without mindfulness and concentration these kilesa does not arises. In everyday life obhasa never arise, only when meditation this obhasa arise. ============================================ > F:ABIAN: The way I experienced Vipassana is like goal keeper, waiting and > catch the ball if they're coming, or like observer of a game. > Likewise in Vipassana we aware everything arises as they really > are, we aware as they arises, aware as they matured and aware of > their disappearance. Every phenomena arises should be aware of as > it is, regardless of our positions (four iriyapatha). ------ NINA: Yes, it does not matter what posture one assumes. As to awareness of arising, maturing and cessation, this is already more advanced. I think that you know that the first stage of insight has to come first. Otherwise one is not sure: what arises and falls away, naama Or ruupa? Each citta with sati and understanding can take only one object at a time, either a naama or a ruupa. I find the following passage of Kh. Sujin's Survey of Paramatthadhammas helpful (ch 35): FABIAN: In my knowledge, as I mention in my reply to Ken Howard, The understanding comes after experience. For example nama-rupa pariccheda nana, in this stage a meditator might feel he is like robot, there is a mind or microprocessor or controller which give command to the robot what it should do, which part should move. In the same way a meditator in Nama-rupa parichedda nana feel his mind controlling the body, the body moves according to what his mind command, that meditator know this is rupa and this is nama. =================================================== > FABIAN: If there are several object arises at a time, take one object > which we think the most dominant or more urgent to be mindful of. > Don't let mindfulness slips away. > Doing this over and over would strengthen the mindfulness and > concentration. ------- NINA: Indeed, many realities arise at a time, and it entirely depends on conditions whether sati arises or not, and of what object it is mindful. I think it is not a matter of 'us' finding something urgent. As to the slipping away of sati, this is very common. Sati accompanies kusala citta and I find it not difficult to know that there are far more akusala cittas in a day than kusala cittas. Even after seeing now there is bound to be subtle attachment to seeing or visible object. We like to see, we do not want to be without it. Therefore I do not think that it is useful to think of ourselves as having many moments of sati. Kh Sujin always stresses that it is right understanding that matters: is there more understanding of what appears now? Sati is not concentration. The following passage of 'Survey' (Ch 34) may be of help: FABIAN: I agree of course sati is kusala citta, in my opinion unbroken mindfullness on something, is what we call concentration. That's why The scriptures always mention sati first and samadhi later. ===================================== NINA: Nina. FABIAN: Also agreed Mettacittena, fabian] #108811 From: han tun Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 8:00 am Subject: Re: Visuddhimagga IV,78 hantun1 Dear Nina (Chew, Azita), Nina: There is not this type of jhaanacitta all the time in those planes. There can also be lobha-muulacitta so long as this has not been eradicated. In the ruupa-brahma-planes there can be seeing or hearing. Han: This is interesting. Can there be also other akusala cittas such as dosa-muula cittas and moha-muula cittas in these planes? When you say that in the ruupa-brahma-planes there can be seeing or hearing, are these seeing and hearing associated with Akusala Vipaaka Cittas as well, and not just with Ahetuka Kusala Vipaaka Cittas, which are not akusala cittas? Respectfully, Han #108812 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 9:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Visuddhimagga IV,78 nilovg Dear Azita, Op 30-jul-2010, om 8:14 heeft gazita2002 het volgende geschreven: > this is very interesting. I had not considered bhavangva cittas in > these realms, in fact, had not thought too much about them at all, > other than knowing that they 'exist' > I tended to think that beings in these realms were quite 'pure' but > of course, why wouldnt they still have lobha mula cittas if they > hadnt yet been eradicated. ------ N: They can still cling to jhaana or the result of jhaana. -------- > I imagine that beings who had attained to higher states eg > sotapattimagga, and who experienced these jhana cittas could be > 'reborn' in these realms - have I got this right? ------- N: If jhaanacittas arise shortly before death, yes, I think so. ------- Nina. #108813 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 9:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Visuddhimagga IV,78 nilovg Dear Han and Chew, Han, I am glad you come in. This is quite a heavy study for me, I know so little about this subject. Chew asked me about IV, 111 but without the Tiika in Pali I cannot make a proper study. I hope others will help. What do the Myanmar Sayadaws say about this passage? I shall look again, but I have two projects running and I am out of time. Vis. IV is a long study and takes years. I know this from my studies of Vis. XIV, and XVII with Larry and Connie. Op 30-jul-2010, om 10:00 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > Nina: There is not this type of jhaanacitta all the time in those > planes. There can also be lobha-muulacitta so long as this has not > been eradicated. In the ruupa-brahma-planes there can be seeing or > hearing. > > Han: This is interesting. Can there be also other akusala cittas > such as dosa-muula cittas and moha-muula cittas in these planes? ------ N: Dosa-muulacittas certainly not, no conditions in those planes. Moha-muulacittas arise in those planes, except in the asa~n~nasatta plane, for all those who are not arahats. -------- > H: When you say that in the ruupa-brahma-planes there can be seeing > or hearing, are these seeing and hearing associated with Akusala > Vipaaka Cittas as well, and not just with Ahetuka Kusala Vipaaka > Cittas, which are not akusala cittas? ------- N: Akusala vipaakacitta is not akusala, it is just vipaakacitta. I am not sure about the answer. I just know that there are less sense impressions in the ruupa-brahmaplanes, and that seeing and hearing arise. ------ Nina. #108814 From: Gemunu Rohana Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 6:39 am Subject: Sukha Vagga :: Happiness gemunu.rohana ? Swaakkhaato Bhagavataa Dhammo... Sukha Vagga Happiness (Text and Translation by Ven. N?rada) ? 5. Jayam veram pasavati ????????????dukkham seti par?jito Upasanto sukham seti ????????????hitv? jayapar?jayam. 201. VICTORY BREEDS HATRED 5. Victory breeds hatred. The defeated live in pain. Happily the peaceful live, giving up victory and defeat. 201. Story ????A King was sad because he had been thrice defeated in battle. The Buddha commented on the evil consequences of both defeat and victory. ? ? May the Triple Gem Bless You! May You Attain Nirvana through a wishing Bodhi [ Bodhi :: sotaapanna (streamwinner) , the sakadaagaamii (once-returner) , the anaagaamii (no-returner) or the arahat] in This Very Life! ? Pls visit: http://sinhaladharmastore.blogspot.com/2010/03/english-buddhist-sites-help-world\ -with.html for Buddhist resources in English ? #108815 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 10:09 am Subject: [dsg] Lukas' questions to Ajahn Sujin, part 10. nilovg Dear Lukas, Lukas' questions to Ajahn Sujin, part 10. Lukas: If there is a lot of dosa in our life, is there any chance to develop more understanding? ---------- N: When one listens to the Dhamma. Dosa is not our dosa. Ann: Dosa can be known. --------- L: What's with unplesant feelings? It hurts. -------- Kh S: That is true. --------- L: What if we are involved in pleasant feelings. Should we first stop enjoying them to develop right understanding? ----------- Kh S: O.K. let us do that. (laughter). He will answer correctly: I can?t do it. N: We do not stop enjoying ourselves, it is better to know it. ----- Kh S: One asks how, instead of understanding little by little. -------- N: Understanding grows very slowly. --------- Sarah: there is not a recipe that one could use, then there is an idea of self behind it. -------- Kh S: Each reality has its own conditions. Sacca ~naa.na is conditioned. We do not mind not trying to do anything. Anything can happen. Thinking can arise, but when it is the right time awareness can arise and pa~n~naa can understand reality. That is how pa~n~naa can be accumulated. We do not have to do anything at all. *********** (End questions Lukas) #108816 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 10:13 am Subject: [dsg] Letters from Nina. The problem of Fear (part 5). nilovg Dear friends, After I had written about the Bodhisatta Temiya, I had an opportunity to practice patience and perseverance in mindfulness. That same evening my husband and I had to attend an official Rotary dinner. My husband was placed at the head table, but I was separated from him and placed somewhere else, at a side-table in the midst of people I did not know very well. There were moments of aversion but I also remembered Khun Sujin's remarks that it is so good to be 'nobody', not 'somebody'. We like to be 'somebody' but in reality there are no people, only conditioned namas and rupas. In order to become really convinced of the truth it is urgent to develop understanding of colour, sound, or any other reality which appears now. We had to wait for our food for a long time since there were many speeches. I remembered Bodhisatta Temiya who was patient and composed in all circumstances. Since he saw the danger of rebirth in hell he never was neglectful as to the development of wisdom. He said to himself time and again when he was tortured: 'Worse than these tortures are the tortures in hell.' I had moments of dosa but I also remembered the conversation you had with Khun Sujin in India about aversion and which I heard on the tape. You spoke about having aversion because you had awareness only of hardness and softness and not of colour or seeing. Khun Sujin said that thinking with aversion is also a reality, it is conditioned and beyond control, not self. Also aversion can be object of awareness so that it can be realized as not self. We should continue to develop understanding of each reality which appears and not leave out unpleasant realities. When the food was finally served that evening I had attachment to flavour, but also that reality can be an object of awareness. Although there cannot be clear understanding yet after only a few moments of awareness we can begin again and again in order to develop it. Although the evening was not pleasant or interesting, when there is mindfulness time is not wasted. There were ceremonies such as the installment of the new board and the exchange of banners with visitors from other Rotary Clubs. I noticed that people attached great importance to such ceremonies, but then, don't we all attach importance to the events of our life: to what people say or do to us, to our likes or dislikes? So long as we do not see realities as they are, as only nama and rupa, we find ourselves very important and we are anxious about what will happen to the 'self'. The 'Mughapakkha Jataka' can remind us to prefer nothing else to the development of right understanding. When we consider the danger of being in the cycle of birth and death there can be, instead of unwholesome fear, wholesome fear so that we are urged to be aware now. With Metta, Nina. #108817 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 10:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Common misconception on in & out breathing in Vipassana. nilovg Dear Fabian, Op 30-jul-2010, om 9:33 heeft chandrafabian het volgende geschreven: > FABIAN: Dear Nina, > In my opinion, without mindfulness and concentration these kilesa > does not arises. In everyday life obhasa never arise, only when > meditation this obhasa arise. ------ N: I read in the Visuddhimagga that obhasa arises mostly in the case of those who practised both jhaana and insight. -------- > ============================================ > > FABIAN: In my knowledge, as I mention in my reply to Ken Howard, > The understanding comes after experience. > For example nama-rupa pariccheda nana, in this stage a meditator > might feel he is like robot, there is a mind or microprocessor or > controller which give command to the robot what it should do, which > part should move. > > In the same way a meditator in Nama-rupa parichedda nana feel his > mind controlling the body, the body moves according to what his > mind command, that meditator know this is rupa and this is nama. > =================================================== N: I cannot follow this very well. We both think according to different ways. -------- > > FABIAN: I agree of course sati is kusala citta, in my opinion > unbroken mindfullness on something, is what we call concentration. > That's why The scriptures always mention sati first and samadhi later. > ===================================== > N: I find it not helpful to focus on an object, this will obstruct > the understanding of anattaa, as I see it. I would like to stress > understanding, and understanding has many levels. It can be of the > level of listening, intellectual understanding, and it can develop > to direct understanding, without the need to think. ------- > FABIAN: According to my own opinion sati is wise attention to > everything that arise at that instant moment (wise attention is > also known as yoniso manasikara). Wise attention (sati) should not > search the past or planning for future. Wise attention is only see > everything arises and passes away, without thinking or analyzing. > Forget of something is only a conditioned dhamma. Analyzing our > forgetfulness is a condition of other dhamma to arise. > When we see it as it is, the "thought" of forgetfulness would subside. ------ N: I agree that also forgetfulness is a dhamma. Its characteristic can be understood when it appears. When citta is kusala citta even without pa~n~naa, there is yoniso manaasikara, right attention. ------ Nina. #108818 From: han tun Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 11:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Visuddhimagga IV,78 hantun1 Dear Nina (Chew), Thank you very much for the clarification. As regards IV 111, the questions by Chew are always difficult. Because he knows the subject very well. He wants your explanation only. The Burmese translation would not help much, because it is the direct translation. What Chew wants is the explanation. Respectfully, Han #108819 From: "Sadhu Chew" Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 11:37 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Visuddhimagga IV,78 chewsadhu Dear Nina & Han, Thank you for answering my question. Saadhu x3. According to that, [ruupaaruupabhavesu bhava.ngajjhaane] (life-continuum jhaana in the fine-material and immaterial kinds of becoming) is also a kind of [appanaa] (absorption). In one of Sayaadaw U Siilaananda talks, he said: "Appanaa is a name for Jhaana as well as Magga. In the fourth chapter [CMA] this word 'Appanaa' will be used. Sometimes Appanaa will just mean the Ruupaavacara Jh??nas and Aruupaavacara Jhaanas. Sometimes it will mean Lokuttara Cittas also. Sometimes Vitakka is called Appanaa. It is absorption of the mind in the object or applying the mind closely to the object." Again, he said: It is very important that you understand this, Jhaana is twofold: (1) That which examines closely the object. The meaning of the word 'Jhaana' is to observe closely, to examine closely, to meditate closely. Here we use the meaning 'examine closely'. That is the meaning of the word 'Jh??na'. "That which examines closely the object" - that is one kind of Jhaana. In Paali it is called AAramma.nupanijjhaana. (2) And that which examines closely the characteristics (Lakkha.nupanijjhaana). The Paali word 'Lakkha.na' is translated as mark or characteristic. So it is that which closely examines the mark or characteristic. In Paali that is Lakkha.nupanijjhaana. There are two kinds of Jhaana. There is Jhaana of AAramma.na and Jhaana of Lakkha.na. What are the AAramma.nas here? AAramma.na here means the objects of meditation. It is the objects of Samatha meditation like Kasi.na disks, parts of the body, corpses and so on. The Eight Attainments (four Ruupaavacara and four Aruupaavacara Jhaanas) are called AAramma.nupanijjhaana, (that means the first one) because they observe closely or examine closely the mental object of earth Kasi.na etc. - not the Kasi.na itself but the mental object of the Kasi.na in the mind. The Jhaana consciousness takes the mental object. They are called AAramma.nupanijjhaana because they closely examine these AAramma.nas. That means they are intensely taking that object. Vipassanaa, Magga and Phala are called Lakkha.nupanijjhaana. That is important. Whenever we find the word 'Jhaana', we think it only means Ruupaavacara and Aruupaavacara. Sometimes Vipassanaa can be called Jhaana. Magga means path. It can be called Jhaana. And Phala, fruition can also be called Jhaana. There can be confusion if we don't know which Jhaana is meant in a certain context. Vipassanaa is called Lakkha.nupanijjhaana. Now here the Lakkha.na, the characteristic is closely examined. Vipassanaa is so called because it closely examines the characteristics of impermanence and so on. That means impermanence, suffering and no soul. These three are called characteristics. They are common characteristics of all conditioned phenomena. When you practice Vipassanaa meditation, you will see these characteristics in whatever object you take at that moment. Vipassanaa can be called Jhaana because it examines closely these three characteristics. Magga is so called - we have not come to Magga yet. It belongs to supramundane consciousness. Magga is so called because the work done by Vipassanaa comes to be accomplished, comes to an end through Magga. When Magga is attained, when Magga is reached, Vipassanaa is finished. Magga is actually the outcome of Vipassanaa practice. But Magga is not a Vipaaka. Vipassanaa work comes to an end or reaches its culmination when Magga is reached, when Magga is attained. So Magga is also called Lakkha.nupanijjhaana. Magga does not take Lakkha.na as object however, Magga takes Nibbaana as object. Still Magga is called Lakkha.nupanijjhaana, contemplation on Lakkha.na, simply because the task of Vipassanaa which is to closely examine the three characteristics comes to an end, comes to be accomplished. So Magga is also called Lakkha.nupanijjhaana. Phala, the Vipaaka of Magga, the resultant of Magga, is so called because it examines the truth of cessation which is the characteristic of the truth. Nibbaana is called the Truth of Cessation here. The Truth of Cessation, Nibbaana is taken by Phala as object. Nibbaana has the characteristic of truth. So Phala is also called Lakkha.nupanijjhaana. Here Lakkha.na means the characteristic of Nibbaana, truth. But when Lakkha.na refers to Vipassanaa, it means the three characteristics - impermanence, suffering and no soul. With regard to Phala being called Lakkha.nupanijjhaana, then Lakkha.na means the characteristic of Nibbaana, not impermanence and so on. There is this difference. According to this description, Jhaana can mean four Ruupaavacara Jhaanas, four Aruupaavacara Jhaanas and the Vipassanaa, Magga and Phala. Jhaana does not just mean Ruupaavacara Jhaana and Aruupaavacara Jhaana everywhere. May all beings be well and happy. With respect, Chew #108820 From: "chandrafabian" Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 11:40 am Subject: Re: Common misconception on in & out breathing in Vipassana. chandrafabian Dear Nina, ======================= Dear Fabian, N: I read in the Visuddhimagga that obhasa arises mostly in the case of those who practised both jhaana and insight. FABIAN: Dear Nina, I agree with you, that's true, first I read this in Abhidhammathasangaha translation by the late Ven. Narada Mahathera. > ============================================ > FABIAN: In my knowledge, as I mention in my reply to Ken Howard, > The understanding comes after experience. > For example nama-rupa pariccheda nana, in this stage a meditator > might feel he is like robot, there is a mind or microprocessor or > controller which give command to the robot what it should do, which > part should move. > > In the same way a meditator in Nama-rupa parichedda nana feel his > mind controlling the body, the body moves according to what his > mind command, that meditator know this is rupa and this is nama. N: I cannot follow this very well. We both think according to different ways. FABIAN: Yes I understand, Sometimes our experience is seems strange, or not the same with other people. In this case I just want to emphasize that understanding comes after we experience something. That experience comes from wise attention and concentration. In my experience, that is the sequence of how understanding (direct understanding) comes about. ========================================== > N: I find it not helpful to focus on an object, this will obstruct > the understanding of anattaa, as I see it. I would like to stress > understanding, and understanding has many levels. It can be of the > level of listening, intellectual understanding, and it can develop > to direct understanding, without the need to think. FABIAN: Yes I agree Nina, focusing the mind too strong like in Jhana absorption would obstruct the ability to see three characteristic. The mind is standstill, it is like cemented to nimitta. But in Upacara Samadhi and/or Khanika Samadhi, the mind not still completely, yet it is strong enough to see three characteristic and therefore give way for understanding to arise. =================================================== > FABIAN: According to my own opinion sati is wise attention to > everything that arise at that instant moment (wise attention is > also known as yoniso manasikara). Wise attention (sati) should not > search the past or planning for future. Wise attention is only see > everything arises and passes away, without thinking or analyzing. > Forget of something is only a conditioned dhamma. Analyzing our > forgetfulness is a condition of other dhamma to arise. > When we see it as it is, the "thought" of forgetfulness would subside. N: I agree that also forgetfulness is a dhamma. Its characteristic can be understood when it appears. When citta is kusala citta even without pa~n~naa, there is yoniso manaasikara, right attention. Nina. FABIAN: I also agree in kusala citta even without panna, there is yoniso manasikara. I think yoniso manasikara is beneficial in every situation. As I see it, a very sharp and wise attention see every kind of thoughts just a conditioned Dhamma which arise and passes away. With the sharp and wise attention, the mind is not in those thoughts, not getting involved in those thoughts, not giving fuel of involvement to those thoughts, not entertain those thoughts, just see it as they really are ( just see the characteristic). Since they don't give fuel for those thougths, they are not attached to those thoughts, and without attachment, those thoughts would immediately pass away. Mettacittena, fabian #108821 From: "Sadhu Chew" Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 12:33 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Visuddhimagga IV,78 chewsadhu Dear Han & Nina, In fact, I do not know the subject well. I am just a beginner. Hope that you all, as my respectable seniors in the studying of Buddhist, can give me guidance in the Dhamma. May you all be well and happy. With respect, Chew > #108822 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 12:54 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Visuddhimagga IV,78. Attention Scott. nilovg Dear Chew (and Scott), Excellent. This was discussed before on dsg. Scott also wrote a post about this. Hello Scott! Yes, very important, the meaning of lakkhanupanijjhaana is mostly overlooked. In dsg archives it can be found in U.P., I think. Op 30-jul-2010, om 13:37 heeft Sadhu Chew het volgende geschreven: > According to this description, Jhaana can mean four Ruupaavacara > Jhaanas, four Aruupaavacara Jhaanas and the Vipassanaa, Magga and > Phala. Jhaana does not just mean Ruupaavacara Jhaana and > Aruupaavacara Jhaana everywhere. ------- N: dsg message 33556. Perseverance in Dhamma, Ch 3, no 4 We read in the ?Kindred Sayings?(V, Kindred Sayings about the Truths, Ch 4, ? 4, Turban) that the Buddha asked what should be done if one?s turban or head is on fire. The answer was that in order to extinguish the fire one should make extra efforts, and have mindfulness and attention. The Buddha said: Well, monks, letting alone, paying no heed to, the blazing turban or head, for the comprehension as they really are, of the four not penetrated Ariyan Truths, one must put forth extra desire, effort, endeavour, exertion, impulse, mindfulness and attention....? This sutta can remind us that we should not delay the development of understanding of all realities arising at this moment. Acharn Sujin said that lobha is attached to everything and that we are always in danger. There is as it were fire on our heads. For the development of right understanding we do not need to go to a quiet place. We may die before we reach that place. Realities such as seeing, hearing and thinking are the same no matter where we are. All day long dhammas appear through the five sense-doors and through the mind- door, one at a time. Through the eyes visible object is experienced, through the ears sound, through the nose odour, through the tongue flavour, through the bodysense hardness, softness, heat, cold, motion or pressure. The realities that appear exhibit their own characteristics. They arise dependent on many different conditions and nobody can cause their arising. Through satipatth?na one will understand the nature of anatt? of realities. During the sessions we discussed samatha and vipassan?. Both of them are ways of mental development, bh?vana, and they cannot be developed without sati and pa???, sati-sampaja??a. However, the method and aim of samatha and vipassan? are different. We read in the ?Discourse on Expunging?(M. I, no 8, Sallekhasutta) that the Buddha said to Cunda: ?These, Cunda, are the roots of trees, these are empty places. Meditate, Cunda; do not be slothful; be not remorseful later. This is our instruction to you.? In Pali the word ?jh?yath? is used, that can be translated as contemplate. The Commentary to this sutta, the ?Papa?cas?dan?, explains that there are two meanings of jh?na: contemplation on the thirtyeight objects of samatha (aramma.n?panijjh?na), and contemplation on the characteristics (lakkhan?panijjh?na), beginning with impermanence, with reference to the khandhas, the sense-fields (?yatanas) and so on. The Commentary states: ?It is said, develop samatha and vipassan?. Do not be slothful; be not remorseful later.? ---------- Nina. #108823 From: Ryan Brawn Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 1:11 pm Subject: Buddah's saying gr8fuldawg2010 Hello Everyone, Buddah says "All that we are is the result of what we have thought", Being as I am Very, Very beginer stage, I understand this quote but then again what is the context? I mean what is buddah saying here. Aren't we to realize that there is no self? Is that what he is saying. That there is no self and who we think we are is the result of what we have thought we were? I don't know, anyone?? #108824 From: Ryan Brawn Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 1:37 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] how to.... gr8fuldawg2010 Ryan: But really I would ask this. If you are kind and good simply because your worried about your next life, then is it really kindness, and love? Because if it was true kindness and love it shouldn't matter whether there is a next life or not. You would be kind and loving and moral, because that is who you are not out of fear. Swee Boon: If someone were to come after your life chopping up one of your limbs, would you be kind and loving to your attacker? If someone were to steal all your belongings leaving you penniless, would you be kind and loving to him? If someone were to sleep with your wife, would you be kind and loving to him? If someone were to speak falsely in court and land you in jail, would you be kind and loving to him? Swee Boon:Can you be sure that your kindness and lovingness remain unaltered despite all the above events? Can you be sure that there will be no discernible change in your kindness and lovingness despite all the above events? Ryan: Yes, if I understand that there really is no self. But only then. Right now I have not achieved that but when I can fully understand that a person who is chopping up one of my limbs is not chopping up me, and I can see the pain in his eyes the anger he feels because he's been hurt or misled I can then not only have loving kindness but also compassion for his pain that causes him to do such a thing, If someone where to steal my belongings? I am one of those who does not stress so much about material items, if he stole, I lost it, maybe I didn't need it all that much, I guess I always look at that like this if someone stole something or everything from me, what good does it do to get all crazy over it, what is done is done it doesn't change a thing, He will get it back what he has done (karma) it's nothing to stress about lifes goes on, Yes if someone were to speak falsly in court and land me in jail would I be kind to him? Absolutely, as I said before He will get his, if I do what is right my Karma will be good, and he does what is wrong his karma bad. It does no good to hate, or not be kind, what does it solve, it does not make the other person so miserable as it can make us. The solution? Let go, he will get his. Now am I totally their I would say suprisinly 90%. If someone was hacking off one of my limbs I don't know how I would feel. Honestly I probably feel the way I do based on my religious past and for that I am grateful. I have learned alot. But still if one is good based on karma, in other words out fear, that does not make him good only his actions and well maybe thats enough? Love and peace RYan #108825 From: "Sadhu Chew" Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 1:50 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Visuddhimagga IV,78. Attention Scott. chewsadhu Dear Nina, Sayaadaw U Siilaananda said in that talks: There is a verse in the Dhammapada: “You yourselves must make the effort; Tathaagatas are only proclaimers. Those who have entered the path and examine it closely by Jhaanas will get free from the bond of Maara”. Here the word 'Jhaana' is used. Actually the Paali word 'Jhaayino' is used. That means those who experience Jhaana. Those who practice Jhaana, who experience Jhaaa, get free from the bonds of Maara. That means they will become enlightened, they will become Arahants. If we take Jhaana to mean just Ru-pa-vacara Jhaana or Aruupaavacara Jhaana, it doesn't make sense here because you have to practice Vipassanaa meditation in order to become enlightened. That is why the Commentary said there are two kinds of Jhaana. "Tathaagatas are merely those who proclaim. Hence those who have stepped on the path in accordance with what they (the Tathaagatas) proclaimed and examine closely by two kinds of Jhaanas" - when the Commentary says two kinds of Jhaana, we must understand they are referring to AAramma.nupanijjhaana and Lakkha.nupanijjhaana. In this verse, we must understand that this person practices both Samatha and Vipassanaa meditation. If you do not understand this, you will be confused here. You may think why are they saying Jhaana to mean Vipassanaa or something like that. So there are two kinds of Jhaana. But here in the Manual [Abhidhammatthasa.ngaha] and in the Abhidhamma, Jhaana will only mean Ruupaavacara and Aruupaavacara. May all beings be well and happy. With respect, Chew #108826 From: "Swee Boon" Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 2:32 pm Subject: Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro nidive Hi Fabian, > 1. Proper language and good manner in the spirit of discussing the truth in friendly manner. How does that apply to you? You have never been friendly to me ever since the first post where you asked me "what do you think if someone do activities in daily life with mindfulness, very attentive and with full awareness could he achieved concentration?" > 2. Sufficient Knowledge of Dhamma. It is pretty alright if you think you have sufficient knowledge of dhamma. But it is another thing to belittle others. > you don't even know Jhana meditation has been around for centuries prior to Prince Siddhattha's birth. Why are you so sure? Were you born in India around that time? > It is obvious you don't have manners, and rude. Please apply that to yourself. Swee Boon #108827 From: "Swee Boon" Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 2:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] how to.... nidive Hi Ryan, > Ryan: Yes, if I understand that there really is no self. But why do you think that there really is no self? Is it just because everyone on DSG says so? (Not that I disagree with the statement.) > If someone was hacking off one of my limbs I don't know how I would feel. Since you don't even know how you would feel, isn't your statement: "You would be kind and loving and moral, because that is who you are, not out of fear." a self-defeating statement? If being kind and loving and moral is who you are, there would be no wavering on your part. There would be no uncertainty on your part. Swee Boon #108828 From: "Swee Boon" Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 3:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] how to.... nidive Hi Ryan > Ryan: This certainly sounds like you believe in Jesus. Am I missing something? I believed in Jesus many moons ago. I withdrew from him and his teachings at a later time. Then I came to Buddhism and discovered about the reality of kamma. Swee Boon #108829 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 3:06 pm Subject: Re: AN9.36 truth_aerator Dear Fabian, > Dear Alex, I want to ask you one simple question, you may ask anyone, >you may ask Ajahn Brahm, Ajahn Thanissaro or anyone you know. The >question is: > > Is Samma-samadhi/right concentration must be Jhana? > > Mettacittena, > fabian. ""And what is right concentration? There is the case where a monk ?" quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful (mental) qualities ?" enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. With the stilling of directed thoughts & evaluations, he enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of composure, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation ?" internal assurance. With the fading of rapture, he remains equanimous, mindful, & alert, and senses pleasure with the body. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasant abiding.' With the abandoning of pleasure & pain ?" as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress ?" he enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. This is called right concentration." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.141.than.html Are there any sutta that defines samma-samadhi as part of N8P without Jhanas? There are few suttas that define samadhi as one of 5 powers as "having relinquishment as object", but it isn't often and that phrase may refer to what one does with samadhi. It seems to me that the Jhana taught by the Buddha is more insight work than simple mindless one-pointedness. See MN111 for example. So in any case deep contemplation of 3 characteristics is a must and proper jhana doesn't exclude that. IMHO. With metta, Alex #108830 From: "Swee Boon" Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 3:38 pm Subject: Re: Visuddhimagga IV,78. Attention Scott. nidive Hi Nina, > The Commentary states: ?It is said, develop samatha > and vipassan?. Do not be slothful; be not remorseful later.? But how does Ajahn Sujin teach the way to develop samatha? Not to argue with you, but it seems to me that Ajahn Sujin doesn't teach the way to develop samatha. I understand the way of vipassana by Ajahn Sujin, but I don't understand the way of samatha by Ajahn Sujin. Swee Boon #108831 From: Kevin F Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 7:33 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some ideas about dhamma starting to change farrellkevin80 Hi Ken, all, Kevin: Thanks for your message. Ken H:I am sure we all agree with you that it is "an instruction in meditation" but we have different understandings as to what that means. I hope you are not suggesting, Kevin, that the Buddha wanted his monks to forget all he had taught them about conditioned dhammas. Because that is what they would have had to do in order to follow his instructions in the ordinary (conventionally known) way. Kevin: Right Ken. But as the Visuddhimagga clearly states: ‘So firstly, one of quick understanding who wants to develop this meditation should go into solitary retreat. Then he should advert to his entire material body, and discern the elements in brief in this way, “In this body what is hard or rough is the earth-element, what is flowing or cohesion is the water-element, what is maturing (ripening) or heat is the fire-element, what is pushing or supporting is the air-element,” and he should advert and give attention to it and review it again and again as “earth-element, water-element, fire-element, air-element,” that is to say, as mere elements, not a being, and soulless. As he makes effort in this way it is not long before concentration arises in him, which is reinforced by understanding that illuminates the classification of the elements, and which is only access and does not reach absorption because it has states with individual essences as its object.' __________ Kevin: I don't see how that could be read as anything other than a set of instructions for formal meditation. Take a close look at it. Ken H: Some of us guys and gals think there is just one citta following on after another. No control! Sometimes - under very rare conditions - a satipatthana citta will arise. What are those conditions, BTW Kevin, do you remember? Kevin: Of course. The two main ones are hearing the Dhamma, and wise attention to it. Thanks a lot for your message. Very interested in the replies. Thanks again. With metta, Kevin __________ With metta, Kevin The business of an intellectual is to think. Most people think religion is staring at the perfection of a rose bud. They don't understand the decay of the rose bud nor the mind that admires it and then quickly decays. - me I never fall because strength of mind is divine over all. - MC Mr. Voodoo http://www.marklevinshow.com/sectional.asp?id=32930# #108832 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 8:55 pm Subject: Re: Some ideas about dhamma starting to change truth_aerator Hello KenH, all, >KH: I am sure we all agree with you that it is "an instruction in >meditation" but we have different understandings as to what that >means. Right, and the suttas often talk about strong effort in an imperative tone, in "things to be done" way, not a descriptive one. The Pali grammar often uses active (as opposite to past passive tone some like to use.) Also it is changing the teaching to imply that Buddha taught only descriptive rather than prescriptive teaching and over look or twist the meaning of imperative phrases and words into grammatical forms that they do not say. Of course if one insists in twisting every word from imperative to past-passive, then it would be impossible to argue with that as you insist on saying that "A = not A". However this is injustice to the words of the Buddha to twist them around to mean what one wants them to mean. To drive a car you don't need to know complex chemistry, mechanics, physics, where every microprocessor is located, and how all the millions of complex parts function (you'd spend decade in school to learn that). You just need to know the user instructions to drive and operate on user level and leave the rest for mechanics. Citta doesn't arise randomly. It arises due to causes and conditions. Because of that it is possible to affect citta with citta. There is control and influence on a citta level. The Abhidhamma mentions 24 conditions. Things don't happen randomly or out of blue air. So what if such and such a kusala state requires such and such causes? Put them in! The more citta does it, the more likely it is to develop a wholesome habit and the easier it will be in the future to do it. Practice accumulations conditions for future success. The more intention one generates for kusala, the more possibilities there is for arising of future kusala state. The more one properly studies the more knowledge there is. However effort must be put in, and actual doing of an action is one of the conditions to do it. You can't use conditionality as an excuse not to do things. Of course action or non-action is conditioned as well and beliefs also shape actions. Be careful that "it can't be done" turns into self-fulfilling prophecy. As a saying goes "if you believe you can or you can't, you are probably right." Swimming is conditioned too. But that doesn't mean that one doesn't move when in deep waters. People are in deep waters of samsara. To get out effort must actually be made. The suttas and the commentaries do stress the need for wise effort, and effort isn't something passive. It is sad that some people change the meaning of words to make them mean exactly opposite of what the Buddha has said. Ex: The Buddha has often said about anapanasati or at the beginning of satipatthana sutta that ""There is the case where a monk, having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building, sits down folding his legs crosswise, holding his body erect, and setting mindfulness to the fore.[1] Always mindful, he breathes in; mindful he breathes out." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.118.than.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.010.than.html Some claim that Ge didn't say that one needs to go somewhere or to sit, or to select the place of attention. Buddha didn't teach anapanasati only for a certain kind of people. Note: The satipatthana sutta says "anyone" or "monk". It doesn't say that its instructions are only for chief disciples to do anapanasati and other parts of the oftenly invoked but not completely studied (only the select parts that fit with one's ideas) and even less practiced sutta - called Satipatthana. There are many other suttas that talk about effort. Understanding does require effort, it won't fall out of blue sky. With metta, Alex #108833 From: Kevin F Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 9:10 pm Subject: Jhanas not possible farrellkevin80 Dear Friends, I have heard that in the Commentaries it is stated that mastery of jhana is no longer possible for todays disciples. Does anyone know where exactly this is stated, or can you provide some direct quotes on this? I am debating someone that thinks that thinks the jhanas and mastery of them are still possible and I need some quotes! Thanks, Kevin ___________ With metta Kevin The business of an intellectual is to think. Most people think religion is staring at the perfection of a rose bud. They don't understand the decay of the rose bud nor the mind that admires it and then quickly decays. - me I never fall. Because strength of mind is divine over all. - MC Mr. Voodoo http://www.marklevinshow.com/sectional.asp?id=32930# #108834 From: Kevin F Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 9:13 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some ideas about dhamma starting to change farrellkevin80 Dear Alex, Alex wrote: Right, and the suttas often talk about strong effort in an imperative tone, in "things to be done" way, not a descriptive one. The Pali grammar often uses active (as opposite to past passive tone some like to use.)... etc. Good message. I still think that vipasanna arises by conditions and that simply reflecting about dhammas, or even just hearing about them, can certainly condition it and nibbana. I am more interested in quotes from the Commentaries and so on and that show that meditation is an intentional act to be undertaken, than quotes from the Suttas or simple arguments. Thanks, Kevin ___________ With metta Kevin The business of an intellectual is to think. Most people think religion is staring at the perfection of a rose bud. They don't understand the decay of the rose bud nor of the mind that admires it and then quickly decays. - me I never fall. Because strength of mind is divine over all. - MC Mr. Voodoo http://www.marklevinshow.com/sectional.asp?id=32930# #108835 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 9:27 pm Subject: Omniscient powers of Buddha regarding other's faculties not shared by disciples truth_aerator Dear Kevin, all, Is there any quote of the Buddha Himself that says that mastery of Jhana is impossible today? The reason I ask this is because according to Ptsm Chapter LXVIII ONLY THE BUDDHA could analyze other people's faculties. Even Ven. Sariputta being a CHIEF disciple could misjudge the capability or blamelessness of a person right in front of him (MN97 and MN144) - nothing to say about later disciples talking about being's capabilities in the far future with absolute certainty. "574. Here the Perfect One (tathagata) sees beings as with little dust on their eyes, as with much dust on their eyes, as with keen faculties, as with dull faculties, as of good parts, as of bad parts, as easy to instruct, as hard to instruct, and also some who see fear in the other world and in what is censurable, and also some who see no fear in the other world and in what is censurable (M i 69, S i 138, Vin i 6). 575. "...A concentrated person has little dust on his eyes; an unconcentrated person has much dust on his eyes..." 576. With keen faculties, with dull faculties: A person with faith has keen faculties; a person without faith has dull faculties ... [and so on with rest of the five faculties]. " [Alex:- samadhi is one of 5 faculties.] [ Knowledge Not Shared By Disciples ] [ CHAPTER LXVIIL - PENETRATION OF OTHERS' FACULTIES] Also only the Buddha has "All that is future it knows,..." according to Ptsm [CHAPTER LXXII. -LXXIII. - OMNISCIENT AND UNOBSTRUCTED KNOWLEDGE]. With metta, Alex #108836 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 9:43 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Some ideas about dhamma starting to change truth_aerator Dear Kevin, all, > Dear Alex, > I still think that vipasanna arises by conditions Neither I, nor good meditation masters say otherwise. > and that simply reflecting about dhammas, or even just hearing >about them, can certainly condition it and nibbana. Sure it may be sufficient for some, and sufficient for stream entry. Wise Reflection itself can lead to certain forms of samadhi, so it is not that samadhi is always absent. (See DN34 on 9's, if I remember correctly, about things rooted in Yoniso Manasikara) The thing is that wise reflection NEEDS to be done. The more one does it, the more it conditions future cittas to have more panna and so on. Again, many meditation teachers do stress importance of developing understanding. > I am more interested in quotes from the Commentaries and so on and >that show that meditation is an intentional act to be undertaken, Well you've seen many VsM quotes, I can provide more if you need them. I really don't approve of taking words and twisting them around from imperatives to past-passives, or to totally avoid certain passages about going into seclusion, avoiding certain faults of a monastery, overcoming imperfections, sitting down, and actually doing something. For example metta meditation: "A meditator who wants to develop firstly lovingkindness among these, if he is a beginner, should sever the impediments* and learn the meditation subject. Then, when he has done the work connected with the meal and got rid of any dizziness due to it, he should seat himself comfortably on a well-prepared seat in a secluded place." -VsM IX,1 Ten Impediments: VsM III, 29 A dwelling, family, and gain, A class, and building too as fifth, And travel, kin, affliction, books, And supernormal powers: ten." ======== As for Anapanasati (which is part of Satipatthana sutta, btw) Anapanasati VsM VIII VIII,145. "'Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu, gone to the forest or to the root of a tree or to an empty place, sits down; having folded his legs crosswise, set his body erect, established mindfulness in front of him, VIII,153. Gone to the forest ...or to an empty place: this signifies that he has found an abode favourable to the development of concentration through mindfulness of breathing. VIII,158. Herein, gone to the forest is gone to any kind of forest possessing the bliss of seclusion among the kinds of forests characterized thus: 'Having gone out beyond the boundary post, all that is forest' (Ps.i,176; Vbh. 251), and 'A forest abode is five hundred bow lengths distant' (Vin.iv,183). To the root of a tree: gone to the vicinity of a tree. To an empty place: gone to an empty, secluded space. And here he can be said to have gone to an 'empty place' if he has gone to any of the remaining seven kinds of abode (resting place).42 [271] VIII,159. Having thus indicated an abode that is suitable to the three seasons, suitable to humour and temperament,43 and favourable to the development of mindfulness of breathing, he then said sits down, etc., indicating a posture that is peaceful and tends neither to idleness nor to agitation. Then he said having folded his legs crosswise, etc., to show firmness in the sitting position, easy occurrence of the in-breaths and out-breaths, and the means for discerning the object. VIII,160. Herein, crosswise is the sitting position with the thighs fully locked. Folded: having locked. Set his body erect: having placed the upper part of the body erect with the eighteen backbones resting end to end. For when he is seated like this, his skin, flesh and sinews are not twisted, and so the feelings that would arise moment by moment if they were twisted do not arise. That being so, his mind becomes unified, and the meditation subject, instead of collapsing, attains to growth and increase. ==================== As to unfavourable monastery VsM - IV,2 : "Herein, one that is unfavourable has any one of eighteen faults. These are: largeness, newness, dilapidatedness, a nearby road, a pond, [edible] leaves, flowers, fruits, famousness, a nearby city, nearby timber trees, nearby arable fields, presence of incompatible persons, a nearby port of entry, nearness to the border countries, nearness to the frontier of a kingdom, unsuitability, lack of good friends. [119] One with any of these faults is not favourable. He should not live there. " =========================== The above quotes do say that there is favourable and unfavourable place. There *are* things "to be done". This is the issue. I fully agree that understanding is a key. But one needs to *develop* understanding. Even reading a Dhamma book requires intentional action and choice (to read the book or watch TV for example). Unfortunately the VsM does state that: "Now concentration was described under the heading of consciousness in the stanza: When a wise man, established well in virtue, Develops consciousness and understanding* (Ch. I, ?1). And that has been developed in all its aspects by the bhikkhu who is thus possessed of the more advanced development of concentration that has acquired with direct-knowledge the benefits [described in Chs. XII and XIII]. But understanding comes next. And that has still to be developed." - VsM XIV,1 UNDERSTANDING COMES NEXT (after virtue and concentration) and HAS STILL TO BE DEVELOPED. So unfortunately VsM does say that strong virtue (hopefully not to the point of Ascetic Practices as said in VsM) + concentration is required. VsM does have section on Virtue and Concentration, that precede Understanding.... With metta, Alex #108837 From: "Ken H" Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 11:56 pm Subject: Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro kenhowardau Hi Fabian, ----------- <. . .: F: > Allow me to say, you are not familiar with practicing, what you say is true for Samatha meditation, but for Vipassana it is different, in Vipassana we must not involved in thoughts (should not actively thinking), we must become active observer, not a thinker. In Vipassana knowledge comes by itself together with experience. ------------ I think this is a central principle on which all arguments in favour of formal meditation are based. Therefore, we should ask ourselves, is it true? Does knowledge really come by itself with experience? There is experience all the time. (There is always nama experiencing an object.) But there isn't any vipassana with these experiences, is there? So surely it can't be said that vipassana knowledge comes by itself with experience. According to the texts, vipassana knowledge is dependent on the teaching, by a Buddha, of the true Dhamma. If there is no teaching, there is no vipassanna knowledge. Also according to the texts, the true Dhamma by itself is not enough. It has to be heard with right understanding, contemplated with right understanding, and applied to the present reality with right understanding. So that's how vipassana knowledge comes about: not by sitting with stilled thoughts waiting for a special experience. ----------------------- F: > for example: can explain the taste of apricot to a person who has never tasted apricot? People might make discussion, debate over the nature and taste of apricot, numerous books can be written about the taste of apricot. ----------------------- I think the point is that only a Buddha can explain the Dhamma to someone who has no right understanding. And even then, it is extremely difficult. (The only reason a Buddha agrees to teach is that there are some people who have (in previous existences) developed enough right understanding to fully comprehend.) But apart from that, I can't see much point in the example of the apricot/mango. Vipassana knowledge develops very, very slowly. It is purely a matter of understanding. We start with a little understanding and we gradually develop it. Meditators, on the other hand, seem to think right understanding will suddenly burst out of nowhere. Just because someone has sat still for a few minutes! --------------------------- F: > After you taste the apricot yourselves, do you need theory? Yes you still need theory, but only to help you to explain the taste of apricot to other people. Or to compare to your own experience. But the books doesn't help you to give knowledge about the taste of it, you know the taste by yourself. The knowledge about the taste comes together with tasting experience. ---------------------------- I must admit, the point of this lost on me. When you (and other formal meditators) use the term 'vipassana knowledge' are you referring to a type of understanding, or are you referring to something else? I don't know what that 'something else' could be. ----------------------- F: > So in practitioner view, the knowledge come together with experience, but the knowledge is better for people who experiencing and also learning theory. ----------------------- Right understanding of the theory is a precious thing, and it should not be underestimated. It has to be developed very gradually until it grows into direct right understanding of a conditioned dhamma. Then it has to be developed very slowly until it grows into direct right understanding of nibbana. Do you agree with that? Or is there something more that you see as necessary? ------------ <. . .> F: > I am not saying a satipatthana meditator should control his mind, I am saying he should not get involved in thinking, judging or analyzing. We can not control the condition Dhamma to arise, but we can see the arisen condition Dhamma without getting involved. Like an obeserver of the cloud can not prevent the cloud from arising. But the observer can observe the cloud without attempting to alter, or to get, or to change the cloud. In the same way a meditator can not prevent anger to arise, but the meditator can prevent himself from following, thinking, or analyzing, or judging, or attached to that anger which has arisen. ----------- This might be good advice in the generally known area of mental health, but it is not satipatthana. Satipatthana is right understanding of a presently arisen paramattha dhamma. In satipatthana the work of "preventing" or "not getting involved" or "not getting attached" etc is done solely by right understanding. Nothing else is required. Or to put it another way: right understanding comes first. All the other required things (right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration etc.) follow on and arise with it automatically. Ken H #108838 From: "Ken H" Date: Sat Jul 31, 2010 12:27 am Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? kenhowardau Hi pt, --- <. . .> pt: > Anyone knows what would be the commentary on this - basically, would this correspond to the 3 sub-moments of a dhamma arising, aging and dissolution, or the context of the sutta is referring to something else? --- It seems pretty straightforward to me, too. But I agree with your reluctance to presume anything. We've been caught out too many times. Ken H #108839 From: "Ken H" Date: Sat Jul 31, 2010 1:34 am Subject: Re: Some ideas about dhamma starting to change kenhowardau Hi Kevin, -------------- <. . .> KH: > > I hope you are not suggesting, Kevin, that the Buddha wanted his monks to forget all he had taught them about conditioned dhammas. Because that is what they would have had to do in order to follow his instructions in the ordinary (conventionally known) way. >> K: >Right Ken. But as the Visuddhimagga clearly states: --------------- But me no buts, Kevin! If you are going to agree that there are only dhammas (rolling on by conditions) you have to stick to that agreement. You can't weasel out as soon as the going gets tough. :-) --------------------------- K: > `So firstly, one of quick understanding who wants to develop this meditation should go into solitary retreat. Then he should advert to his entire material body, and discern the elements in brief in this way, "In this body what is hard or rough is the earth-element, what is flowing or cohesion is the water-element, ---------------------------- How are we to understand this: from the perspective of uninstructed worldlings, or from the perspective of Dhamma students? When the Vism talks about someone of quick understanding "wanting" something, it can't possibly be referring to lobha. Going into solitary retreat can be a symptom of lobha and wrong view, *or* it can occur naturally. In this instance, it is occurring naturally. It's just like you or me going to a Dhamma discussion: we can do it as a sacred ritual, or we can do it (as we do) without expectations - because it comes naturally. ---------------------------------- <. . .> K: > I don't see how that could be read as anything other than a set of instructions for formal meditation. Take a close look at it. ----------------------------------- I think you mean take a superficial look at it. :-) ------------------ KH: > > No control! Sometimes - under very rare conditions - a satipatthana citta will arise. > > What are those conditions, BTW Kevin, do you remember? K: > Of course. The two main ones are hearing the Dhamma, and wise attention to it. ------------------ Yes, or another way of saying it might be, 'There must be panna in a citta that has taken a presently arisen dhamma as it object.' And it has to be a strong panna that has been gradually developed over countless instances of hearing, considering and implementing the Dhamma. It's all a matter of dhammas rolling on by conditions. Just like they are now! And the satipatthana-type dhammas are not to be clung to (or wanted) any more than the ones we have now. Ken H #108840 From: Kevin F Date: Sat Jul 31, 2010 2:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some ideas about dhamma starting to change farrellkevin80 Hi Ken, You wrote: Ken: But me no buts, Kevin! If you are going to agree that there are only dhammas (rolling on by conditions) you have to stick to that agreement. You can't weasel out as soon as the going gets tough. :-) Kevin: Ken, maybe I should quote some more sections of the Visuddhimagga for you on that subject. I have highlighted some of the important parts. Thanks. From Chapter XI: 41. So firstly, one of quick understanding who wants to develop this meditation subject should go into solitary retreat. Then he should advert to his own entire material body and discern the elements in brief in this way: 'In this body what is stiffenedness or harshness is the earth element, what is cohesion or fluidity25 [352] is the water element, what is maturing (ripening) or heat is the fire element, what is distension or movement is the air element'. And he should advert and give attention to it and review it again and again as 'earth element, water element', that is to say, as mere elements, not a living being, and soulless. 42. As he makes effort in this way it is not long before concentration arises in him, which is reinforced by understanding that illuminates the classification of the elements, and which is only access and does not reach absorption because it has states with individual essences as its object. 43. Or alternatively, there are these four [bodily] parts mentioned by the General of the Dhamma [the Elder Sariputta] for the purpose of showing the absence of any living being in the four great primary elements thus: 'When a space is enclosed with bones and sinews and flesh and skin, there comes to be the term "material form" (rupaY (M.i,190). And he should resolve each of these [as a separate entity], separating them out by the hand of knowledge, and then discern them in the way already stated thus: 'In these what is stiffenedness or harshness is the earth element'. And he should again and again advert to them, give attention to them and review them as mere elements, not a living being, not a soul. 44. As he makes effort in this way, it is not long before concentration arises in him, which is reinforced by understanding that illuminates the classification of the elements, and which is only access and does not 347 XI, 45 The Path of Purification reach absorption because it has states with individual essences as its object. This is the method of development when the definition of the elements is given in brief. [METHOD OF DEVELOPMENT IN DETAIL] 45.The method given in detail should be understood in this way. A meditator of not over-quick understanding who wants to develop this meditation subject should learn the elements in detail in the forty-two aspects from a teacher, and he should live in an abode of the kind already described. Then, when he has done all the duties, he should go into solitary retreat and develop the meditation subject in four ways thus: (1) with constituents in brief, (2) with constituents by analysis, (3) with characteristics in brief, and (4) with characteristics by analysis. [(1) WITH CONSTITUENTS IN BRIEF] 46. Herein, how does he develop it with constituents in brief! Here a bhikkhu does his defining in this way, 'In twenty of the parts what has the stiffened mode is the earth element', and he does his defining thus, *In twelve parts the liquid called water with the mode of cohesion is the water element', [353] and he does his defining thus, 'In four parts what matures (what has the mode of ripening) is the fire element', and he does his defining thus, 'In six parts what has the mode of distending is the air element'. As he defines them in this way they become evident to him. As he again and again adverts to them and gives his attention to them, concentration arises as access only. [(2) WITH CONSTITUENTS BY ANALYSIS] 47. However, if his meditation subject is not successful while he develops it in this way, then he should develop it with constituents by analysis. How? Firstly, the bhikkhu should carry out all the directions given for the thirty-two-fold aspect in the description of mindfulness occupied with the body as a meditation subject (Ch. VIII, §§48-78), namely, the sevenfold skill in learning and the tenfold skill in giving attention, and he should start with the verbal recitation, in direct and reverse order, of the skin pentad and so on, without omitting any of it. The only difference is this: there, after giving attention to the head hairs, etc., as to colour, shape, direction, location, and delimitation, the mind had to be fixed by means of repulsiveness (Ch. VIII, §83), but here it is done by means of elements. Therefore at the end of each part after giving attention to head hairs, etc., each in the five ways beginning with colour (Ch. Vm, §83), attention should be given as follows. 348 Nutriment & The Elements XI, 52 48.These things called head hairs grow on the inner skin that envelops the skull. Herein, just as when kuntha grasses grow on the top of an anthill, the top of the ant-hill does not know ''Kuntha grasses are growing on me', nor do the kuntha grasses know 'We are growing on the top of an ant-hiir, so too, the inner skin that covers the skull does not know 'Head hairs grow on me', nor do the head hairs know 'We grow on inner skin that envelops a skull'. These things are devoid of mutual concern and reviewing. So what are called head hairs are a particular component of this body, without thought, [morally] indeterminate, void, not a living being, rigid (stiffened) earth element. 49. Body hairs grow on the inner skin that envelops the body. Herein, just as, when dabba grasses grow on the square in an empty village, the square in the empty village does not know ''Dabba grasses grow on me', nor do the dabba grasses know 'We grow on the square in an empty village', so too, the inner skin that envelops the body does not know 'Body hairs grow on me', nor do the body hairs know 'We grow on inner skin that envelops a body'. These things are devoid of mutual concern and reviewing. So what are called body hairs are a particular component of this body, without thought, indeterminate, void, not a living being, rigid earth element. 50. Nails grow on the tips of the fingers and toes. Herein, just as, when children play a game by piercing madhuka-fruit kernels with sticks, the sticks [354] do not know 'Madhuka-fmil kernels are put on us', nor do the madhuka-fruit kernels know 'We are put on sticks', so too, the fingers and toes do not know 'Nails grow on our tips', nor do the nails know 'We grow on the tips of fingers and toes'. These things are devoid of mutual concern and reviewing. So what are called nails are a particular component of this body, without thought, indeterminate, void, not a living being, rigid earth element. ... 85.However, if he still does not succeed with his meditation subject when he gives his attention to it in this way, then he should develop it with characteristics by analysis. How? After discerning head hairs, etc., in the way already described, the characteristic of stiffenedness in head hairs should be defined as the earth element, the characteristic of cohesion there too as the water element, the characteristic of maturing (ripening) as the fire element, and the characteristic of distension as the air element. The four elements should be defined in this way in the case of each component. As he defines them in this way the elements become evident to him. As he adverts and gives attention to them again and again access concentration arises in him in the way already described. ... This bhikkhu who is devoted to the defining of the four elements immerses himself in voidness and eliminates the perception of living beings. Since he does not entertain false notions about wild beasts, spirits, ogres, etc., because he has abolished the perception of living beings, he conquers fear and dread and conquers delight and aversion (boredom); he is not exhilarated or depressed42 by agreeable and disagreeable things; and as one of great understanding, he either ends in the deathless or he is bound for a happy destiny. Defining the four elements Is ever the wise man's resort; The noble meditator lion43 Will make this mighty theme his sport. This is the description of the development of the defining of the four elements. [371] [DEVELOPMENT OF CONCENTRATION—CONCLUSION] 118.This completes in all its aspects the commentary on the meaning of the clause 'How should it be developed?', in the set of questions beginning with 'What is concentration?', which was formulated in order to show the method of development of concentration in detail (see Ch. Ill, §1). 119. This concentration as intended here is twofold, that is to say, access concentration and absorption concentration. Herein, the unification [of mind] in the case of ten meditation subjects and in the consciousness preceding absorption [in the case of the remaining meditation subjects]44 is access concentration. The unification of mind in the case of the 366 Nutriment & The Elements XI, 123 remaining meditation subjects is absorption concentration. And so it is developed in two forms with the development of these meditation subjects. Hence it was said above: 'This completes in all its aspects the commentary on the meaning of the clause "How should it be developed?" '. [THE BENEFITS OF DEVELOPING CONCENTRATION] 120. The question (viii) WHAT ARE THE BENEFITS OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF CONCENTRATION ? was also asked, however (Ch. ffl, §1). Herein, the benefits of the development of concentration are fivefold, as a blissful abiding here and now, and so on. For the development of absorption concentration provides the benefit of a blissful abiding here and now for the Arahants with cankers destroyed who develop concentration, thinking 'We shall attain and dwell with unified mind for a whole day'. Hence the Blessed One said: 'But, Cunda, it is not these that are called effacement in the noble ones' discipline; these are called blissful abidings in the noble ones' discipline' ___________ With metta Kevin The business of an intellectual is to think. Most people think religion is staring at the perfection of a rose bud. They don't understand the decay of the rose bud nor of the mind that admires it and then quickly decays. - me I never fall. Because strength of mind is divine over all. - MC Mr. Voodoo http://www.marklevinshow.com/sectional.asp?id=32930# ________________________________ #108841 From: Ryan Brawn Date: Sat Jul 31, 2010 3:52 am Subject: RE: [dsg] how to.... gr8fuldawg2010 Swee Boom: But why do you think that there really is no self? Is it just because everyone on DSG says so? (Not that I disagree with the statement.) Ryan: LOL, Actually I have had enough of doing that (when i used to be a christian), It has been along spiritual journey for me. A while back before I even began to look into buddhism, and after I left the christian faith, and looked into Judaism, I began to think alot about God if there was one and who he was. without a super long explainaition I will just say before I found buddhism I already came to there was no self. One thing we know is that people are who they are, based on life expierience, and genetics. We see people lose there memories all the time. I read a story awhile ago in the papper about a girl who was a muscian and christian, her major in college was music. one day she woke up and had no memory, she eventaully got her life back together and decided she no longer was interested in music. there is more to this story but for lack of time, I will just end with this. She became a totally different person. The reason for this is who we are is brain and body. The one thing however that all things living have in common is life. and when the body dies where does the life go. my thought which i don't know if is buddhist thought or not, probably not, but close is that god is energy/life/space/ everything & nothing my thought is that the life in everything comes from God, and when the matter that we are made up of dies, the life in us joins it's creator. I guess what I am saying in self is made up of our intellect, thoughts, feelings, expierences, etc... take away the brain and there is no self. erase the memories and give it new ones and there willl be a different self. In other words as I said before God is everything and nothing and all life comes from him, the real us is Life, which is a part of God and comes from him. We think we are, but we are not. pretty much God is energy and we are a part of that energy. When we die, that energy returns to it source, and the matter (our bodies) returns to dirt. Now I keep saying God, what do I mean by God? God has no intellect for he is energy and therfore cannot think, or create or anything else. God being like a man, started wake back before even the Judeao/Christian bible, people have elevated themselves to god status since the begining. So to say we were created in God's image is only to elvate man to god status. God is not man or anything, God truly is energy and nothing else the best word I would use to describe who I believe a god to be would be this if the stars planets,& everyliving thing, trees, animals, people etc were to be non existance, God would still be there existing. In order for something not to exist, something has to exist. God is the existance the holds it all together He is the existance that would even hold non existance. God is, and always has been, always will be. God is existance! I said all this to answer your question about why do I believe there is no self? This is what I believe self to be, and why I believe there is no self in the sense of a soul. I don't know what buddhism believes, I know very little about it. I am trying to learn. If this sounds like something else then that is what it is. If if sounds like buddhism that is what it is, I came up with this thought on my own simply reflecting on things. Personally I like buddhism, because I agree with it so far, things that might typically be called Nirvana I might call conecting with God, things they might say ceasing to be reborn, I would say would be your energy returning to it's source so being rejoined to God. I just want to make this last part clear, I do not believe in a god! In the sense of anything other then energy or existance! Ryan: If someone was hacking off one of my limbs I don't know how I would feel. Swee Boon: Since you don't even know how you would feel, isn't your statement: "You would be kind and loving and moral, because that is who you are, not out of fear." a self-defeating statement? Ryan: No as I thought I said, maybe I didn't sometimes my head gets a hold of my hands when I am typing. :) I have not yet reached perfect understanding, Once this place is fully reached I would say yes then I could still love and have compassion, but as far now I am not yet there. Also I want to retract my statement I made in my last response that I am 90% there I would say maybe 3 to 5 percent there. I was thinking in response to the scenarios you mentioned that I was 90% there, but I was wrong. Swee Boon: If being kind and loving and moral is who you are, there would be no wavering on your part. There would be no uncertainty on your part. Ryan: Maybe but then again who are we? It seems to me if we are made up of matter, thoughts, life expiereince etc..., we may spend our whole lives working on becoming "who we are", but I do think on my own thought, that learning that we is really not who think, the true self the one that is forever existing is the only me and to to be kind and loving I first think I half to realize that I am not, and then I would be able to look at others and know that they are the way they are because of the life expierience etc.., therefore, they are not either but we are both the same neither one of us has a self. Ryan #108842 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sat Jul 31, 2010 6:26 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Some ideas about dhamma starting to change ptaus1 Hi Kevin, KenH, Alex, Fabian, It might be useful to be precise about what exactly is the matter of contention. As I understand what KenH is saying, when Vsm says that a beginner should count breaths or analyze the body parts, etc, to develop samatha - I think that would automatically mean that Vsm is implying that this should be done with a kusala citta. So, the real issue here I think is whether a beginner can actually tell the difference between when he's (for example) counting the breaths with a kusala citta or with an akusala citta? I think the answer is probably - no, he can't tell the difference. That is, if understanding is not developed to some degree, the beginner will not be able to tell that he's mistakenly practicing with an akusala citta. In meditative speak, I think this is what people sometimes mean when they say "concentrating too hard, trying too hard,"etc. On this basis, I think KenH makes the conclusion that in the vast majority of cases, samatha (or vipassana) cannot be practiced intentionally because most often that would entail that the beginner is trying to count the breaths (or analyze body parts, etc) with akusala citta, not kusala. Hence, practicing with an akusala citta wouldn't be development of samatha, nor the path for that matter. So, then I see two issues here: The first issue is - what constitutes a "beginner" in Vsm? My thinking is that a beginner in Vsm is someone with very developed sila, and with an understanding developed to a degree where he could tell very accurately the difference between kusala and akusala, or more precisely, a moment with sati and a moment without sati. The second issue then becomes - how does the beginner get to this level of understanding in the first place? My thinking is that access to dhamma teachings is indispensable of course, but the real matter of contention I think is whether he can also learn from his mistakes - e.g.practice meditation with akusala citta and then realize from mistakes the difference between akusala and kusala cittas. I think KenH would say that if one practices with aksuala citta, then that is automatically a setback and strengthening of wrong view, so wrong practice. I'm not sure myself. I think there's some room for mistakes, in particular if it's clear that development of (samatha) jhana is not what leads to nibbana. I mean, at least in that case it won't be necessarily wrong practice, since it's not practiced for the purpose of awakening. But I might be wrong. Best wishes pt #108843 From: "Ken H" Date: Sat Jul 31, 2010 8:20 am Subject: Re: Some ideas about dhamma starting to change kenhowardau Hi pt, I'll gladly go over what I have been trying to say. All of it, BTW, has been picked up in conversations with others. If any of my own original thinking has somehow got in there, then that part is almost certainly wrong. -------------- pt: >It might be useful to be precise about what exactly is the matter of contention. As I understand what KenH is saying, when Vsm says that a beginner should count breaths or analyze the body parts, etc, to develop samatha - I think that would automatically mean that Vsm is implying that this should be done with a kusala citta. --------------- With you so far . . . ------------------------- pt: > So, the real issue here I think is whether a beginner can actually tell the difference between when he's (for example) counting the breaths with a kusala citta or with an akusala citta? -------------------------- I think I am still with you. That is, if you are saying that a beginner is a person who can tell the difference. If you are saying a beginner is a person who hasn't got to that stage yet, then I would disagree. I would say he was not yet qualified to be called a jhana meditation beginner. --------------------------------------- pt: > I think the answer is probably - no, he can't tell the difference. That is, if understanding is not developed to some degree, the beginner will not be able to tell that he's mistakenly practicing with an akusala citta. In meditative speak, I think this is what people sometimes mean when they say "concentrating too hard, trying too hard,"etc. --------------------------------------- I couldn't quite follow you there. ----------------------------------------- pt: > On this basis, I think KenH makes the conclusion that in the vast majority of cases, samatha (or vipassana) cannot be practiced intentionally because most often that would entail that the beginner is trying to count the breaths (or analyze body parts, etc) with akusala citta, not kusala. Hence, practicing with an akusala citta wouldn't be development of samatha, nor the path for that matter. ----------------------------------------- It can *never* be practised intentionally. Nothing good ever can. When there is belief in intentional manipulation of consciousness there is wrong view and akusala citta, and no prospect of jhana. -------------------------------------------------------- pt: >So, then I see two issues here: The first issue is - what constitutes a "beginner" in Vsm? My thinking is that a beginner in Vsm is someone with very developed sila, and with an understanding developed to a degree where he could tell very accurately the difference between kusala and akusala, or more precisely, a moment with sati and a moment without sati. --------------------------------------------------------- Yes, that's the way I understand it too. ------------------------------ pt: > The second issue then becomes - how does the beginner get to this level of understanding in the first place? ------------------------------ Couldn't it be just their personality that makes the difference? I think some people are naturally the renouncing type. Not interested in sensual pleasures of any kind they naturally tend to turn away from them. By habitually renouncing sense pleasures in this way they gradually develop more and more sensitivity to what is [akusala] attachment to sense pleasure, and what is not. -------------- pt: > My thinking is that access to dhamma teachings is indispensable of course, but the real matter of contention I think is whether he can also learn from his mistakes - e.g.practice meditation with akusala citta and then realize from mistakes the difference between akusala and kusala cittas. I think KenH would say that if one practices with aksuala citta, then that is automatically a setback and strengthening of wrong view, so wrong practice. I'm not sure myself. I think there's some room for mistakes, in particular if it's clear that development of (samatha) jhana is not what leads to nibbana. I mean, at least in that case it won't be necessarily wrong practice, since it's not practiced for the purpose of awakening. But I might be wrong. -------------- It wasn't so clear in the old days. Before the Buddha taught otherwise, jhana was commonly mistaken for nibbana. (At least, I think I have been told that.) :-) But in any case, belief in control over the arising or non-arising of [kusala] dhammas is wrong view. And so a jhana meditator would not have that particular belief. Ken H #108844 From: "Ken H" Date: Sat Jul 31, 2010 8:40 am Subject: Re: Some ideas about dhamma starting to change kenhowardau Hi Kevin, --- <. . .> Kevin: > Ken, maybe I should quote some more sections of the Visuddhimagga for you on that subject. I have highlighted some of the important parts. Thanks. <. . .> --- Sorry Kevin, all I could see was a whole lot of words. I couldn't see any highlighting. Can you abridge it for me? In what way does it tell you there can be control over the arising or non-arising of dhammas? Ken H #108845 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sat Jul 31, 2010 10:07 am Subject: Re: Some ideas about dhamma starting to change ptaus1 Hi KenH, > KH: I'll gladly go over what I have been trying to say. pt: Thanks for that. ---- > KH: I think I am still with you. That is, if you are saying that a beginner is a person who can tell the difference. If you are saying a beginner is a person who hasn't got to that stage yet, then I would disagree. I would say he was not yet qualified to be called a jhana meditation beginner. pt: Yes, that's what I meant. ---- > pt: > I think the answer is probably - no, he can't tell the difference. That is, if understanding is not developed to some degree, > the beginner will not be able to tell that he's mistakenly practicing with an akusala citta. In meditative speak, I think this is what people sometimes mean when they say "concentrating too hard, trying too hard,"etc. > --------------------------------------- > > KH: I couldn't quite follow you there. new pt: I was saying a similar thing to what you said above - a beginner nowadays usually can't tell the difference between a/kusala, while Vsm and suttas imo automatically assume that the beginner can tell that difference. ---- > KH: It can *never* be practised intentionally. Nothing good ever can. When there is belief in intentional manipulation of consciousness there is wrong view and akusala citta, and no prospect of jhana. pt: I think I know what you're saying, but for those who are not familiar with dsg terminology it might be a little confusing, since intention (cetana) arises with every citta. I think it might be a little more politically friendly to say that if someone can't tell the difference between a/kusala cittas, then his meditation practice is likely to be based on akusala cittas when he attempts to follow the Vsm or sutta instructions because his intention at the time would most likely be akusala. On the other hand, if someone can tell the difference between a/kusala, then for him the Vsm instructions would fal into place with kusala cittas, and he would not fall into using the method with akusala cittas/akusala intention. ---- > pt: > The second issue then becomes - how does the beginner get to this level of understanding in the first place? > ------------------------------ > > KH: Couldn't it be just their personality that makes the difference? I think some people are naturally the renouncing type. Not interested in sensual pleasures of any kind they naturally tend to turn away from them. By habitually renouncing sense pleasures in this way they gradually develop more and more sensitivity to what is [akusala] attachment to sense pleasure, and what is not. new pt: Yes, I'd think there's definitely that scenario, though I'd think that there must be also more borderline cases that are neither here nor there. Especially nowadays. Don't know. ---- > KH: It wasn't so clear in the old days. Before the Buddha taught otherwise, jhana was commonly mistaken for nibbana. (At least, I think I have been told that.) :-) pt: If I remember right, even after the Buddha, some sects were claiming that formless jhanas were equal to nibbana - I think there's a discussion about it somewhere in Kathavatthu. ---- KH: But in any case, belief in control over the arising or non-arising of [kusala] dhammas is wrong view. And so a jhana meditator would not have that particular belief. pt: Hm, this last bit has me stumped. Ideally, a Buddhist wouldn't hold onto that view/belief. But, if there were jhana attainers before the Buddha as you say, and thus, before he made clear what's wrong view and what's not, then that would mean they also had right view/understanding of some degree. That degree would have to be at least being able to tell the difference between a/kusala. And yet, without knowing about anatta, conditionality, etc, which came only with the Buddha, I'm pretty sure they were very much into control and trying to reach unification with Brahma and that sort of thing. So, I'm not quite sure how to reconcile this - i.e. by the above logic, (samatha) jhana development does not necessarily preclude the control thing, and that runs contrary to our conclusions so far. Don't know. Best wishes pt #108846 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 30, 2010 1:03 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Malunkyaputta Sutta, Commentarial Question nilovg Dear Kevin, Is it especially the passage quoted below? I have the Co in Thai and can look it up if you like. BTW is your postal address still the same? My 'Conditions' are in print now and in a few weeks we will start sending copies to friends. Nina. Op 27-jul-2010, om 18:02 heeft Kevin F het volgende geschreven: > In the Makunkyaputta Sutta the Buddha talks about the path to the > destruction of > the five lower fetters as having restraint in body, in speech, in > mind, and > attaining the jhanas and so forth. At the end of the sutta, though, > the Buddha > states: > > "Venerable sir, when this is the path and the method for the > destruction of the > five lower bonds for the sensual world, why does a certain bhikkhu > talk of a > release of mind and a release through wisdom? Ananda, that is the > difference > in the maturity of the mental faculties. > > The Blessed One said that and venerable Ananda delighted in the > words of the > Blessed One." > > Is it possible that anyone knows the Commentary for this section of > the sutta? #108847 From: "Ken H" Date: Sat Jul 31, 2010 11:06 am Subject: Re: Some ideas about dhamma starting to change kenhowardau Hi pt, --- <. . .> KH: > > But in any case, belief in control over the arising or non-arising of [kusala] dhammas is wrong view. And so a jhana meditator would not have that particular belief. > > pt: > Hm, this last bit has me stumped. Ideally, a Buddhist wouldn't hold onto that view/belief. But, if there were jhana attainers before the Buddha as you say, and thus, before he made clear what's wrong view and what's not, then that would mean they also had right view/understanding of some degree. That degree would have to be at least being able to tell the difference between a/kusala. And yet, without knowing about anatta, conditionality, etc, which came only with the Buddha, I'm pretty sure they were very much into control and trying to reach unification with Brahma and that sort of thing. So, I'm not quite sure how to reconcile this - i.e. by the above logic, (samatha) jhana development does not necessarily preclude the control thing, and that runs contrary to our conclusions so far. Don't know. ------------- I am sure you were right. Before the time of the Buddha, jhana meditators had, as you say, right view to the extent of knowing kusala from akusala, but no more than that. If they had views about other things - such as eternalism and annhilationism - they would have been wrong ones. They might have entertained those wrong views at some times, but not while they were developing jhana. The same applies to views about control. Any view that presupposed an I - "I have control" "I have no control" "I have both" "I have neither" - would have meant akusala consciousness and an end to their kusala calm. That's why I am sure jhana meditators have never practiced meditation in a deliberate or "formal" manner. Right view comes first - the associated behaviour follows after. And that goes for the samatha kind of right view just as much as the vipassana right view. Ken H #108848 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sat Jul 31, 2010 11:34 am Subject: Re: Some ideas about dhamma starting to change ptaus1 Hi KenH, > KH: Before the time of the Buddha, jhana meditators had, as you say, right view to the extent of knowing kusala from akusala, but no more than that. If they had views about other things - such as eternalism and annhilationism - they would have been wrong ones. They might have entertained those wrong views at some times, but not while they were developing jhana. pt: Ah ok, that makes sense. Thanks. Best wishes pt #108849 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jul 31, 2010 1:13 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: samatha. nilovg Dear Swee Boon, Op 30-jul-2010, om 17:38 heeft Swee Boon het volgende geschreven: > But how does Ajahn Sujin teach the way to develop samatha? Not to > argue with you, but it seems to me that Ajahn Sujin doesn't teach > the way to develop samatha. I understand the way of vipassana by > Ajahn Sujin, but I don't understand the way of samatha by Ajahn Sujin. ------- N: I am rather disinclined to speak about persons. But since we quote Kh Sujin a lot I understand your question. I went to Rob K's forum Abhidhamma Vipassana and found a letter of him under the section samatha. I quote: (end quote). -------- N: As to recollection of the Buddha, whenever we learn about naama and ruupa, and there is a little more understanding, we can be grateful to the Buddha. If he had not taught us, we would be completely ignorant. In this way we can recollect his excellent qualities time and again. As I understand, calm, samaadhi, develops also in vipassanaa, by conditions. No need to try to have it. In the course of the stages of insight there will be more calm and more concentration on the object of insight. At the moment of enlightenment calm is equal to the strength of jhaana of the first stage. ******* Nina. #108850 From: Ryan Brawn Date: Sat Jul 31, 2010 5:12 am Subject: RE: [dsg] how to.... gr8fuldawg2010 Thanks was just curious. :) #108851 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jul 31, 2010 1:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Jhanas not possible nilovg Dear Kevin, Op 30-jul-2010, om 23:10 heeft Kevin F het volgende geschreven: > I have heard that in the Commentaries it is stated that mastery of > jhana is no > longer possible for todays disciples. Does anyone know where > exactly this is > stated, or can you provide some direct quotes on this? ------- N: I translated from Thai Dhamma Issues, and here the following question is dealt with: are there still arahats? The subject is the decline of the sasana and this may answer also your question about jhaana today: < The Commentary to the Sutta ?The Gotamid?, in the Gradual Sayings, the Manorathap?ra??, gives an additional explanation: ?The words vassasahassa.m, thousand years, that are used here, refer only to the arahats who were endowed with the four analytical knowledges (pa.tisambidhas ). But when we take into consideration the following thousand years, there were only arahats who are sukkha vipassaka (who only developed insight and did not attain jh?na). In the next period of thousand years (the third period) there are an?g?mis (who have attained the third stage of enlightenment, the stage of the non-returner). In the next period of thousand years (the fourth period) there are sakad?g?m?s (who have attained the second stage of enlightenment, the stage of the once-returner). In the next period of thousand years (the fifth period) there are sot?pannas (who have attained the first stage of enlightenment, the stage of the streamwinner). Thus, the saddhamma, the true dhamma, of the level of pativedha, realization, can, according to this reckoning, last for five thousand years. Evenso pariyatti dhamma (of the level of intellectual understanding) can endure for five thousand years. Without pariyatti dhamma there can be no pativedha dhamma. This means that when pariyatti dhamma has disappeared the monkhood will have changed into something else.? It can be concluded that at the present time, which is the third period of thousand years in the Dispensation of the Buddha Gotama, nobody has the excellent qualities of the degree of the arahat, and the highest attainment will only be that of the an?g?m?. > (end quote). You may find more answers in the texts quoted in Rob K's forum. Nina. #108852 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jul 31, 2010 1:44 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] how to.... nilovg Dear Ryan, Op 31-jul-2010, om 5:52 heeft Ryan Brawn het volgende geschreven: > I have not yet reached perfect understanding ------ N: Wow, but who has? I meant to tell you that you may like to read Kh Sujin's 'Deeds of Merit' I translated from Thai, to be found on Zolag web. You can also try my 'Buddhism in Daily LIfe'. Nina. #108853 From: "chandrafabian" Date: Sat Jul 31, 2010 2:09 pm Subject: Re: AN9.36 chandrafabian Dear Alex, ALEX: Dear Fabian, > Dear Alex, I want to ask you one simple question, you may ask anyone, >you may ask Ajahn Brahm, Ajahn Thanissaro or anyone you know. The question is: > Is Samma-samadhi/right concentration must be Jhana? > Mettacittena, > fabian. ""And what is right concentration? There is the case where a monk ?" quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful (mental) qualities ?" enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. With the stilling of directed thoughts & evaluations, he enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture &pleasure born of composure, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation ?" internal assurance. With the fading of rapture, he remains equanimous, mindful, & alert, and senses pleasure with the body. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasant abiding.' With the abandoning of pleasure & pain ?" as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress ?" he enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. This is called right concentration." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.141.than.html ========================================================= FABIAN: Dear Alex, My question is: Is Samma-samadhi/right concentration must be Jhana? You can answer yes or no. ========================================= ALEX: Are there any sutta that defines samma-samadhi as part of N8P without Jhanas? There are few suttas that define samadhi as one of 5 powers as "having relinquishment as object", but it isn't often and that phrase may refer to what one does with samadhi. It seems to me that the Jhana taught by the Buddha is more insight work than simple mindless one-pointedness. See MN111 for example. So in any case deep contemplation of 3 characteristics is a must and proper jhana doesn't exclude that. IMHO. With metta, Alex ============================================================ FABIAN: I understand your opinion, but would you ask a practitioner of pure Samatha, did they able to see three characteristic, If they don't practice Vipassana?. Tipitaka underwent very tight scrutiny, there should be no contradiction if we compared each other. Yuganadha Sutta statements, there are 4 ways of achieving Arahantship. Abhidhamma also confirm 48 Ariya Puggala citta which 8 of them belong to Sukhavipasaka Ariya citta (Ariya Puggala without Jhana). Did hundred of learned Ariya monks of the four council made it up? I don't think so, considering how strict The Theravadin against what they considered a-dhamma or not The Buddha Teaching. Mettacittena, fabian. #108854 From: "chandrafabian" Date: Sat Jul 31, 2010 2:43 pm Subject: Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro chandrafabian Dear Ken, KEN H: Hi Fabian, <. . .> Do we agree on what jhana meditation is? This is the way I understand it: Firstly, jhana is a citta. And it is a citta that is wholesome - not unwholesome. Most meditators today have either attachment or aversion, or just ignorance. And so they are not developing jhana citta. ================================================= FABIAN: Dear Ken, I'm sorry I am not agree with you, from the scriptures, Jhana is defined as a state of mind which free from five hindrances: vicikicca, byapada, udacca-kukucca, thinamidha and kammaraga. And endowed with five Jhana factors: vitakka, vicara, piti, sukha and ekaggata. ================================= KEN H: Secondly, jhana citta is a citta that contains panna (right understanding). This is not the same type of panna that arises with satipatthana - it doesn't know the three characteristics of dhammas - but it does know when a citta is kusala and when it is akusala. Most meditators today, even when they have wholesome consciousness, don't know it from unwholesome consciousness. And so they don't have panna, and they are not practising jhana. =================================================== FABIAN: Nope...., I also did not agree on this one, You say a Jhana attainer does know when citta kusala or akusala, I'm not agree. Take Devadatta for example, I don't have to tell you the story of his wickedness as a Jhana and Abhinna attainer, because I believe you know the story. Another example is Sunakkhatta Bhikkhu, he is also a Jhana attainer who has Abhinna too, but he had wrong view. ============================================== KEN H: Thirdly, jhana is for only people who are inclined towards a life of seclusion. Therefore, even if someone had the wisdom to know kusala from akusala, it is still unlikely that he/she would even be interested in learning jhana meditation. ============================================ FABIAN: I already answered your statement. ======================================================= KEN H: Those rare people who are suited to jhana meditation are still unlikely to attain it. Firstly they would have to find a qualified teacher, and I doubt there are any today. But even then, the Visudhimagga explains that "only one in a hundred or a thousand" of those people who are accepted by a jhana teacher, will ever attain access concentration. And of those who do attain access concentration, "only one in a hundred or a thousand" will ever attain the first jhana. ===================================================== FABIAN: Dear Ken, I have to explain to you again, the statement only one in a hundred or a thousand who will attain access concentration is from Visuddhi Magga, but Visuddhi Magga stated that these difficult achievement, is only for direct Kasina concentration object. Not for Anapanasati. ===================================================== KEN H: So jhana is an extremely rare phenomenon, and it is practised only by a rare kind of individual. I imagine it would be the kind of individual who would be regarded in their community as a saint. Modern-day communities have no interest in saints. Our heroes are singers and actors, and so we are unlikely to provide the support that a reclusive meditator requires. For all sorts of reasons, I think we have to accept that jhana meditation is a thing of the past. Ken H ====================================================== FABIAN: Again I'm not agree. I don't know, I am lucky or what, why I met so many people during meditation retreat who has tasting Jhana attainment. Obviously I'm not living in the past. Mettacittena, fabian #108855 From: "Swee Boon" Date: Sat Jul 31, 2010 3:48 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] how to.... nidive Hi Ryan, > This is what I believe self to be, and why I believe there is no self in the sense of a soul. The Buddha not only teaches that there is no self in the sense of a soul, he also teaches the clinging to a doctrine of a self (such as yours) and the way to end that very clinging. Swee Boon #108856 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Jul 31, 2010 4:06 pm Subject: Re: Some ideas about dhamma starting to change truth_aerator Dear Pt, KenH, all, >Pt: I think KenH would say that if one practices with aksuala citta, >then that is automatically a setback and strengthening of wrong >view, so wrong practice. I'm not sure myself. I think there's some >room for mistakes, in particular if it's clear that development of >(samatha) jhana is not what leads to nibbana. I mean, at least in >that case it won't be necessarily wrong practice, since it's not >practiced for the purpose of awakening. But I might be wrong. If one has to do something only when one has a perfect skill in it, then it is a vicious circle. How can one practice something if one has to be 100% perfect? To learn to ride a bike you have to take certain risks, perhaps fall a few times, but get up 1 more time than you fall. At first the development is imperfect (which is why one doesn't becomes an Arahant on the 2nd day) Also lets assume that despite all the right conceptual views, one practices with less than perfect understanding (which is why one doesn't become an Aryan after few minutes). Is it really that evil to counteract lust with asubha practice, for example? Or to counteract anger with metta? Is it really that "evil" to develop refined present moment awareness and cut down evil thoughts? Is it really that bad to put in lots of effort to read more Dhamma books? Can one ever do anything 100% right the first time? Is it something reasonable to expect? What good teachers teach about Atta? Or does cetana (intention) automatically means that one *has* to act with a belief in a "Self"? Without intention, one will not move a finger, much less develop kusala. With metta, Alex #108857 From: Ryan Brawn Date: Sat Jul 31, 2010 4:14 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] how to.... gr8fuldawg2010 Swee Boon, Swee Boon: The Buddha not only teaches that there is no self in the sense of a soul, he also teaches the clinging to a doctrine of a self (such as yours) and the way to end that very clinging. I do not believe there is soul either. I believe there is energy, no intellect, no me, matter and energy. that's it. Also as far as the buddah, he seems to have it figured out. I can see his teaching leading much more to peace then mine. Honestly I wouldn't say that I am a buddhist. I am at the testing and learning stage. Didn't the buddah say to try it out first? That is what I would say I am doing. I am sure the buddah was smarter then myself, if his teaching seems to be accurate I will give up my doctirne. Peace, Love & Happy Living Ryan Ps. Swee Boon, I have enjoyed our conversations, thanks. :) #108858 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Jul 31, 2010 4:18 pm Subject: Re: AN9.36 truth_aerator Dear Fabian, all, > FABIAN: I understand your opinion, but would you ask a practitioner >of pure Samatha, did they able to see three characteristic, If they >don't practice Vipassana?. And Jhana as Samma-Samadhi does not exclude sati or seeing triple characteristics. See MN111 sutta for example. One sees rise and fall of aggregates within the 4 Jhana and 3 immaterial attainments. And in suttas that describe 4th Jhana, it talks about purity of equanimity & mindfulness. Sati, panna, and Samma-Samadhi are much more inter-related than some think. "Furthermore, with the abandoning of pleasure & stress ? as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress ? Sariputta entered & remained in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither-pleasure-nor-pain. Whatever qualities there are in the fourth jhana ? a feeling of equanimity, neither pleasure nor pain; an unconcern due to serenity of awareness;[3] singleness of mind, contact, feeling, perception, intention, consciousness, desire, decision, persistence, mindfulness, equanimity, & attention ? he ferreted them out one after another. Known to him they arose, known to him they remained, known to him they subsided. He discerned, 'So this is how these qualities, not having been, come into play. Having been, they vanish.' He remained unattracted & unrepelled with regard to those qualities, independent, detached, released, dissociated, with an awareness rid of barriers. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.111.than.html "purity of equanimity & mindfulness (sati)" Note that mindfulness is one of the factors in Jhana and that one can see many factors rise and fall when it says "Known to him they arose, known to him they remained, known to him they subsided." So it is not like one chooses to do just Jhana and disregard mindfulness (satipatthana) and other factors. The path is an inter-related whole with separation of factors being merely for sake of analysis. There aren't really two paths in Dhamma, only one, with difference only in emphasis of tranquility or insight. With metta, Alex #108859 From: Ryan Brawn Date: Sat Jul 31, 2010 4:28 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] how to.... gr8fuldawg2010 Nina, Thanks so much! I have been wanting to learn more and not knowing where to go or what to read. Thanks for this treasury of info. > I have not yet reached perfect understanding ------ N: Wow, but who has? I meant to tell you that you may like to read Kh Sujin's 'Deeds of Merit' I translated from Thai, to be found on Zolag web. You can also try my 'Buddhism in Daily LIfe'. Nina. Ps. I found your Buddhism in Daily Life but & many other looks like excellent reads, but I haven't found kh Sujin's "deeds of merit", can you give me a direct link or tell me where I can find it PLEASE :) #108860 From: "chandrafabian" Date: Sat Jul 31, 2010 4:38 pm Subject: Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro chandrafabian Dear Ken H KEN H: Hi Fabian, <. . .: I think this is a central principle on which all arguments in favour of formal meditation are based. Therefore, we should ask ourselves, is it true? Does knowledge really come by itself with experience? There is experience all the time. (There is always nama experiencing an object.) But there isn't any vipassana with these experiences, is there? So surely it can't be said that vipassana knowledge comes by itself with experience. ==================================================== FABIAN: I agree with you Ken, there is experience all the time. My previous statement is not precise enough, so it is confusing. Of course you don't have Vipassana knowledge if you practice chemistry, or practice medical. Chemistry practitioner would experience chemistry knowledge. Medical practitioner would experience medical knowledge. How do you think Vipassana knowledge would come? ===================================================== KEN H: According to the texts, vipassana knowledge is dependent on the teaching, by a Buddha, of the true Dhamma. If there is no teaching, there is no vipassanna knowledge. ===================================================== FABIAN: Agreed, who's teaching are we discussing right now? =================================================== KEN H: Also according to the texts, the true Dhamma by itself is not enough. It has to be heard with right understanding, contemplated with right understanding, and applied to the present reality with right understanding. ===================================================== FABIAN: I agree, I think in learning everything we should hear with right understanding. ===================================================== KEN H: So that's how vipassana knowledge comes about: not by sitting with stilled thoughts waiting for a special experience. ===================================================== FABIAN: You are mixed up between Samatha and Vipassana. Who said Vipassana knowledge comes from stilling the thoughts? ==================================================== FABIAN: > for example: we can explain the taste of apricot to a person who has never tasted apricot? People might make discussion, debate over the nature and taste of apricot, numerous books can be written about the taste of apricot. KEN H: I think the point is that only a Buddha can explain the Dhamma to someone who has no right understanding. And even then, it is extremely difficult. (The only reason a Buddha agrees to teach is that there are some people who have (inprevious existences) developed enough right understanding to fully comprehend.) ===================================================== FABIAN: If what you say is true, a person with no right understanding is useless to learn Dhamma because only a Buddha can explain Dhamma and it is extremely difficult. Obviously there is no Buddha right now. So do you actually think none of us have right understanding? Is there anyone born with right understanding? ==================================================== KEN H: But apart from that, I can't see much point in the example of the apricot/mango. Vipassana knowledge develops very, very slowly. It is purely a matter of understanding. We start with a little understanding and we gradually develop it. ==================================================== FABIAN: Of course the simile of apricot or manggo is very helpful to understand Dhamma. Which one is the fastest and most precise way to understand the taste of mango or apricot, hundreds of theory books about apricot or manggo taste, or just tasting a slice of that fruit? That is true Vipassana Knowledge develops very slowly for a person with little panna and poor concentration, but for a person with good panna and concentration it develops swiftly. ==================================================== KEN H:Right understanding of the theory is a precious thing, and it should not be underestimated. It has to be developed very gradually until it grows into direct right understanding of a conditioned dhamma. Then it has to be developed very slowly until it grows into direct right understanding of nibbana. Do you agree with that? Or is there something more that you see as necessary? =================================================== FABIAN: Dear Ken: how do you develop the right understanding of the taste of apricot if you never taste apricot? =================================================== FABIAN: > I am not saying a satipatthana meditator should control his mind, I am saying he should not get involved in thinking, judging or analyzing. We can not control the condition Dhamma to arise, but we can see the arisen condition Dhamma without getting involved. Like an obeserver of the cloud can not prevent the cloud from arising. But the observer can observe the cloud without attempting to alter, or to get, or to change the cloud. In the same way a meditator can not prevent anger to arise, but the meditator can prevent himself from following, thinking, or analyzing, or judging, or attached to that anger which has arisen. =================================================== KEN H: This might be good advice in the generally known area of mental health, but it is not satipatthana. =================================================== FABIAN: Is Satipatthana meditator's mental is not healthy? Need not be healthy? ==================================================== KENH: Meditators, on the other hand, seem to think right understanding will suddenly burst out of nowhere. Just because someone has sat still for a few minutes! I must admit, the point of this lost on me. When you (and other formal meditators) use the term 'vipassana knowledge' are you referring to a type of understanding, or are you referring to something else? I don't know what that 'something else' could be. ===================================================== FABIAN: I agree many people seem to think right understanding suddenly burst out of nowhere, but not me. What I expain to you is how Vipassana Knowledge (Vipassana Nana) comes about. ===================================================== KEN H: Satipatthana is right understanding of a presently arisen paramattha dhamma. In satipatthana the work of "preventing" or "not getting involved" or "not getting attached" etc is done solely by right understanding. Nothing else is required. ==================================================== FABIAN: My opinion is contradicted to your opinion, right understanding would arise if, we see presently arisen paramattha dhamma without judging, analyzing, not getting involved, not getting attached, see it as they really are. ==================================================== KEN H: Or to put it another way: right understanding comes first. All the other required things (right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration etc.) follow on and arise with it automatically. Ken H ==================================================== FABIAN: you can read thousands of books explaining the taste of manggo or apricot, it can't explain the taste precisely or satisfactorily. Unlesss you taste a slice of it. But... we need right understanding to know the apricot or manggo exist, we learn research about it, the price, how to plant, how to distinguish apricot and manggo, how to know if the manggo is ripe or not etc. The highest benefit of these books is to motivate us to know more about it. The most important is to taste it. So we can be liberated from the doubts about manggo taste. That is my opinion. Mettacittena, fabian #108861 From: Kevin F Date: Sat Jul 31, 2010 4:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some ideas about dhamma starting to change farrellkevin80 Dear Ken H, Pt, all, There have been a few replies in this thread and a few good points made. I am not going to reply to every point simply because I think that will just cause more confusion, so I will only reply to one point -- one point which I feel will help clear up all the different points nicely (I hope). So here I reply to that point, which is one that Ken made. Ken wrote: It can *never* be practised intentionally. Nothing good ever can. When there is belief in intentional manipulation of consciousness there is wrong view and akusala citta, and no prospect of jhana. Kevin: Then please explain these sections from the Visuddhimagga on the development of meditation on the elements. I have bolded and underlined some parts. I don't know how much of that will show up in the message (last time my bolding (highlightning) did not show up). It is only a few paragraphs and it is trimmed down quite a bit. So firstly, one of quick understanding who wants to develop this meditation subject should go into solitary retreat. Then he should advert to his own entire material body and discern the elements in brief in this way: 'In this body what is stiffenedness or harshness is the earth element, what is cohesion or fluidity25 [352] is the water element, what is maturing (ripening) or heat is the fire element, what is distension or movement is the air element'. And he should advert and give attention to it and review it again and again as 'earth element, water element', that is to say, as mere elements, not a living being, and soulless. 42. As he makes effort in this way it is not long before concentration arises in him, which is reinforced by understanding that illuminates the classification of the elements, and which is only access and does not reach absorption because it has states with individual essences as its object. The method given in detail should be understood in this way. A meditator of not over-quick understanding who wants to develop this meditation subject should learn the elements in detail... he should live in an abode of the kind already described. Then, when he has done all the duties, he should go into solitary retreat and develop the meditation subject in four ways thus: (1) with constituents in brief, (2) with constituents by analysis, (3) with characteristics in brief, and (4) with characteristics by analysis.... As he defines them in this way they become evident to him. As he again and again adverts to them and gives his attention to them, concentration arises as access only. However, if his meditation subject is not successful while he develops it in this way, then he should develop it with constituents by analysis... and he should start with the verbal recitation, in direct and reverse order, of the skin pentad and so on, without omitting any of it. The only difference is this: there, after giving attention to the head hairs, etc., as to colour, shape, direction, location, and delimitation, the mind had to be fixed by means of repulsiveness (Ch. VIII, ?83), but here it is done by means of elements. ... However, if he still does not succeed with his meditation subject when he gives his attention to it in this way, then he should develop it with characteristics by analysis. How? After discerning head hairs, etc., in the way already described, the characteristic of stiffenedness in head hairs should be defined as the earth element, the characteristic of cohesion there too as the water element, the characteristic of maturing (ripening) as the fire element, and the characteristic of distension as the air element. The four elements should be defined in this way in the case of each component. As he defines them in this way the elements become evident to him. As he adverts and gives attention to them again and again ___________ With metta Kevin The business of an intellectual is to think. Most people think religion is staring at the perfection of a rose bud. They don't understand the decay of the rose bud nor of the mind that admires it and then quickly decays. - me I never fall. Because strength of mind is divine over all. - MC Mr. Voodoo ________________________________ #108862 From: "Swee Boon" Date: Sat Jul 31, 2010 5:12 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] how to.... nidive Hi Ryan, > Thanks so much! I have been wanting to learn more and not knowing where to go or what to read. Thanks for this treasury of info. Besides Nina and Sujin's books, you can also learn about the Dhamma at: AccessToInsight (Read the Buddha's very own words) http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ and at Bhikkhu Samahita's websites: http://what-buddha-said.net/ http://groups.google.com/group/Buddha-Direct You can contact Bhikkhu Samahita at bhikkhu.samahita@... to ask questions about the Dhamma. He is available most of the days. Remember to include the keywords "Bhikkhu Samahita" in your message for his filter to pick up. Swee Boon #108863 From: "chandrafabian" Date: Sat Jul 31, 2010 5:26 pm Subject: Re: AN9.36 chandrafabian Dear Alex, I prefer translation from mettalanka.net, because the explanation is NOT CONTRADICTORY to other Suttas, and NOT BIAS. "Again, bhikkhus, S?riputta, dispelling pleasantness and unpleasantness, earlier having overcome pleasure and displeasure purifying mindfulness with equanimity abides in the fourth jh?na These things of the fourth jh?na such as equanimity, neither unpleasant nor pleasant feelings, observed feelings not enjoyed, purified mindfulness, one pointedness of mind, contact, feelings, perceptions, intentions, interest, resolution, effort, equanimity and attention, follow one after the other to him. They rise, persist and fade with his knowledge. He knows, these things come to be and cause feelings to rise. When these things follow one after the other, he abides with a mind that does not settle, is not bound, is released and unyokedand is unrestricted. knows there is an escape beyond this. WITH MUCH PRACTICE THEY COME TO HIM." http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/Majjhima3/111-anupad\ a-e.html If you read the whole Sutta from this translation you will understand, what the Sutta means, release, unyoked, not bound is seeing higher Jhana. Therefore in the last (eight Jhana), last sentence said differently: "When these things follow one after the other, he abides with a mind that does not settle, is not bound, is released unyoked and unrestricted. knows there is nothing beyond this. WITH MUCH PRACTICE NOTHING COMES TO HIM." Nothing comes to him, no higher Jhana, the eight Jhana is the last, no Jhana beyond eight Jhana. You see, this Sutta doesn't say Any Jhana can see the three characteristics if they don't practice Samatha, So... please find another Sutta that claim practicing Samatha without Vipassana, would make them see three characteristics. Mettacittena, fabian #108864 From: Kevin F Date: Sat Jul 31, 2010 7:23 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Jhanas not possible farrellkevin80 Dear Nina: That is an excellent quote and explanation. Thank you! Kevin Nina wrote: I translated from Thai Dhamma Issues, ___________ With metta Kevin #108865 From: Kevin F Date: Sat Jul 31, 2010 7:24 pm Subject: How the aggregates should be seen farrellkevin80 The aggregates should be seen and regarded as more than just not self. They should be seen like this: In brief [that is, collectively] the five aggregates as objects of clinging should be seen as an enemy with drawn sword (S.iv,174) in the Snake Simile, as a burden (S.iii,25) according to the Burden Sutta, as a devourer (S.iii,87f.) according to the To-be-devoured Discourse, and as impermanent, painful, not-self, formed, and murderous, according to the Yamaka Sutta (S.iii,112f.). 224. In detail [that is, individually] matter should be regarded as a lump of froth because it will not stand squeezing, feeling as a bubble on water because it can only be enjoyed for an instant, perception as a mirage because it causes illusion, formations as a plantain trunk because it has no core, and consciousness as a conjuring trick because it deceives (S.iii, 140-42). In particular, even sublime internal materiality84 should be regarded as foul (ugly); feeling should be regarded as painful because it is never free from the three kinds of suffering (see Ch. XVI, ?34); perception and formations as not-self because they are unmanageable; and consciousness as impermanent because it has the nature of rise and fall. 225. 6. As to good for one seeing thus: good comes to be accomplished in one who sees in the two ways thus in brief and in detail. And the way of definition should be known according to that, that is to say, firstly, one who sees the five aggregates as objects of clinging in the form of an enemy with drawn sword, etc., is not worried by the aggregates, but one who sees materiality, etc., in detail as a lump of froth, etc., is not one who sees a core in the coreless. 226. And in particular, [480] one who sees internal materiality as foul 485 XTV, 227 The Path of Purification (ugly) fully understands nutriment consisting of physical nutriment. He abandons the perversion [of perceiving] beauty in the foul (ugly), he crosses the flood of sense desire, he is loosed from the bond of sense desire, he becomes canker-free as regards the canker of sense desire, he breaks the bodily tie of covetousness. He does not cling with sensedesire clinging. 227. One who sees feeling as pain fully understands nutriment consisting of contact. He abandons the perversion of perceiving pleasure in the painful. He crosses the flood of becoming. He is loosed from the bond of becoming. He becomes canker-free as regards the canker of becoming. He breaks the bodily tie of ill will. He does not cling with rites-and-ritual clinging. 228. One who sees perception and formations as not-self fully understands nutriment consisting of mental volition. He abandons the perversion of perceiving self in the not-self. He crosses the flood of views. He is loosed from the bond of views. He breaks the bodily tie of interpretations (insistence) that 'This is the truth'. He does not cling with selftheory clinging. 229. One who sees consciousness as impermanent fully understands nutriment consisting of consciousness. He abandons the perversion of perceiving permanence in the impermanent. He crosses the flood of ignorance. He is loosed from the bond of ignorance. He becomes cankerfree as regards the canker of ignorance. He breaks the bodily tie of holding to rites and rituals. He does not [cling with false-] view clinging. 230. Such blessings there will be From seeing them as murderers and otherwise, Therefore the wise should see The aggregates as murderers and otherwise. The fourteenth chapter called 'The Description of the Aggregates' in the Treatise on the Development of Understanding in the Path of Purification composed for the purpose of gladdening good people. 486_______ Kevin ____ With metta Kevin #108866 From: han tun Date: Sat Jul 31, 2010 9:47 pm Subject: Re: Visuddhimagga IV,78. Attention Scott. hantun1 Dear Nina (Chew), Nina wrote: In Pali the word ?jh?yath? is used, that can be translated as contemplate. The Commentary to this sutta, the ?Papa?cas?dan?, explains that there are two meanings of jh?na: contemplation on the thirtyeight objects of samatha (aramma.n?panijjh?na), and contemplation on the characteristics (lakkhan?panijjh?na), beginning with impermanence, with reference to the khandhas, the sense-fields (?yatanas) and so on. Han: What are the two objects of samatha that are not involved in aramma.n?panijjh?na? Thank you very much. Respectfully, Han #108867 From: "Ken H" Date: Sat Jul 31, 2010 11:01 pm Subject: Re: how to.... kenhowardau Hi Ryan (and Swee Boon), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Swee Boon" wrote: > > Hi Ryan, > > > Thanks so much! I have been wanting to learn more and not knowing where to go or what to read. Thanks for this treasury of info. > > Besides Nina and Sujin's books, you can also learn about the Dhamma at: > > AccessToInsight (Read the Buddha's very own words) > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ ------------------------------- Access to Insight is a handy website for finding sutta translations, but there is something about the people behind it you really must know. Bhikkhu Thinissaro is a man who literally woke up one morning with the brainwave, "The Buddha did not teach no-self!" He decided that the doctrine of anatta was simply the Buddha's way of telling us not to *think* about the self (because that kind of thinking will cause "stress" and disrupt our meditation). His brainwave was a complete load of rubbish, of course, but that didn't stop him from developing it into a entirely new Dhamma and propagating that Dhamma on a massive scale. Access To Insight contains translations of selected parts of the Theravada Tipitaka that BT thinks can be made to fit into his theory. I am told (by people who visit several Buddhist internet groups) that his view has actually become the majority view. I don't know if that is true or not. One can only hope . . . Ken H #108868 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Aug 1, 2010 12:22 am Subject: Re: how to.... truth_aerator Hello KenH, all interested, > Bhikkhu Thinissaro is a man who literally woke up one morning with >the brainwave, "The Buddha did not teach no-self!" Thats partially correct. It is a worldly talk about existence and non-existence. The right view is a totally different way of seeing where "is" is inseparable with "ought". Right view for it to be right has to express itself in action (less craving) and what makes views wrong is to cling to them - even if that clinging is toward correct propositions. For example note the difference between "inappropriate attention" and "appropriate attention". Views of existence or non-existence of Self belong to inappropriate attention. "'Am I? Am I not? or I have a self arises in him as true & established, or the view I have no self.." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.002.than.html These are inappropriate reflections that may be fine for worldly philosophy, but not for actual "thing to be done" a revolutionary emphasis of the Buddha. Samma-ditthi isn't defined as "there is no self", it is defined in much more pragmatic statements of 4 NT where " ...noble truth of stress is to be comprehended' ...noble truth of the origination of stress is to be abandoned' ...noble truth of the cessation of stress is to be directly experienced'. ...noble truth of the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress is to be developed" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn56/sn56.011.than.html Note the emphasis on "TO BE..." Right view is inseparable with instructions on what to do, rather than to simply believe. With metta, Alex #108869 From: Ryan Brawn Date: Sun Aug 1, 2010 1:12 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: how to.... gr8fuldawg2010 ken H, Alex, Swee Boon, and group, Thanks for everything! #108870 From: Ryan Brawn Date: Sun Aug 1, 2010 1:15 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: how to.... gr8fuldawg2010 Ken H, Thanks for keeping us informed! It is very important to me to get correct info, from good sources or to at least no when you are getting info from a source what that sources view is. Thanks for keeping us up to par. Peace, Love, and Happy Living Ryan #108871 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sun Aug 1, 2010 2:36 am Subject: Re: Some ideas about dhamma starting to change ptaus1 Hi Alex, > A: If one has to do something only when one has a perfect skill in it, then it is a vicious circle. How can one practice something if one has to be 100% perfect? pt: I think things are the other way around - knowing the difference between a/kusala would be the necessary minimum for correct development of (samatha) jhana. This is still a long way away from any kind of insight that liberates (vipassana) - which I guess would be yours 100% perfect. I mean, if one doesn't know the difference between a/kusala states which constitute counting the breaths for example, then it's very likely he'll end up counting breaths in an akusala manner. He simply can't tell the difference! It doesn't matter that he's tyring to emulate what's instructed in the Visuddhimagga by counting the breaths - he will simply be doing it in an akusala way, while believing that he's doing it right. That's the problem. ---- > A: To learn to ride a bike you have to take certain risks, perhaps fall a few times, but get up 1 more time than you fall. pt: If we compare developing samatha jhana with riding a bicycle, then the level of understanding the difference between a/kusala would be comparable to actually having two legs to ride a bicycle. If one doesn't have the legs, he can't ride a bicycle no matter how hard he tries. He will keep falling and hurting himself even though he might come to believe that that is what "riding a bicycle" is all about. ---- > A: Also lets assume that despite all the right conceptual views, one practices with less than perfect understanding (which is why one doesn't become an Aryan after few minutes). pt: Well, I think that knowing the difference between a/kusala is already "less than perfect understanding" to begin with (since it isn't vipassana). And if the understnading is not even on that level of knowing the difference between a/kusala, then even developing (samatha) jhana isn't possible (which won't make one an ariyan anyway). ---- > A: Is it really that evil to counteract lust with asubha practice, for example? Or to counteract anger with metta? Is it really that "evil" to develop refined present moment awareness and cut down evil thoughts? Is it really that bad to put in lots of effort to read more Dhamma books? pt: I think the real problem is like this - when one "counteracts lust with asubha practice" for example, is he doing it with akusala cittas or kusala cittas? That's really the issue here. So, how does one know that he's in fact doing it with kusala cittas, and not with akusala cittas? I think that happens by having an understanding that is developed to the level that can tell the difference between the two. If that level of understanding isn't there, then one won't be able to tell if he's counteracting lust with dosa for example. In conventional description that would be something like getting angry at yourself, or hating the object that was previously lusted for. But all this is just more dosa - more akusala, not kusala. But he can't tell the difference because understanding hasn't developed to that level yet, so he would believe he's in fact doing the asubha practice correctly. ---- > A: Can one ever do anything 100% right the first time? Is it something reasonable to expect? pt: As mentioned, I think knowing the difference between a/ksuala would be the necessary starting point for development of (samatha) jhana. I think, that's still far away from 100% right, in fact I don't think it's even above 0% yet, since it doesn't liberate. Though I'm open to learning: 1. how "steady" this understanding of the difference between a/kusala needs to be for a person to classify as an eligible "beginner" for samatha jhana development, and 2. once this understanding is there, can it be further developed by making practical "mistakes", or only by hearing Dhamma and considering it wisely? ---- > A: Or does cetana (intention) automatically means that one *has* to act with a belief in a "Self"? > > Without intention, one will not move a finger, much less develop kusala. pt: As I've explained when writing to KenH regarding intention: > > KH: It can *never* be practised intentionally. Nothing good ever can. When there is belief in intentional manipulation of consciousness there is wrong view and akusala citta, and no prospect of jhana. > pt: I think I know what you're saying, but for those who are not familiar with dsg terminology it might be a little confusing, since intention (cetana) arises with every citta. I think it might be a little more politically friendly to say that if someone can't tell the difference between a/kusala cittas, then his meditation practice is likely to be based on akusala cittas when he attempts to follow the Vsm or sutta instructions because his intention at the time would most likely be akusala. On the other hand, if someone can tell the difference between a/kusala, then for him the Vsm instructions would fall into place with kusala cittas, and he would not fall into using the method with akusala cittas/akusala intention. Best wishes pt #108872 From: "Ken H" Date: Sun Aug 1, 2010 2:45 am Subject: Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro kenhowardau Hi Fabian, -------- <. . .> KH: > > "only one in a hundred or a thousand" of those people who are accepted by a jhana teacher, will ever attain access concentration. And of those who do attain access concentration, "only one in a hundred or a thousand" will ever attain the first jhana. > > FABIAN: > Dear Ken, I have to explain to you again, the statement only one in a hundred or a thousand who will attain access concentration is from Visuddhi Magga, but Visuddhi Magga stated that these difficult achievement, is only for direct Kasina concentration object. Not for Anapanasati. --------- That may be the case, I don't know. But if it is the case we should ask why. According to the texts, jhana masters in ancient times would give each of their students an appropriate object of meditation. There were 38 objects to choose from, and breath was one of them. But breath was the most difficult, and would be prescribed only for the best students. "But this mindfulness of breathing is difficult, difficult to develop, a field in which only the minds of Buddhas, paccekabuddhas and Buddhas sons are at home. It is no trivial matter, nor can it be cultivated by trivial persons." (Visuddhimagga VIII 211) I suppose the best students were the most likely to succeed, even if they were given the hardest meditation objects. And that might account for the higher success rates that you say were achieved. (?) ------------------- <. . .> KH: > > For all sorts of reasons, I think we have to accept that jhana meditation is a thing of the past. FABIAN: > Again I'm not agree. I don't know, I am lucky or what, why I met so many people during meditation retreat who has tasting Jhana attainment. Obviously I'm not living in the past. ------------------- Many people have had strange experiences at meditation retreats and have been given false information as to the nature of those experiences. I know this happened to me when I bought my first Buddhist book and followed its 'easy guide to jhana.' Some false claims are made mistakenly, while others are made maliciously. Consider, for example, the American television evangelists who claim to have been told *directly by God* to raise money for the church. As a general rule, I think the bigger the claim, the less it should be believed. Ken H #108873 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Aug 1, 2010 2:58 am Subject: Re: Some ideas about dhamma starting to change truth_aerator Hi Pt, KenH, all, > > A: If one has to do something only when one has a perfect skill >in it, then it is a vicious circle. How can one practice something >if one has to be 100% perfect? > > pt: I think things are the other way around - knowing the >difference between a/kusala would be the necessary minimum for >correct development of (samatha) jhana. Is attaining this theoretical knowledge that hard or takes that much time? Greed, anger and delusion are bad. Non-greed, non-anger and non-delusion are good. The Buddha did teach about what is kusala and what is akusala. 5,8 or more precepts is an example. >I mean, if one doesn't know the difference between a/kusala states >which constitute counting the breaths for example, then it's very >likely he'll end up counting breaths in an akusala manner. Ptsm does talk quite a bit about various faults. SO study them and then actually put into practice what was learned. Just because a person needs to know how to swim it doesn't mean that s/he doesn't study and then practices what was studied. same with other similar points. > > pt: I think the real problem is like this - when one "counteracts >lust with asubha practice" for example, is he doing it with akusala >cittas or kusala cittas? The actual moment of asubha is kusala. The more such moments are accumulated the better. >That's really the issue here. So, how does one know that he's in >fact doing it with kusala cittas, and not with akusala cittas? Develop super mindfulness and examine the state that is occuring. Even if the state is akusala, the fact of reflecting on the mind and studying hindrances is good and is a part of satipatthana. > > > KH: It can *never* be practised intentionally. Nothing good >ever can. 1) Are there choices? yes or no 2) Are there actions being made? yes or no 3) Do actions have consequences? yes or no With metta, Alex #108874 From: A T Date: Sun Aug 1, 2010 3:17 am Subject: Re: Some ideas about dhamma starting to change truth_aerator Hello Pt1, KenH, all, Part 2.... On Study, What should we study? ""Now, Kalamas, don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, 'This contemplative is our teacher.' When you know for yourselves that, 'These qualities are skillful; these qualities are blameless; these qualities are praised by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to welfare & to happiness' — then you should enter & remain in them."" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.065.than.html Note: "know for yourselves" The Dhamma is: "sva-kkha-to bhagavata- dhammo sandit.t.hiko aka-liko ehipassiko opaneyyiko paccattam. veditabbo viññu-hi-’ti." (The Dhamma well-expounded by the Blessed One is visible here and now, timeless, inviting all to come and see, leading inward, to be seen by the wise for themselves.) The qualities are to be seen by the wise for themselves, not simply learned from books. Furthermore all this doesn't need as much time as some over emphasize. The dhamma is sandit.t.hiko aka-liko, visible here and now, timeless. It wouldn't be that well proclaimed if a wise one couldn't realize it quickly in this very life. Ajahn Chah was very orthodox to the Buddha's message when he taught "don't read books study the heart (citta)". The Dhamma isn't found in books, it is found in actual experience. The books are just whole bunch of concepts we call "words, names, sentences, paragraphs...". One can taste the taste of Dhamma from reading in the same way one can taste the taste of food by reading the ingredient list on the back of the box. With metta, Alex #108875 From: "Swee Boon" Date: Sun Aug 1, 2010 3:20 am Subject: [dsg] Re: how to.... nidive Hi Alex, > Samma-ditthi isn't defined as "there is no self", it is defined in much more pragmatic statements of 4 NT where > " > ...noble truth of stress is to be comprehended' > ...noble truth of the origination of stress is to be abandoned' > ...noble truth of the cessation of stress is to be directly experienced'. > ...noble truth of the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress is to be developed" > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn56/sn56.011.than.html > > Note the emphasis on "TO BE..." > > Right view is inseparable with instructions on what to do, rather than to simply believe. Thank you for your message. That was very wise of you. For one who has comprehended the Four Noble Truths, the reality of no self is "Such". For one who has not comprehended the Four Noble Truths, the belief in no self is an entrapment for him. This is why the Buddha teaches us to contemplate on all things as not-self, and not teach us to believe in a doctrine of no self. Swee Boon #108876 From: "Swee Boon" Date: Sun Aug 1, 2010 3:37 am Subject: [dsg] Re: how to.... nidive Hi Ryan, > Thanks for keeping us informed! It is very important to me to get correct info, from good sources or to at least no when you are getting info from a source what that sources view is. If you are concerned about Access To Insight, there is an alternative source: http://www.metta.lk/ (I do not know if Ken H has any opinions on this source.) Swee Boon #108877 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sun Aug 1, 2010 3:54 am Subject: Re: Some ideas about dhamma starting to change ptaus1 Hi Alex, > > pt: I think things are the other way around - knowing the >difference between a/kusala would be the necessary minimum for >correct development of (samatha) jhana. > > A: Is attaining this theoretical knowledge that hard or takes that much time? Greed, anger and delusion are bad. Non-greed, non-anger and non-delusion are good. pt: Perhaps I wasn't clear. I think understanding the difference between a/kusala refers to actual understanding - the faculty of understanding in action so to speak, so not just theoretical. ---- > > pt: I mean, if one doesn't know the difference between a/kusala states >which constitute counting the breaths for example, then it's very >likely he'll end up counting breaths in an akusala manner. > > A: Ptsm does talk quite a bit about various faults. > > > SO study them and then actually put into practice what was learned. pt: I think you're still missing my point - it's not just about knowing theoretically what's kusala and what's akusala, but also knowing practically when the arisen mental state is actually a/kusala. If one doesn't have that practical knowledge/understanding, then he cannot tell the difference between when his asubha (or another) practice is actually kusala or akusala. He may believe it to be kusala, but it might be akusala. So, he might try to put what he learned into practice, but it wouldn't be right practice because he can't tell when he's practicing akusala. ---- > A: Just because a person needs to know how to swim it doesn't mean that s/he doesn't study and then practices what was studied. > > same with other similar points. pt: Again, I'm not referring to only theoretical study, but to actual knowing/understanding arising in the actual moment, in practical terms. If one doesn't have that understanding, he might believe he's engaging in right concentration for example, but it might in fact be wrong. He just can't tell the difference since the sufficient the understanding hasn't been developed. ---- > > pt: I think the real problem is like this - when one "counteracts >lust with asubha practice" for example, is he doing it with akusala >cittas or kusala cittas? > > A: The actual moment of asubha is kusala. The more such moments are accumulated the better. pt: Sure, but that is in theory so. How does one personally know, practically speaking, whether the moment of supposed asubha is actually kusala or akusala? I think only by knowing the difference between a/kusala, or in this case, it would be between a citta with dosa and adosa I guess. This is the hardest part. I for one am not certain that I actually know this difference practically speaking. Sure, in theory it's easy, but in the actual moment? Not so easy. ---- > > pt: That's really the issue here. So, how does one know that he's in >fact doing it with kusala cittas, and not with akusala cittas? > > A: Develop super mindfulness and examine the state that is occuring. Even if the state is akusala, the fact of reflecting on the mind and studying hindrances is good and is a part of satipatthana. pt: Sure, that's in theory. But how can I be certain that in practice I'm actually developing mindfulness and not greed (for example) by trying to hold onto a certain mental factors to examine them better believing that to be mindfulness? These two are very easy to mix up. For me it's hard to distinguish the difference between them. Perhaps for you it's easier. Maybe you can describe what helps you to be certain that what you experienced was a moment of sati and not a moment of clinging to a mental phenomenon (believing that's what sati is)? Thanks. ---- > > > > KH: It can *never* be practised intentionally. Nothing good >ever can. > > A: 1) Are there choices? yes or no > 2) Are there actions being made? yes or no > 3) Do actions have consequences? yes or no pt: Don't quite follow you are trying to say here. Best wishes pt #108878 From: "Swee Boon" Date: Sun Aug 1, 2010 4:31 am Subject: Re: how to.... nidive Hi Ken H, > Access to Insight is a handy website for finding sutta translations, but there is something about the people behind it you really must know. From Access to Insight FAQ: Access to Insight is not an organization and is not affiliated with any institution. It is simply one person's website. > Bhikkhu Thinissaro is a man who literally woke up one morning with the brainwave, "The Buddha did not teach no-self!" > His brainwave was a complete load of rubbish, of course, but that didn't stop him from developing it into a entirely new Dhamma and propagating that Dhamma on a massive scale. My thoughts: 1. None of us here is the Buddha who actually has the power of discerning others abilities, inclinations, etc, which means that our opinions are not based on discerning the truth, but rather on speculation, which is subject to error, misjudgment, taking things out of context, etc. 2. For those of us who mostly have to use speculation rather than direct discernment, I don't think it's possible to call someone "his brainwave was a complete load of rubbish" without involving unwholesome mental states based on pride and hate. So, it's not good for the poster, and then it's not good for those who reply since they are likely to respond in an unwholesome way as well. On the other hand, if we disagree, but remain respectful, then there's a chance for wholesomeness since respect is based on kindness and generosity. 3. By showing respect towards members of the ordained Sangha, we're engaging in wholesome mental states - basically showing respect towards the Triple Gem. And the same goes for disrespect. I think it's ok to disagree with statements by some monastics, but that's no reason to engage in disrespect. E.g. saying things like "I disagree with Venerable X because of Y and Z" seems like a reasonable discussion that will allow sharing Dhamma, whereas using words that might be perceived as disrespectful personal remarks will most probably not allow sharing Dhamma. Swee Boon #108879 From: "Ken H" Date: Sun Aug 1, 2010 5:12 am Subject: Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro kenhowardau Hi Fabian, ------ <. . .> KEN H: > > So that's how vipassana knowledge comes about: not by sitting with stilled thoughts waiting for a special experience. > > FABIAN: > You are mixed up between Samatha and Vipassana. Who said Vipassana knowledge comes from stilling the thoughts? ------ Many people think vipassana practice is a matter of sitting still and simply observing whatever concepts come to mind. I am told that Zen teachers, for example, tell their students, "Look! [Just] look!" I am sorry if I misunderstood you, but I thought you were saying same sort of thing when you wrote a couple of times, ". . .he should not get involved in thinking, judging or analyzing." ---------------- <. . .> FABIAN: > > > for example: we can explain the taste of apricot to a person who has never tasted apricot? People might make discussion, debate over the nature and taste of apricot, numerous books can be written about the taste of apricot. > > > KEN H: > > I think the point is that only a Buddha can explain the Dhamma to someone who has no right understanding. And even then, it is extremely difficult. (The only reason a Buddha agrees to teach is that there are some people who have (in previous existences) developed enough right understanding to fully comprehend.) > > FABIAN: > If what you say is true, a person with no right understanding is useless to learn Dhamma because only a Buddha can explain Dhamma and it is extremely difficult. Obviously there is no Buddha right now. So do you actually think none of us have right understanding? Is there anyone born with right understanding? ------------------- That is another interesting topic of conversation, but perhaps we shouldn't digress just now. You see, I was just trying to understand your simile of tasting an apricot. Many meditators use that simile as somehow justifying formal meditation. They say that we shouldn't just, 1) hear the Dhamma, 2) consider what we have heard and 3) understand how it applies to the present reality. They say we should, 4) do something more. But what is that something more? And how is it similar to tasting a mango/apricot? Ken H #108880 From: "Ken H" Date: Sun Aug 1, 2010 5:45 am Subject: Re: how to.... kenhowardau Hi Swee Boon, Thanks for your thoughts on respect for the Sangha. I am sure you are right, but I am also sure that B Thanissaro is disseminating wrong views via the Access To Insight website. I have always tried to confine my remarks to his views and to not indulge in personal attacks, and in doing so I have been guided by others. One of them was an Australian monk who had known BT personally and who related the story of his waking up one morning with the new "not-self" theory. Another was a monk who said quite straightforwardly that BT was knowingly going against Theravada orthodoxy and was spreading his own heterodoxy. So, I am guided by those people. It is possible to criticise the views and actions of a monk without being disrespectful to him or to the Sangha. Ken H #108881 From: Ryan Brawn Date: Sun Aug 1, 2010 5:50 am Subject: to be the buddah gr8fuldawg2010 group, Sween Boon: None of us here is the Buddha who actually has the power of discerning others abilities, inclinations, etc, Ryan (question for group):Who actually is the buddah? Not historically, but now. Isn't it right that there is only one buddah per generation or something like that? What does it mean to be the buddah now? sorry if this makes no sense, or is super basic. Peace, Love, and happy living Ryan #108882 From: "Ken H" Date: Sun Aug 1, 2010 6:30 am Subject: Re: Some ideas about dhamma starting to change kenhowardau Hi Kevin, ---- <. . .> KH: > >When there is belief in intentional manipulation of consciousness there is wrong view and akusala citta, and no prospect of jhana. > > Kevin: > Then please explain these sections from the Visuddhimagga on the development of meditation on the elements. I have bolded and underlined some parts. I don't know how much of that will show up in the message (last time my bolding (highlightning) did not show up). It is only a few paragraphs and it is trimmed down quite a bit. ---- None of the highlighting showed up. YahooGroups doesn't provide for bold or underlined text. That's why we use *asterisks!* I did ask you to summarise the extracts or to just explain how they indicated to you that there could be control over dhammas. But you obviously want me to do the hard work. :-) There is just one citta at a time - no living being. And so no living being can have control over anything. That's what you have to bear in mind when you read Dhamma texts. Ken H #108883 From: "Swee Boon" Date: Sun Aug 1, 2010 7:02 am Subject: Re: to be the buddah nidive Hi Ryan, > What does it mean to be the buddha now? In my opinion, "to be the Buddha now" means to end Ignorance now. --------------- http://www.what-buddha-said.net/drops/II/Cause_of_Ignorance.htm What is ignorance, what is the origin of ignorance, what is the ceasing of ignorance, and what is the way leading to the ceasing of ignorance? Not knowing about suffering, not knowing about the origin of suffering, not knowing about the ceasing of suffering, not knowing about the way leading to the ceasing of suffering, this is called ignorance! With the arising of the mental fermentations, ignorance also arises. With the ceasing of the mental fermentations, ignorance also ceases! The way leading to the ceasing of ignorance is just this Noble 8-fold Way: That is; Right view, right motivation, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right awareness, and right concentration. --------------- The Buddha teaches that clinging to a doctrine of a self is suffering, because it propels one towards further becomings, further births, further agings and further deaths. The Buddha teaches that craving is the cause for clinging to a doctrine of a self. There are these six kinds of craving: craving for delightful forms experienced with the eye, craving for delightful sounds experienced with the ear, craving for delightful aromas experienced with the nose, craving for delightful tastes experienced with the tongue, craving for delightful tactile sensations experienced with the body and craving for delightful ideas (such as a refined doctrine of a self like yours) experienced with the mind. The Buddha teaches that with the ceasing of craving, there is also the ceasing of clinging to a doctrine of a self. The Buddha teaches that the Noble Eightfold Path is the way that leads to the ceasing of clinging to a doctrine of a self. Swee Boon #108884 From: "Ken H" Date: Sun Aug 1, 2010 7:11 am Subject: Re: to be the buddah kenhowardau Hi Ryan, The Buddha has gone and will never be seen again - by anyone. He is no more. But in ultimate reality, there never was a Buddha. Even when he was alive there were just conditioned dhammas following one after another. That's why he said, 'Anyone who sees this Dhamma (this way things are) sees me.' People who only saw the concept of the living Buddha - even if they managed to touch the hem of his robe - did not see him in any meaningful way. Ken H #108885 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 1, 2010 7:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] how to.... nilovg Dear Ryan, Op 31-jul-2010, om 18:28 heeft Ryan Brawn het volgende geschreven: > . I found your Buddhism in Daily Life but & many other looks like > excellent reads, but I haven't found kh Sujin's "deeds of merit", > can you give me a direct link or tell me where I can find it PLEASE :) ------- N:< http://www.zolag.co.uk/downloads.html > and: Nina. #108886 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 1, 2010 8:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Some ideas about dhamma starting to change nilovg Dear Alex, Op 1-aug-2010, om 4:58 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > 1) Are there choices? yes or no > 2) Are there actions being made? yes or no > 3) Do actions have consequences? yes or no ------- N: 2 and 3 yes: kamma and vipaaka, but no person who does actions or receives result. I am sure you agree. As to 1, this was discussed before. How easily can the idea of self slip in. That is the meaning of Kh Sujin's words: nobody can do anything. Just to remind people of anattaa. It does not mean being passive as to the development of kusala and understanding. The idea of 'I am listening, I am studying' can occur at any time. I was just listening to a recording taken in India, and found it helpful what Kh Sujin said: < No expectations to have a lot of sati. Not trying very hard to have it. and here we learn the meaning of patience. There is a flash of awareness and then attachment to it. That is the way to know attachment as it is.> Nina. #108887 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 1, 2010 8:27 am Subject: Meditation on Elements.Vis. Ch XI nilovg Dear Kevin, An interesting subject. I find it helpful to look at the heading a particular subject is dealt with in the Visuddhimagga. I am comparing Ch XI and Ch XIV on the elements. you quoted Vis. ch XI (Vism,Ch.XI, 27 etc.): ‘So firstly, one of quick understanding who wants to develop this meditation should go into solitary retreat. Then he should advert to his entire material body, and discern the elements in brief in this way, “In this body what is hard... (snipped) I think we can see clearly from this passage that this is an instruction in meditation. I don't think there is any doubt that this is a direct instruction on meditation.... I think that this meditation can work to increase conceptual wisdom, which can lead to wisdom of actual satipatthana, and eventually to penetration of nibbana. I also think that intentional sila can support this. ----------- N: Yes, this is under the heading of samatha. Then on the body parts, the aspect of foulness. The aim of samatha is suppression of desire for sense objects. However, wealso find the expressions no soul, etc. This pertains to a person who develops both samatha and vipassanaa. Now Vis. XIV, 35 and Tiika also deal with the elements. This is the section on the aggregates, khandhas, and it is called the soil on which understanding grows. It refers to Ch XI for the definitions. ------- Vis. Ch XIV, 35. Herein (a) "primary materiality" is of four kinds as the earth element, water element, fire element, and air element. Their characteristic, function, and manifestation have been given under the definition of the four elements (Ch. XI, 87, 93); but as to the proximate cause, each has the other three as its proximate cause. -------- Tiika: After he has explained the principal elements as to word meaning and so on in the definition of the four elements as objects of sense desire *, and he has given the explanation of the characteristics and so on of these dhammas which each have their own distinct nature, he said, ?Their characteristic, function, and manifestation have been given under the definition of the four elements?. Since he had not given the proximate cause, he said, ?as to their proximate cause and so on?. And the fact that he did not mention the meaning in each case with regard to the condition should be seen here as a way of 'meanwhile explanation'. As to the expression, also all of them, this means, also the four elements. The element of earth proceeds because it is held together by water, maintained by fire, and distended by wind. Thus, it is not otherwise that the other (three) great elements are its proximate cause, and therefore he said also with regard to the other elements: ?each has the other three as its proximate cause?. _______ * In Ch XI, they are treated under the aspect of the foulness of the body since they are objects of desire. ----------- N: Under the heading of samatha (in Ch XI) it was not necessary to give conditions, since the elements were dealt with as objects of desire. Here, in Ch XIV it is different. Under the heading of aggregates all naamas and ruupas have been described in detail. This is not meant for just reading and remembering or mere intellectual understanding. They are realities, and thus, when their characteristics appear they can be objects of sati sampaja~n~naa. Nina. #108888 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 1, 2010 2:19 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Visuddhimagga IV,78. Attention Scott. nilovg Dear Han, Op 31-jul-2010, om 23:47 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > Han: What are the two objects of samatha that are not involved in > aramma.n?panijjh?na? ------- N: I do not know. I think all the meditation subjects of samatha enumerated in the Visuddhimagga are included. What do you think? Nina. #108889 From: Ken O Date: Sun Aug 1, 2010 4:21 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is the ALL actually? ashkenn2k Dear Fabian A rock is a mental construction.? Just like a picture in the PC is make up of millions of pixels.? A rock is seen is due to the construct of the thinking process of the citta.? Seeing only sees a pixel of the rock, it is thinking that pieces them together into a rock.? the hardness of the rock is because of the hardness property of the earth element of the rock.?? there is no real rock, it is just rupa.? Rock only is real if we think about it.? If not it is just visible object and hardness. It is not easy to understand the fine distinction between thinking and rupa as we are so used to such thinking or construct cheers Ken O #108890 From: Ken O Date: Sun Aug 1, 2010 4:33 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A get-together with Pt, Vince & Nancy! ashkenn2k Dear Sarah its ok to review past cittas and thoughts it there is wise reflection.? nothing wrong about it and dont discourage him.??Reviewing our past thoughts and actions?could strengthen our?panna cheers Ken O #108891 From: Ken O Date: Sun Aug 1, 2010 4:54 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Visuddhimagga IV,78 ashkenn2k Dear Chew to make it simple, Jhanas can also refering to supramundane jhanas so it depends on the context cheers Ken O #108892 From: Ken O Date: Sun Aug 1, 2010 6:35 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sotapanna ashkenn2k >Could you please explain a bit more in this regard. I don't quite understand how > >can one really understand a dhamma without knowing the difference >(experientially) between thinking about dhammas (so just operating with >concepts) and actually experiencing/understanding a dhamma directly? I guess >that if only concepts are involved, that wouldn't be insight yet - so no real >understanding of dhammas. Thanks. KO:? What we understand now is conventional panna not yet direct panna or vipassana.?? In? Abhidhamma, the development?of panna?on the emphasis on paramatha dhamma rather than concepts because concepts are based on paramatha dhamma.? But it does not mean concept are not important,? They are and are helpful in many ways of development like the different form of meditation subjects.? When one try to differentitate this is concept and this is paramatha dhamma, one could easily misdirect their own development.? One forgets that concepts are condition to arise by thinking or concepts could condition thinking.?? When one like a pleasant object be it car, house or paintings, it is the craving that has the characteritistics of sticking or clinging to the concept.? Concept by itself is harmless but craving of it is the cause of the aksuala.? Concepts can induce aksuala to arise due to sanna associating it with pleasure but it is still not the concepts that is the dhamma that arise, it is sanna with pleasurable vedana. One sees, seeing only sees, seeing dont crave, seeing dont differentiate whether this is red or yellow or rock.? It is the citta that arise after seeing in the javana process which is the cause of the craving etc.? So when one like a car, if one could say it is just visible rupa, I would ask which part of the seeing citta that sees the colour.? It is difficult but it would be easier if one understand the arising of lobha of a car.? Slowly one will start thinking in terms of dhamma, when one likes it is just craving, one is impatient while waiting for a friend,?it is just dosa.?? When we understand the world in dhamma, one lessen the attachment to self view, one slowly understands that when appriopriate condtion arise, the appriopriate cause will arise.? In this case when thinking and sanna associated a concept as a pleasurable, it is the craving that is conditioned to arise.? Experience is just being aware of the paramatha dhamma that arise.? That is no need to understand concepts, there is a need to understand paramatha dhamma as all concepts are the result of paramatha dhammas.? One more time, understand and develop the thinking of dhamma, understand when it arise, then it would erode the self?view and?wrong view as it is just paramattha dhamma cheers Ken O #108893 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Aug 1, 2010 7:39 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Some ideas about dhamma starting to change truth_aerator Dear Nina, all >Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Alex, > Op 1-aug-2010, om 4:58 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > > > 1) Are there choices? yes or no > > 2) Are there actions being made? yes or no > > 3) Do actions have consequences? yes or no > ------- > N: 2 and 3 yes: kamma and vipaaka, but no person who does actions >or receives result. I am sure you agree. Right. > As to 1, this was discussed before. How easily can the idea of >self slip in. Just like there is action without an actor. There is choice without a One who chooses. But in any case, this is getting too metaphysical. Is there choice now? Of course. There can be choice to continue reading this sentence, to look somewhere else, or do something else. >It does not mean being passive as to the development of kusala and >understanding. I am glad to hear this. With metta, Alex #108894 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Aug 1, 2010 9:05 pm Subject: Re: Some ideas about dhamma starting to change truth_aerator Hello Pt, all, > Hi Alex, > > > > pt: I think things are the other way around - knowing the >difference between a/kusala would be the necessary minimum for >correct development of (samatha) jhana. > > > > A: Is attaining this theoretical knowledge that hard or takes >that much time? Greed, anger and delusion are bad. Non-greed, >non-anger and non-delusion are good. > > pt: Perhaps I wasn't clear. I think understanding the difference >between a/kusala refers to actual understanding - the faculty of >understanding in action so to speak, so not just theoretical. Great. Faculty of understanding in action is gained in action. 1) Experience and *description* of it that you could read from books are different just like tasting the food vs reading the ingridient list. 2) No book can replace direct experience, and often the specific details vary from people to people and from circumstance to circumstance. > pt: I think you're still missing my point - it's not just about >knowing theoretically what's kusala and what's akusala, but also >knowing practically when the arisen mental state is actually >a/kusala. Right. One needs to learn "in the trenches" so to speak, the "street smart". This may take time and lots of discernment on one's part. This is one of the reasons why generally people don't become arahants in 2 days. But if one doesn't try and never learns from one's mistakes, when will one learn? > pt: if one doesn't have that understanding, he might believe he's >engaging in right concentration for example, but it might in fact be >wrong. It could happen. So one needs to be discerning and honest with oneself. One should be aware of what is occurring as it is occurring. One needs to devise personal tactics. Your hindrances might have different specifics than mine. But in any case, this is like swimming. If this stroke doesn't work well for you, try another one. Learn as you go. Sometimes learning and improving "one's technique" (of battling kilesas) is part of the way. If everything would happen with no problem, then how and what would you learn? One doesn't need to be absolutely perfect for stream-entry path. In fact noticing and being aware of one's kilesas can itself be very helpful in the beginning. Relative Perfection comes with fruit of arhatship. With metta, Alex #108895 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Aug 1, 2010 9:12 pm Subject: Re: to be the buddah truth_aerator Hello Ryan, all, > Ryan (question for group):Who actually is the buddah? Self awakened Arhat. When there isn't Dhamma in the world and someone becomes first Arhat through his own efforts and teaches others, then that person is fully Awakened Buddha. The next Buddha will be Buddha Metteyya who will come in ~576 million years (according to traditional indian cosmology based on lifespan in Tusita Heaven where bodhisatta is said to abide now). With metta, Alex #108896 From: han tun Date: Sun Aug 1, 2010 9:45 pm Subject: Re: Visuddhimagga IV,78. Attention Scott. hantun1 Dear Nina and Chew, > > Han: What are the two objects of samatha that are not involved in aramma.n?panijjh?na? > Nina : I do not know. I think all the meditation subjects of samatha enumerated in the Visuddhimagga are included. What do you think? Han: In the Burmese Dictionary, I find the word "aaramma.naapanijjhaayana" which is translated as "the contemplation on the aaramma.na" (without going into the numbers of aaramma.na). Like you, I think it includes *all* the meditation subjects of samatha. Maybe, Chew may know. Respectfully, Han #108897 From: Ryan Brawn Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 12:08 am Subject: Dhammapada gr8fuldawg2010 Hello Group, It's me Ryan again. I don't have sound on my computer, and I was wondering is there anyway someone could tell me how do you say Dhammapada Maybe someone could spell it as it sounds. thanks #108898 From: "Ken H" Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 12:13 am Subject: Re: to be the buddah kenhowardau Hi Swee Boon (and Ryan), ---- <. . .> SB: > The Buddha teaches that clinging to a doctrine of a self is suffering, because it propels one towards further becomings, further births, further agings and further deaths. ---- I don't know where you got that from, Swee Boon. Do you really think it is the Buddha's teaching? Or is it Ven. Thanissaro's alternative teaching? The Buddha taught that *all* conditioned existence was dukkha (suffering)! And it wasn't because it propelled anyone towards anything. Conditioned dhammas are dukkha by their inherent nature (lakkhana). ------------------- SB: > The Buddha teaches that craving is the cause for clinging to a doctrine of a self. There are these six kinds of craving: craving for delightful forms experienced with the eye, craving for delightful sounds experienced with the ear, craving for delightful aromas experienced with the nose, craving for delightful tastes experienced with the tongue, craving for delightful tactile sensations experienced with the body and craving for delightful ideas (such as a refined doctrine of a self like yours) experienced with the mind. The Buddha teaches that with the ceasing of craving, there is also the ceasing of clinging to a doctrine of a self. ------------------- You make it sound as if the doctrine of self was not inherently evil. You seem to be disseminating Thanissaro's line - that the doctrine of self is good and sound, and it is only when we *cling* to it that "stress" arises. ------------------------- SB: > The Buddha teaches that the Noble Eightfold Path is the way that leads to the ceasing of clinging to a doctrine of a self. --------------------------- No, he teaches that the Noble Eightfold path is the way that leads to the extinction of dukkha. Wrong view - especially belief in a self - is the way that leads to the *continuation* of dukkha. Ken H #108899 From: A T Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 2:28 am Subject: [dsg] Re: What is the ALL actually? truth_aerator Dear KenO, all interested, >KO:A rock is a mental construction. Just like a picture in the PC >is >make up of millions of pixels. A rock is seen is due to the >construct >of the thinking process of the citta. Seeing only sees a >pixel of the >rock, it is thinking that pieces them together into a >rock. the >hardness of the rock is because of the > hardness property of the earth element of the rock. > > > there is no real rock, it is just rupa. Rock only is real if we >think >about it. If not it is just visible object and hardness. What if one trips over the rock without seeing the rock prior? So if I am not thinking about a rock, I cannot trip over one? And how exactly does this knowledge helps to let go of craving and views? Samma-ditthi includes 4NT. This noble truth of stress is to be comprehended' Tam. kho panidam. dukkham. ariyasaccam. pariññeyya’nti 'This noble truth of the origination of stress is to be abandoned' Tam. kho panidam. dukkhasamudayam. ariyasaccam. paha-tabba’nti 'This noble truth of the cessation of stress is to be directly experienced'. ‘Tam. kho panidam. dukkhanirodham. ariyasaccam. sacchika-tabba’nti 'This noble truth of the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress is to be developed'. Tam. kho panidam. dukkhanirodhaga-mini- pat.ipada- ariyasaccam. bha-vetabba’nti I am not exactly sure how discussion on existence or non-existence of rocks relates to realizing suffering, abandoning craving, experiencing nibbana, and developing N8P. It seems actually to be the wrong view outlined in Dit.t.hi-sam.yuttam. (about things not existing and us being deluded about their non-existence) . With metta, Alex #108900 From: "chandrafabian" Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 3:25 am Subject: Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro chandrafabian Dear Ken, KEN H: Hi Fabian, <. . .> That may be the case, I don't know. But if it is the case we should ask why. According to the texts, jhana masters in ancient times would give each of their students an appropriate object of meditation. There were 38 objects to choose from, and breath was one of them. But breath was the most difficult, and would be prescribed only for the best students. "But this mindfulness of breathing is difficult, difficult to develop, a field in which only the minds of Buddhas, paccekabuddhas and Buddhas sons are at home. It is no trivial matter, nor can it be cultivated by trivial persons." (Visuddhimagga VIII 211) I suppose the best students were the most likely to succeed, even if they were given the hardest meditation objects. And that might account for the higher success rates that you say were achieved. (?) ================================- FABIAN: Dear Ken, Mindfulness of breathing difficult, it is not trivial matter, this is true, because you have to overcome your tendencies. It difficult like any other meditation subject, but not saying numbers. Nevertheless, a trivial person would never become a superb person if they don't practice right? A trivial person who never practice would always become a trivial person. A trivial person would become a best students if they practice diligently, the key word: practice makes perfect. ======================================= KEN H: <. . .> Many people have had strange experiences at meditation retreats and have been given false information as to the nature of those experiences. I know this happened to me when I bought my first Buddhist book and followed its 'easy guide to jhana.' ======================================= FABIAN: Yes or no, I don't know the teacher false or not, if I'm not hearing myself. To practice meditation it is hard to do by ourself if we don't have guidance. Meditation need guidance by someone who has experience, it is like a person who doesn't have any knowledge trying to built highrise building by learning from books. ======================================== KEN H: Some false claims are made mistakenly, while others are made maliciously. Consider, for example, the American television evangelists who claim to have been told *directly by God* to raise money for the church. As a general rule, I think the bigger the claim, the less it should be believed. Ken H ======================================== FABIAN: That's right Ken, therefore we should not learn meditation from teacher who sell Jhana for sale, or something like that. But speak sincerely from my heart and from my experience, Jhana absorption) is still experienced by many people in my community. Mettacittena, fabian #108901 From: "chandrafabian" Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 4:22 am Subject: Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro chandrafabian Dear Ken, KEN H: Hi Fabian, <. . .> Many people think vipassana practice is a matter of sitting still and simply observing whatever concepts come to mind. I am told that Zen teachers, for example, tell their students, "Look! [Just] look!" ====================================== FABIAN: Dear Ken, That is true, but it is not as simple at it seems. =========================================== KEN H: I am sorry if I misunderstood you, but I thought you were saying same sort of thing when you wrote a couple of times, ". . .he should not get involved in thinking, judging or analyzing." ========================================== FABIAN: It is hard to explain if you never see outside the thought, you must experience by yourself, other wise it is hard for you to understand. The THOUGHT CAN NOT BE STILLED, it arises and passes away. We should not get involved in thinking, judging, or analyzing, the purpose is to see the process of thinking. ============================================ <. . .> KEN H: > > I think the point is that only a Buddha can explain the Dhamma to someone who has no right understanding. And even then, it is extremely difficult. (The only reason a Buddha agrees to teach is that there are some people who have (in previous existences) developed enough right understanding to fully comprehend.) ================================================== FABIAN: I understand you said in previous existences. Last year, last month, last week, yesterday, last minute ago is our previous existence. So practicing today might give result next year, next month, next week, tomorrow or next minute. =================================================== FABIAN: <.....> KEN H: That is another interesting topic of conversation, but perhaps we shouldn't digress just now. You see, I was just trying to understand your simile of tasting an apricot. Many meditators use that simile as somehow justifying formal meditation. They say that we shouldn't just, 1) hear the Dhamma, 2) consider what we have heard and 3) understand how it applies to the present reality. They Desay we should, 4) do something more. But what is that something more? And how is it similar to tasting a mango/apricot? Ken H =================================================== For example: the arising of nama and/or rupa must be experience by ourselves, you may learn thousands of books about it, but without experiencing ourselves the knowledgge is superficial. If you experience by yourself (like tasting mango or apricot), you would be FIRM in understanding your body and mind is impermanent. Learning is very important, but practicing is more important and complement your knowledge. Mettacittena, fabian #108902 From: "ptaus1" Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 4:35 am Subject: Re: Some ideas about dhamma starting to change ptaus1 Hi Alex, > A: Faculty of understanding in action is gained in action. pt: Hm, if you put it that way, then that's the actual issue of contention I guess - whether understanding is gained by engaging in certain actions, or whether understanding has to actually accompany a certain action, for that action to be right in the first place. ---- > A: 1) Experience and *description* of it that you could read from books are different just like tasting the food vs reading the ingridient list. > > > 2) No book can replace direct experience, and often the specific details vary from people to people and from circumstance to circumstance. pt: Yes, I think so too. ---- > A: One needs to learn "in the trenches" so to speak, the "street smart". This may take time and lots of discernment on one's part. This is one of the reasons why generally people don't become arahants in 2 days. > > But if one doesn't try and never learns from one's mistakes, when will one learn? pt: Again, I think this is one of the issues in contention - can one actually learn from mistakes or not when it comes to Dhamma? If we equate a "mistake" to an akusala citta, then I guess akusala would usually tend to condition more akusala in the future. Sometimes, I gather that understanding (kusala) can arise and recognise akusala as akusala, so that would be kusala. But, this doesn't happen very often. So the question is whether those rare moments of kusala are worth all the akusala that's created in the process? Related issue is how grave the consequences of making such a "mistake" are - e.g. if I attempt to develop samatha, but in the process end up just engaging in akusala, then - is that as bad as washing the dishes while disliking it? Or how about the difference between: (a) engaging in akusala while trying to develop samatha believing that it's the path that leads to awakening, and (b) compared to simply trying to develop samatha as a sort of a hobby (so not believing it's the path to awakening)? I don't know. ---- > A: So one needs to be discerning and honest with oneself. One should be aware of what is occurring as it is occurring. pt: Agreed. ---- > A: One needs to devise personal tactics. Your hindrances might have different specifics than mine. pt: Here I'm not quite certain what you're saying by tactics. No matter what arises, it's still just a dhamma, and whether it's understood as such would depend on whether there's understanding or not at the time I guess. ---- Best wishes pt #108903 From: "ptaus1" Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 4:39 am Subject: [dsg] Re: A Sotapanna ptaus1 Hi KenO, Thanks for coming back to this, I think I understand a little better now what you were trying to say. Best wishes pt > When one try to differentitate this is concept and this is paramatha dhamma, one > could easily misdirect their own development.? One forgets that concepts are > condition to arise by thinking or concepts could condition thinking.?? #108904 From: "ptaus1" Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 4:55 am Subject: Re: to be the buddah ptaus1 Hi Ryan, > Ryan: Who actually is the buddah? Just thought I should mention it - there are several topics on the Buddha in the Useful Posts file that might interest you: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts.htm Also, you might be interested in reading the posts in the topics "Abhidhamma - beginners" (also in the Useful posts file). I found reading those helped me initially to follow the discussions here. Also, if you haven't already found it, there's a Links section on the group yahoo page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/links You might find some useful things there - someone mentioned already the ATI and Mettanet websites for finding the suttas online, there's also Mahindarama website: http://www.mahindarama.com/e-tipitaka/suttanta.htm and a mirror of Mettanet: http://awake.kiev.ua/dhamma/tipitaka/ When it comes to translations of the tipitaka, I find it useful to have the opportunity to compare different translations to get a better understanding. Best wishes pt #108905 From: "chandrafabian" Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 5:23 am Subject: Re: Some ideas about dhamma starting to change chandrafabian Dear Alex and all, I should say sadhu, sadhu, sadhu, Dhamma inviting us to experience by ourselves, but learning Dhamma books also important, it would help develop our intellectual understanding. Mettacittena, fabian > #108906 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 6:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Past Buddhas Dhamma in Detail sarahprocter... Dear Nina & Kevin, >N: Thank you for the reference. Thus far I have not met discrepancies in > the commentaries and therefore I am surprised of the quote you gave. > It is hard to find its location... .... S: Connie and I have both referred to the passage in question (and another briefer reference to the same point in another text) here before. It's from the SuttaVibhanga, (vol 1 in Horner's "Book of Discipline", vol 1 under Paaraajika, p15 (111.7 for the Pali): "Now while the venerable Saariputta had gone into seclusion for meditation, this thought arose in his mind: "Of which enlightened ones, of which lords did the Brahma-life not last long? Of which enlightened ones, of which lords did the Brahma-life last long?" Then the venerable Saariputta, rising up at evening time from his meditation, came up to the lord and having come up he greeted him and sitting to one side. As he was sitting to one side, the venerable Saariputta spoke thus to the lord: "Now, lord, as I was in seclusion for meditation, this thought arose in my mind: 'Of which enlightened ones....last long?' " "Saariputta, while Vipassin was lord, while Sikhin was lord, and while Vessabhu was lord the Brahma-life did not last long. Saariputta, while Kakusandha was lord and while Konaagamana was lord and while Kassapa was lord the Brahma-life lasted long." "And what, Lord, is the cause, what the reason why when Vipassin was lord and when Sikin was lord and when Vessabhu was lord the Brahma life did not last long?" "Sariputta, the lord Vipassin and the lord Sikhin and the lord Vessabhu were idle in preaching dhamma in detail to the disciples; and these had little of the Suttas in prose or in prose and verse, the Expositions, the Songs, the Verses of Uplift, the Quotations, the Jatakas,the Miracles, the Miscellanies (S: the Vedalla); the course of training for the disciples was not made known, the Paa.timokkha was not appointed. After the disappearance of these enlightened ones, these lords, after the disappearance of the disciples enlightened under these enlightened ones, those last disciples of various clans, of various social strata, who had gone forth from various families, caused this Brahma life rapidly to disappear. it is as if, Saariputta, various flowers, loose on a flat piece of wood, not tied together by a thread, are scattered about, whirled about and destroyed by the wind....." S: The text continues to give detail about why some Buddhas gave more detail than others - different circumstances, different accumulations of those around at the time as well. The the Buddha Vessabhu, the text tells, was in a jungle and exhorted the thousand monks around him briefly on the Truths after reading their minds and they all became arahats immediately without a need for more detail or Vinaya rules. Metta Sarah ======= #108907 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 7:16 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Sabhava is just an Annihilationist Atta view applied to micro s... sarahprocter... Hi Kevin (& all), Like others, I've really been appreciating your many helpful discussions and also your frank and considered responses to the many questions friends have raised. On this thread, very belatedly (I've been very behind with my reading), whatever the intentions, I think it really is inappropriate, as others have suggested, to tell anyone here "to scram" or to talk of "kick ass" or any of the other comments which sound unfriendly or unwelcoming here. I tried to give a hint about this before and I appreciate the good points that pt and others have made about gentle speech. Let's all discuss our differing views and understandings of the Teachings without making personal comments which can easily cause offence. Isn't this the characteristic of metta - to treat others as we'd like to be treated? Some friends here with views that may be different from yours or mine are considered by us to be very valued contributors and good friends here. Remember the sutta in MN which points to appreciating the good qualities one finds in others - no matter it be their sila, their dana or their wisdom. If one finds no good qualities, it's an opportunity for uppekkha and metta, even karuna. We can ask ourselves why we're so bothered by others' different views? What is the present reality at such a moment? Last Sunday a friend visited us here who has listened to A.Sujin on and off for nearly 40 years, but he still has strong views about meditation, jhana and so on which are quite contrary to hers or mine. But there's no point in arguing or making things unpleasant because he has his own way, different from ours. We still appreciate him as a good, kind friend and learn to be patient when other ideas are expressed. It really does all come back to the present moment, the present citta. The problems in the world are just the lobha, dosa and moha arising with the present citta. That's all. As you know, at a moment of awareness, there's peace, true calm or samatha. Looking forward to more discussions with you and others as we slowly catch up (!) Metta Sarah ====== #108908 From: "Ken H" Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 7:29 am Subject: Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro kenhowardau Hi Fabian, --------- <. . .> KH: > > "But this mindfulness of breathing is difficult, difficult to develop, a field in which only the minds of Buddhas, paccekabuddhas and Buddhas sons are at home. It is no trivial matter, nor can it be cultivated by trivial persons." (Visuddhimagga VIII 211) <. . .> F: > Mindfulness of breathing difficult, it is not trivial matter, this is true, because you have to overcome your tendencies. It difficult like any other meditation subject, --------- I am not sure about the details, but I gather that most meditators can practice mindfulness of breathing. However, almost none of them can take it to the stage of access concentration or beyond. That would be the domain of the tiny elite group refereed to in the quote. That same passage from the Visuddhimagga explains why this is so. Apparently, all other meditation objects become clearer and clearer as concentration increases, but with breath the opposite applies. As concentration increases, the breath becomes less and less clear. -------------------- F: > Nevertheless, a trivial person would never become a superb person if they don't practice right? -------------------- Right, but what do you mean by practice? ---------------------------- F: > A trivial person who never practice would always become a trivial person. A trivial person would become a best students if they practice diligently, the key word: practice makes perfect. ----------------------------- Yes, that is the generally understood meaning of practice. However, the Buddha's teaching is to know "the way things are." It has nothing to do with *changing* the way things are. That has to be born in mind at all times. Most people forget it very easily (if they ever knew it at all). And so they practise in same way that ordinary, uninstructed worldlings practise. They try to change stress into calm, or unmindfulness into mindfulness, or ignorance into wisdom, etc. ----------------------- <. . .> FABIAN: That's right Ken, therefore we should not learn meditation from teacher who sell Jhana for sale, or something like that. But speak sincerely from my heart and from my experience, Jhana absorption) is still experienced by many people in my community. ------------------------ I wonder why people would want to learn jhana at all - even from a proper teacher. It is a good practice, but it is not what the Buddha taught (it is not satipatthana). I wonder why they don't use their valuable time more productively. By studying Dhamma! Ken H #108909 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 8:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A get-together with Pt, Vince & Nancy! sarahprocter... Dear Ken O, Good to see you around again, after your break! We're having another trip to Kaeng Krajan at the very end of August. Would you (or anyone else like to join us? If so, ask me for details off-list. We'll hide all the chairs, don't worry!!) --- On Mon, 2/8/10, Ken O wrote: >its ok to review past cittas and thoughts it there is wise reflection.? nothing wrong about it and dont discourage him.??Reviewing our past thoughts and actions?could strengthen our?panna .... S: There can be wise reflection about past cittas but thinking about concepts of past cittas is not the same as awareness and understanding of present dhammas. So what is most useful is a consideration and understanding of the present reality at that or any other time. Usually, and only panna can know at any given moment whether the citta is kusala or akusala. When we're concerned about past cittas and review past tendencies, especially, "was it awareness or was it not" kind of reflections, there is bound to be lobha, clinging to oneself, clinging to having awareness, if we're honest. So, I encourage anyone to just understand more about the presently appearing dhammas. What's gone has completely gone. Aren't we lost in our dreams enough? Metta Sarah ===== #108910 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 8:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Some ideas about dhamma starting to change sarahprocter... Hi Kevin, As I said, I'm very behind, so haven't read the further discussions in this thread yet... --- On Thu, 29/7/10, Kevin F wrote: >I think this meditation was taught by the Buddha with the purpose of developing wisdom in the individual. I am starting to think that it is profitable. I also think that no matter what one does, if one does not have the Parami developed, one will not attain nibbana because there will be no cause or support for it. I think that this meditation works on a conceptual level. When one searches in the body for hardness or roughness as earth element, for example, one does not really see it; however one gets a strong concept that it is there. I think that this meditation can work to increase conceptual wisdom, which can lead to wisdom of actual satipatthana, and eventually to penetration of nibbana. I also think that intentional sila can support this. What do you guys think?? ... S: I think you're beginning to lose the "plot"..... sounds like a lot of doubt about the power of panna to understand any conditioned dhamma as anatta at this moment. Atta sneaks in very easily, easily masquerading as wisdom. As soon as there's some special "searching" or trying to catch/find realities, it's attachment, not detachment at work. Metta Sarah ======== #108911 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 8:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro sarahprocter... Dear Fabian & Swee Boon, I appreciated your sharing of views. --- On Fri, 30/7/10, chandrafabian wrote: >To discuss Dhamma we must find the suitable person to make discussion, if that person not fulfill the criteria, that person is not suitable as a friend to talk to. The criteria's are; >1. Proper language and good manner in the spirit of discussing the truth in friendly manner. 2. Sufficient Knowledge of Dhamma. .... S: I'm sure we can all learn in both these regards. We're all here to consider and improve our knowledge and better to be a good friend and develop frienliness than to expect too much from others:-). We can all come across rather abruptly at times here, I'm sure. As Pt said, internet and live discussions are very different. How about you both showing some friendliness to us all by sharing a pic each in the DSG photo album? Perhaps you'll even encourage Pt not to be so shy in this regard:). Anyway, thanks again for your lively and interesting discussion which let us all learn more about your views. Metta Sarah p.s Fabian, pls remember to trim your posts - I know we all forget at times. ========= #108912 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 9:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Past Buddhas Dhamma in Detail nilovg Dear Sarah, Op 2-aug-2010, om 8:51 heeft sarah het volgende geschreven: > S: The text continues to give detail about why some Buddhas gave > more detail than others - different circumstances, different > accumulations of those around at the time as well. The the Buddha > Vessabhu, the text tells, was in a jungle and exhorted the thousand > monks around him briefly on the Truths after reading their minds > and they all became arahats immediately without a need for more > detail or Vinaya rules. ------- N: Thank you for the reference and your conclusion is plausible. Only, I wonder about the giving of Patimokkha, given by all former Buddhas. As I wrote before, I looked at the Buddhava.msa, Chronicle of the Buddhas, and its commentary, Madhuratthavilaasini, tr. by Horner as the Clarifier of the Sweet Meaning. the Buddha Vipassin recited Paatimokkha, and then the verse of the ovaada paatimokkha. As to the Buddha Vessabhu (p. 356), he was srrounded by thousands of arahats, the 'Lord Vessabhu recited Paatimokkha'. Then under the Exposition of the Differences between the Buddhas, there are differences in lifespan, family, Bo-tree, etc. Then for all Buddha similarities are mentioned. Great Brahmaa's request for teaching dhamma, the turning of the Wheel of Dhamma, recital of the Paatimokkha, teaching of the Abhidhamma in the abode of the thirtythree, descent to Sa.nkassa (after that).... ------ Nina. #108913 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 10:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Past Buddhas Dhamma in Detail sarahprocter... Dear Nina (& Kevin), Good points - I haven't read all your discussion yet. --- On Mon, 2/8/10, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > N: Thank you for the reference and your conclusion is plausible. Only, I wonder about the giving of Patimokkha, given by all former Buddhas. ... S: In the Vinaya text, under Vipassin, Sikhin and Vessabhu Buddhas, it mentioned that "the course for training for the disciples was not made known, the Patimokkha was not appointed". Later it refers to how under any Buddha, the course of training and the appointment of the Patimokkha was not made until there were conditions for "cankers" appearing in the Order, but it seems to be referring to those Buddhas who gave the dhamma in detail, including Gotama of course. ... >As I wrote before, I looked at the Buddhava.msa, Chronicle of the Buddhas, and its commentary, Madhuratthavilaasini, tr. by Horner as the Clarifier of the Sweet Meaning. the Buddha Vipassin recited Paatimokkha, and then the verse of the ovaada paatimokkha. As to the Buddha Vessabhu (p. 356), he was srrounded by thousands of arahats, the 'Lord Vessabhu recited Paatimokkha'. ... S: Yes, it refers to how he recited the Patimokkha "in the midst of the eighty thousand arahants who had gone forth in the gathering with the two chief disciples, So.na and Uttara. That was the first assembly". A footnote says that "Vessabhu is said to have held uposatha once in every six years, DhA iii 236." It also refers to the same Vinaya passages I quoted and referred to Vin iii 7ff. So I'm wondering if when it says in the Vinaya that under these Buddhas, the Patimokkha was not given, whether it actually means, not regularly given or not given in detail or fully, as there just wasn't the need at the time. (Actually, I remember once discussing this same point with K.Sujin once about why there wasn't the need for the detail and we had a brief discussion about the qualities of the monks who became arahats.) .... >Then under the Exposition of the Differences between the Buddhas, there are differences in lifespan, family, Bo-tree, etc. Then for all Buddha similarities are mentioned. Great Brahmaa's request for teaching dhamma, the turning of the Wheel of Dhamma, recital of the Paatimokkha, teaching of the Abhidhamma in the abode of the thirtythree, descent to Sa.nkassa (after that).... ... S: Yes, I remember this from when I quoted it all before (for others: see "Useful Posts" under "Buddhas"). I know it's just a detail, but I'll try to raise the point in Bkk. All the translations of these texts quoted here are by I.B.Horner, so there shouldn't be any discrepancy. I'm inclined to think that it means that under some Buddhas, little detail was given and the Patimokkha was not recited for a long time and then only very occasionally, but I'll ask. Metta Sarah ======== #108914 From: han tun Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 11:39 am Subject: Re: Past Buddhas Dhamma in Detail hantun1 Dear Sarah and Nina, In Pali text of DN 14 Mahaapadaana Sutta, I found the following passage. Tatra suda.m, bhikkhave, vipassii bhagavaa araha.m sammaasambuddho bhikkhusa"nghe eva.m paatimokkha.m uddisati Khantii parama.m tapo titikkhaa, Nibbaana.m parama.m vadanti buddhaa; Na hi pabbajito paruupaghaatii, Na sama.no hoti para.m vihe.thayanto. Sabbapaapassa akara.na.m, kusalassa upasampadaa; Sacittapariyodapana.m, eta.m buddhaanasaasana.m. Anuupavaado anuupaghaato, paatimokkhe ca sa.mvaro; Matta~n~nutaa ca bhattasmi.m, panta~nca sayanaasana.m; Adhicitte ca aayogo, eta.m buddhaanasaasana’nti. The English translation is in paragraph 3.28 of DN 14 of the book translated by Maurice Walshe. My understanding is the above three verses are the paatimokkha delivered by Buddha Vipassii every six years. Am I correct? Was there any paatimokkha other than the above three verses. Respectfully, Han #108915 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 12:05 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Past Buddhas Dhamma in Detail nilovg Dear Sarah, Op 2-aug-2010, om 12:13 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > I'm inclined to think that it means that under some Buddhas, little > detail was given and the Patimokkha was not recited for a long time > and then only very occasionally, but I'll ask. ------ N: This may well be so. A question of more detail and less detail. Better to talk about satipa.t.thaana, we need it! Nina. #108916 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 12:06 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Past Buddhas Dhamma in Detail nilovg Dear Han, Op 2-aug-2010, om 13:39 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > My understanding is the above three verses are the paatimokkha > delivered by Buddha Vipassii every six years. > Am I correct? Was there any paatimokkha other than the above three > verses. ------ N: There are two kinds of patimokkha: ovada patimokkha, the exhortation to the patimokkha (your quoted verses). 2. The aa.naa patimokkha: all the Vinaya rules for the bhikkhus. (aa.naa means command). See Kh sujin's Perfections under patience, p. 116. Nina. #108917 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 12:20 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhammapada nilovg Dear Ryan, Op 2-aug-2010, om 2:08 heeft Ryan Brawn het volgende geschreven: > how do you say Dhammapada Maybe someone could spell it as it sounds. ------ N: get the accent on pa, of pada. And do not pronounce the a as an English 'a'. I would say, rather a Dutch a. Or in English: ah. Nina. #108918 From: "chandrafabian" Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 1:06 pm Subject: Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro chandrafabian Dear Ken, KEN H: Hi Fabian, <. . .> --------- I am not sure about the details, but I gather that most meditators can practice mindfulness of breathing. However, almost none of them can take it to the stage of access concentration or beyond. That would be the domain of the tiny elite group refereed to in the quote. That same passage from the Visuddhimagga explains why this is so. Apparently, all other meditation objects become clearer and clearer as concentration increases, but with breath the opposite applies. As concentration increases, the breath becomes less and less clear. ============================================= FABIAN: Dear Howard, I agree not everyone can reach Jhana, one of my friend don't even experience uggaha nimitta after practicing intensively for two months straight. But majority experience nimitta and in the group at that time more than ten percent experience Jhana. To attain first jhana is difficult but after first Jhana, the progress is a lot easier. You are right in Anapanasati the breath is more and more subtle. But as long as we maintain our mindfulness would be no problem, after the nimitta is strong, breath is no longer our object. ================================== KEN H: <......> Right, but what do you mean by practice? ================================== FABIAN: Aren't we discussing meditation right now? ============================================ <....> KEN H: Yes, that is the generally understood meaning of practice. However, the Buddha's teaching is to know "the way things are." It has nothing to do with *changing* the way things are. ============================================ FABIAN: What do you mean? ============================================ KEN H: That has to be born in mind at all times. Most people forget it very easily (if they ever knew it at all). And so they practise in same way that ordinary, uninstructed worldlings practise. They try to change stress into calm, or unmindfulness into mindfulness, or ignorance into wisdom, etc. ============================================= FABIAN: Have you ever practice meditation Ken? ============================================= <. . .> KEN H: I wonder why people would want to learn jhana at all - even from a proper teacher. It is a good practice, but it is not what the Buddha taught (it is not satipatthana). I wonder why they don't use their valuable time more productively. By studying Dhamma! Ken H ============================================= FABIAN: The Buddha admonish bhikkhus to practice Jhana, He also urge Bhikkhus to practice Satipatthana, I follow Him and practice both. Before practicing meditation I learn Dhamma, after meditation I still learn Dhamma. Mettacittena, fabian #108919 From: han tun Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 1:17 pm Subject: Re: Past Buddhas Dhamma in Detail hantun1 Dear Nina (Sarah), N: There are two kinds of patimokkha: ovada patimokkha, the exhortation to the patimokkha (your quoted verses). 2. The aa.naa patimokkha: all the Vinaya rules for the bhikkhus. (aa.naa means command). See Kh sujin's Perfections under patience, p. 116. Han: Thank you very much. It is very clear now. Respectfully, Han #108920 From: "chandrafabian" Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 1:51 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro chandrafabian Dear Sarah, Thank you for encouraging me to upload my picture, but unfortunately I have same problem with Alex, But if you browse around and ask brother google, you will see my picture. :)) I am sorry I do not understand, do you think my post is too long or I didn't cut previous post? Mettacittena, fabian #108921 From: "Swee Boon" Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 2:06 pm Subject: Re: to be the buddah nidive Hi Ken H, > I don't know where you got that from, Swee Boon. Do you really think it is the Buddha's teaching? Or is it Ven. Thanissaro's alternative teaching? ------------------------- http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.002.than.html "And what is clinging/sustenance? These four are clingings: sensuality clinging, view clinging, precept & practice clinging, and doctrine of self clinging. This is called clinging ------------------------- ------------------------- http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/3Samyutta-Nikaya/Samyutta2/12-Abhisam\ aya-Samyutta/01-Buddhavaggo-e.html 7. ?Monks, what is holding? Monks, the mind's way of holding is fourfold. That is holding to sensuality, holding to views, sticking to virtues and seizing a view of a self. Monks, these are the four ways of holding. ------------------------- Is it not the case that with clinging to a doctrine of a self, there is further becomings, further births, further agings and further deaths as explained by way of Dependent Co-arising? > The Buddha taught that *all* conditioned existence was dukkha (suffering)! And it wasn't because it propelled anyone towards anything. Conditioned dhammas are dukkha by their inherent nature (lakkhana). It remains a fact that when one clings to a doctrine of a self, he is not released from the rounds of births and deaths. With clinging comes further becoming comes further birth comes further aging and death. > You make it sound as if the doctrine of self was not inherently evil. You seem to be disseminating Thanissaro's line - that the doctrine of self is good and sound, and it is only when we *cling* to it that "stress" arises. A doctrine of a self is not inherently evil just as a concept is not inherently evil. A doctrine of a self is just mere idea, mere concept. I do not know if Nina or Sujin teaches that a concept is inherently evil or not. Maybe we can get Nina to verify this. > No, he teaches that the Noble Eightfold path is the way that leads to the extinction of dukkha. Well, clinging to a doctrine of a self is dukkha. With the ceasing of clinging to a doctrine of a self, there is also the ceasing of much dukkha. A sotapanna with at most seven remaining lifetimes has eliminated much suffering. > Wrong view - especially belief in a self - is the way that leads to the *continuation* of dukkha. Yes, continuation of dukkha, as well as continuation in the rounds of births and deaths. Swee Boon #108922 From: "connie" Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 2:59 pm Subject: Sangiitisutta, Sixes, 16 nichiconn Dear Friends, Section 325 continued, 16. Cha dhaatuyo - pathaviidhaatu, aapodhaatu, tejodhaatu, vaayodhaatu, aakaasadhaatu, vi~n~naa.nadhaatu. Walshe DN 33.2.2(16) 'Six elements: the earth-, water-, fire-, air-, space-elements (aakaasa-dhaatu), the consciousness-element (vi~n~naa.na-dhaatu). RD Six elements, to wit, those of extension, cohesion, heat and mobility [in matter], space and consciousness. RD: The primary meaning of the first four is earth, water, fire, air. In Abhidhamma, the meaning is as stated. B. paraphrases by (1) pati.t.thaa, the more usual interpretation being kakkhalatta, or hardness (v. B.P.E. 241, n.1), (2) aabandhanaa, or binding, (3) paripaacanaa, or maturing, (4) vitthambanaa, or unstable, (5) asamphu.t.thaa, or intangible. Cf. p. 219, xvi. (4.16) A.t.thakathaa Pathaviidhaatuuti pati.t.thaadhaatu. aapodhaatuuti aabandhanadhaatu. Tejodhaatuuti paripaacanadhaatu. Vaayodhaatuuti vitthambhanadhaatu. aakaasadhaatuuti asamphu.t.thadhaatu. Vi~n~naa.nadhaatuuti vijaananadhaatu. peace, connie #108923 From: Ken O Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 3:14 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A get-together with Pt, Vince & Nancy! ashkenn2k Dear Ken O S: There can be wise reflection about past cittas but thinking about concepts of >past cittas is not the same as awareness and understanding of present dhammas. >So what is most useful is a consideration and understanding of the present >reality at that or any other time. KO:? how can there be reflections if there is no present citta to reflect.? all wise reflection is now, cannot be a past cittas?:-) > >Usually, and only panna can know at any given moment whether the citta is kusala > >or akusala. When we're concerned about past cittas and review past tendencies, >especially, "was it awareness or was it not" kind of reflections, there is bound > >to be lobha, clinging to oneself, clinging to having awareness, if we're honest. > > KO:? Kusala can also know?kusala, it is not just panna that knows kuala.? And also ?panna is not limited to kusala, it is about understanding dhamma that arise be it reflections, walking or talking or thinking about what we learn in the suttas or discussions >So, I encourage anyone to just understand more about the presently appearing >dhammas. What's gone has completely gone. Aren't we lost in our dreams enough? KO:? Buddha never discourage reflections right.? Reflection can be wise or unwise.? It is not the past, it is about the dhamma cheers Ken O #108924 From: "Swee Boon" Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 3:24 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro nidive Hi Sarah, > How about you both showing some friendliness to us all by sharing a pic each in the DSG photo album? Perhaps you'll even encourage Pt not to be so shy in this regard:). I posted my photo I just took with my cellphone. Sarah, you are always so friendly. Love you. Swee Boon #108925 From: Ken O Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 3:40 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is the ALL actually? ashkenn2k Dear Alex > >What if one trips over the rock without seeing the rock prior? So if I am not >thinking about a rock, I cannot trip over one? KO: Hmm how do you know it is a rock if you dont see what you trip, it can be a tree log :-). It is hardness you feel, and this hardness can be any thing rock, trees or furniture >And how exactly does this knowledge helps to let go of craving and views? > KO: Knowledge is not attribute to external, it is internal dhamma that arise which helps you. when you trip over a rock, what arise, anger, or lobha (for laugther) or you could think why should we be angry over hardness elements. >Samma-ditthi includes 4NT. > >This noble truth of stress is to be comprehended' >Tam. kho panidam. dukkham. ariyasaccam. pariññeyya’nti > >'This noble truth of the origination of stress is to be abandoned' >Tam. kho panidam. dukkhasamudayam. ariyasaccam. paha-tabba’nti > >'This noble truth of the cessation of stress is to be directly experienced'. >‘Tam. kho panidam. dukkhanirodham. ariyasaccam. sacchika-tabba’nti > > >'This noble truth of the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress is >to be developed'. >Tam. kho panidam. dukkhanirodhaga-mini- pat.ipada- ariyasaccam. bha-vetabba’nti > >I am not exactly sure how discussion on existence or non-existence of rocks >relates to realizing suffering, abandoning craving, experiencing nibbana, and >developing N8P. > >It seems actually to be the wrong view outlined in Dit.t.hi-sam.yuttam. (about >things not existing and us being deluded about their non-existence) KO: What exist and real is important because they are the dhammas that condition our continual rebirth like craving, they are the ones that deluded us believing that rock or self is permanent which is ditthi. Is rock the one that craves or craving craves. Personality view arise not because of a rock but because of our conceiving of the rock. Some conceive rock as beautiful like a mountain, Crave for it like a diamond. Can rock coondition your next rebirth or your cravings that of the rock that condition the next rebirth. Understand the difference, is developing understanding of dhamma, understand that because of this, that arise. Because of association diamond with pleasant feeling, craving arise. think about it. cheers Ken O #108926 From: Ken O Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 4:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A get-together with Pt, Vince & Nancy! ashkenn2k Dear Sarah thanks for the invite. I have graduated from AS classes.? I am not being proud or conceit about it.? Its has been a?ten year?journey, longer than the one I took before I learn the Thervada from Mahayana.??I have learnt?what?I have wanted from her, that I?am very grateful.? Now it is?my personal journey with dhamma, the Abhidhamma and commentarial books ?that keeps me going or until I find another teacher that could teach me or until someone wish to learn dhamma from me.?? ?It is all paramatha dhamma, be it walking,?reading or action?etc?and not attribute all to self or this is conventional?vs ultimate?or concepts?etc.???To me it is a sense of over attributing to self or?this is conventional or?it is?the present moment?without understanding the workings of dhamma,? which could be kusala or akusala, which also?underline the rise of any conventional understanding of dhamma or any actions.? I could go there just for company of dhamma friends?but not for discussion of dhamma??:-)?? cheers Ken O #108927 From: Ken O Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 4:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sabhava is just an Annihilationist Atta view applied to micro s... ashkenn2k Dear pt and Kevin whether a speech is harsh, depends on the kusala lor kusala? that arise with it.? A gentle speech can be harsh if the person who saying it, is actually cursing the other party who listens.? A mother could scold a child harshly but for the sake of good of the child, that is not a harsh speech cheers Ken O #108928 From: Kevin F Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 7:24 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Past Buddhas Dhamma in Detail farrellkevin80 Dear Sarah, Sarah: The the Buddha Vessabhu, the text tells, was in a jungle and exhorted the thousand monks around him briefly on the Truths after reading their minds and they all became arahats immediately without a need for more detail or Vinaya rules. Kevin: His powers must have been amazing. Kevin Just a post script note to all: I have read some of the replies to me in other threads here over the past few days but have not yet had a chance to respond to them all. The old Lyme disease has been kicking my ass. I have to pick and choose my battles! But I will say one thing now. What appears to be "doubt" in panna may not be doubt at all, but just confidence in the efficacy in sila and samadhi. There is no self there. In fact, I have read dhamma books in a special location. I used to go down to the water of the Hudson River to read them. From there I had a very nice view, a special view. I sat high on a ridge, overlooking the landscape. Directly ahead of me was the great river that flows on and on against our will and carries things away. The river was flowing outward from my direction. On either side of it their were great mountains where the earth element and all the great elements arose. However, looking straight ahead there was a lighthouse in the middle of the river. The lighthouse gave off illumination to those floating along and to wanderers on the river. Directly behind the light house, the river bent and looked like it dropped off. There was a great void between the mountains and the river was not visible, did not look like it reached that place. In the midst of this stood the lighthouse. Behind that lighthouse was the great void. In that void, the river was not there carrying things away, nor were the mountains or the great elements there. Even the four great elements had no footing there. That has been my vantage point. The point where no things arise, nibbana. - Kevin ___________ With metta Kevin The business of an intellectual is to think. Most people think religion is staring at the perfection of a rose bud. They don't understand the decay of the rose bud nor of the mind that admires it and then quickly decays. - me I never fall. Because strength of mind is divine over all. - MC Mr. Voodoo http://www.marklevinshow.com/sectional.asp?id=32930# #108929 From: Kevin F Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 7:36 pm Subject: A post I made on Dhammawheel about wisdom in the Path of Purification farrellkevin80 Please excuse any spelling errors. As to the correct development of wisdom, the Vsm, first talsk about the "soil" of wisdom. This involves hearing about, learning about, and understanding certain teachings on dhamma. The first one listed is the aggregates one has to learn definitions of them to know what they consist of conceptually. It breaks down different models for this. For the first aggregate, form, you can learn the abhidhamma breakdown of the great elements and all the derived rupa. Then you learn about the feeling aggregatre etc. Then you are implored to regard them all in a specific different way. For example, the form aggregate is always thought of and regarded as "foam that is squeezed" because it cannot withstand pressure and always changes. For each aggregate there is a certain ways to look at it (Consciousness as a magic trick and so on). The other elements in the "soil" of understanding are the sense bases and elements, the faculties and truths, and then Dependent Origination. Only after there is "soil" can there grow the roots and trunk. So the roots and trunk of wisdom come next after one has learned about the soil and are described very specifically. First of all, one who has mastery of jhana emerges from jhana and reviews consciousness and it's conditions very carefully using the power gained from jhana. One who has less than mastery of jhana, ie. has reached jhana but cannot gain the five masteries, or has access concentration or less, reviews in a different specific way. First he must define mentallity and materliallity and become very clear about it (these are different than the vipassana stages). Vsm says: "But one whose vehicle is pure insight, or that same aforesaid one whose vehicle is serenity, discerns the four elements in brief or in detail in one of the various ways given in the chapter on the definition of the four elements (Ch. XI, ?27ff.)". The Vsm makes it clear that there are specific ways to go about this and that one must first become very clear about materiallity before moving on to mentallity. One person does it by way of the Four Elements, another by way of the the Eighteen Elements, one by way of the Twelve Sense Bases, another by way of the Defiinition of the Aggregates, another through a Brief Definition on the Four Primaries. Those are the only ways listed and they are all derived from Suttas and texts. One has to review again and again untill the distinction of materiallity and mentallity becomes extremely, abundantly clear to one by way of one of these specific contemplations derived from Suttas. They are intellectuall contemplations. First one does materiallity and only then mentallity. This is caled "Purification of View". Only once Purification of View is stable can one move on to Purification by Removing Doubt, where onediscerns the conditions for the materiallity and the mentallity that one know understand through various ways, ie. by Dependent Originination in Reverse Order, or by other ways listed in the text. After one becomes very, very clear of the conditions causing the nama and rupa, one goes onto other contemplations in the text called "purifications" because they purify ones view and help to conditions strong wisdom. They are very, very specific in nature and are derived from suttas and the Canon. There are Five Purifications listed in the section of Wisdom that wise people should go through. You can see how much easier it is for one who can gain mastery of jhanas: they can remain in their blissful abiding of jhana, exit it and review in brief the way told for those people (the instructions on it only take up a couple of paragraphs in the Vsm!). Then they can re-enter jhana, exit and review again at their will, and so on. This takes mastery of jhana. For all the other people it is much more complicated. Now does this sound like the Mahasi way, or the way of other modern vipassana teachers? No, it doesn't. Kevin___________ With metta Kevin The business of an intellectual is to think. Most people think religion is staring at the perfection of a rose bud. They don't understand the decay of the rose bud nor of the mind that admires it and then quickly decays. - me I never fall. Because strength of mind is divine over all. - MC Mr. Voodoo http://www.marklevinshow.com/sectional.asp?id=32930# #108930 From: A T Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 9:37 pm Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? truth_aerator Dear KenO, all, >A:What if one trips over the rock without seeing the rock prior? So if >I >am not thinking about a rock, I cannot trip over one? > > KO: Hmm how do you know it is a rock if you dont see what you trip, >it >can be a tree log :-). It is hardness you feel, and this hardness >can be >any thing rock, trees or furniture One can see another person trip over a rock, or one can learn that after the fall. As for concepts vs reality. Some say that since wholes are made of parts, wholes do not exist. So ultimately speaking there are no pedestrians, no cars, no traffic lights. They exist only “conventionally” . This brings to paradoxes. 1) Can one really believe in this ultimate truth? 2) Can one fully act that belief out? Just try to drive without seeing cars, pedestrians or traffic lights. Why worry about running over something that doesn’t exist (pedestrians) by the means of non-existent cars? 3) Is this sort of teaching useful to cut down all craving? Do you see the big practical problem with following such a belief? Some may say that there are two truths. Conceptual truth states that pedestrians do exist, ultimate truth say that they do not exist. This seems a bit contradictory to me. Two contradictory statements cannot be X cannot equal not-X. The whole argument that “since wholes are made of parts, thus wholes do not exist” is not very convincing. What prevents wholes existing as san.khata dhamma? Since different wholes have different functions, they have to functionally exist. A big rock has a different function and use than a car. *note: I do not deny the existence aggregation of aggregates, sense bases, 18 elements, etc. I question the metaphysical assumptions of non-existence despite the diverse functions being seen. The Buddha didn’t deny the emperic world or emperic personality, what he did reject was metaphysical assumptions. Suffering is experiential, not metaphysical, thus its solution is within the experiential. The suttas are full of references to empirical self (not metaphysical!). ================================================================= By oneself is evil done; by oneself is one defiled. By oneself is evil left undone; by oneself is one made pure. Purity and impurity depended on oneself; no one can purify another. Dhp 165 Attana- hi katam. pa-pam., attana- sam.kilissati; Attana- akatam. pa-pam., attana-va visujjhati; Suddhi- asuddhi paccattam., na-ñño aññam. visodhaye. One truly is the protector of oneself; who else could the protector be? With oneself fully controlled, one gains a mastery that is hard to gain. Atta- hi attano na-tho, ko hi na-tho paro siya-; Attana- hi sudantena, na-tham. labhati dullabham.. - Dhp 160 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.12.budd.html The problem of craving is because we ignore the truths that craving causes suffering, impermanence, unsatisfactoriness and not-Self. With metta, Alex #108931 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 10:29 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Past Buddhas Dhamma in Detail sarahprocter... Dear Kevin, --- On Tue, 3/8/10, Kevin F wrote: >Sarah: The the Buddha Vessabhu, the text tells, was in a jungle and exhorted the thousand monks around him briefly on the Truths after reading their minds and they all became arahats immediately without a need for more detail or Vinaya rules. >Kevin: His powers must have been amazing. .... S: Yes and also all the monks, ripe for enlightenment. Paramis accumulated over countless aeons and the kamma to be born at that place, at that time. ... >Just a post script note to all: I have read some of the replies to me in other threads here over the past few days but have not yet had a chance to respond to them all. The old Lyme disease has been kicking my ass. I have to pick and choose my battles! ... S: Wishing you good health and no need to think of any discussions here as "battles"! Just friends helping each other along the way.... There are bound to be minsunderstandings from time to time too. .... >But I will say one thing now. What appears to be "doubt" in panna may not be doubt at all, but just confidence in the efficacy in sila and samadhi. There is no self there. .... S: The last sentence is the important point to stress. No matter what happens in life, no matter what dhammas arise, they are all anatta - nothing to be attached to at all. Many thanks for sharing your other experiences and comments. As Ken H said, never boring with you around:-) One day I'd like to visit you and Howard in New York and go visit the river and lighthouse too! Metta Sarah ======= #108932 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 10:33 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro sarahprocter... Hi Swee Boon & all camera-shy friends, --- On Mon, 2/8/10, Swee Boon wrote: >I posted my photo I just took with my cellphone. Sarah, you are always so friendly. Love you. .... S: :-) Love you too, Swee Boon! That was a friendly act and you took a great pic! Let's see if you encourage Fabian or any other regulars to follow suit. Metta Sarah ======= #108933 From: Kevin F Date: Mon Aug 2, 2010 11:25 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Past Buddhas Dhamma in Detail farrellkevin80 Dear Sarah: Sarah wrote: Yes and also all the monks, ripe for enlightenment. Paramis accumulated over countless aeons and the kamma to be born at that place, at that time. Kevin: Absolutely! What impresses me though is the power of the Great Buddha to all the accumulations and tendencies of the monks. A truly Great One. Sarah: Wishing you good health and no need to think of any discussions here as "battles"! Kevin: Thank you. Sharpening my axe as we speak. Sarah: The last sentence is the important point to stress. No matter what happens in life, no matter what dhammas arise, they are all anatta - nothing to be attached to at all. Kevin: Agree. Sarah: Many thanks for sharing your other experiences and comments. As Ken H said, never boring with you around:-) One day I'd like to visit you and Howard in New York and go visit the river and lighthouse too! Kevin: You have that same lighthouse in your own back yard too. But I would love if you visited. That goes for Jon as well and everyone else. By all means. all the best, Kevin #108934 From: Ryan Brawn Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 12:16 am Subject: going to... gr8fuldawg2010 Hello Group, First I just want to say thanks to everyone for answering all my many questions, and for everyones kindness. I was just wondering, in most religious practices or the like, for instance when I was a christian, I would go to church every sunday, pray here a word etc..., etc.., Do buddhists have churchs/temples or whatever you want to call them? Place where you can go weekly and learn? I guess what I'm getting at is so far, I am reading some stuff online, listening to some teachings, but is there a place where you go to learn weekly & meditatie? Do buddhists have this kind of thing? Does the lay buddhist learn buddhist writtings etc..? And is this what a sitting group is? Or is a sitting group just a place you learn to meditate? Thanks with much appreciation Love and peace be yours Ryan #108935 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 2:14 am Subject: Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro kenhowardau Hi Fabian, ----- <. . .> F: > I agree not everyone can reach Jhana, one of my friend don't even experience uggaha nimitta after practicing intensively for two months straight. But majority experience nimitta and in the group at that time more than ten percent experience Jhana. ----- I hope you won't mind if I believe it was something other than jhana. -------------------- F: > To attain first jhana is difficult but after first Jhana, the progress is a lot easier. You are right in Anapanasati the breath is more and more subtle. But as long as we maintain our mindfulness would be no problem, after the nimitta is strong, breath is no longer our object. -------------------- According to the Visuddhimagga, only Buddhas, paccekabuddhas and chief disciples can use breath as the object of jhana. The Visuddhimagga also says (somewhere) that the vast majority of jhana meditators used coloured kasinas as meditation objects. I remember reading about the strict procedures by which each beginner had to make his own kasina out of clay etc. It seems the genuine practice of jhana was a highly specialised, full-time way of life. ----------------------------- <......> KH: > > Right, but what do you mean by practice? > > FABIAN: > Aren't we discussing meditation right now? ----------------------------- Yes, but I understand meditation to mean "bhavana" as described in the texts. Bhavana is essentially a conditioned dhamma (citta) that arises with panna and other kusala cetasikas. ------------------------------------ <. . .> KH: > > It has nothing to do with *changing* the way things are. > > FABIAN: > What do you mean? ------------------------------------- It is natural for us to want to become a better person. And so it is natural that we will interpret the Dhamma as a way of becoming a better person. But that is not what it is. The Dhamma is a way of understanding the present reality. ------------------------------------------------- <. . .> FABIAN: > Have you ever practice meditation Ken? ------------------------------------------------- I believe you are referring here to the popular meaning of meditation. Some of us call it "formal meditation" to distinguish it from bhavana. The answer is yes. I heard about Buddhism when I was a young man, and practised various formal-meditation techniques (on and off) for the next twenty-six years. When I joined DSG, however, I learned about the Dhamma that was found *in the Pali Tipitaka and the ancient commentaries.* It was a very different Dhamma from the one I knew. And so I am not interested in knowing exactly when satipatthana will arise. It's a very rare dhamma, and probably not likely to arise in my lifetime, but that's of no concern to me. I am only interested in the present reality. In reality, the world is just the presently arisen conditioned dhammas. They are nothing to be frightened of, and nothing worth clinging to. ----------- <. . .> F: > The Buddha admonish bhikkhus to practice Jhana, He also urge Bhikkhus to practice Satipatthana, I follow Him and practice both. Before practicing meditation I learn Dhamma, after meditation I still learn Dhamma. ----------- Yes, a monastery is one of the few places that are suitable for jhana meditation, and in the Buddha's day many monks did practise it. It was a wholesome way of life, and so the Buddha urged them to continue with it (while, as you say, still learning Dhamma). Even though jhana is mentioned many times in the suttas, we must remember that most disciples did not practise it. And of those who did practise it, only a tiny minority were able to use jhana factors as objects of satipatthana. And so jhana meditation was essentially a wholesome activity that was practised *concurrently* with satipatthana - not as part of it. Ken H #108936 From: "ptaus1" Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 2:15 am Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? ptaus1 Hi Alex, Just my thoughts on the issues you raise. When it comes to ultimate vs conventional reality argument, my thinking is that exposition in paramattha terms is not so much about analysis into parts and denying the existence of conventions, but more about pointing towards insight, or rather - encouraging insight. E.g. in terms of the fabled rock, if there's understanding arising at the moment when "one's foot hits the rock", there's likely to be at that time an awareness of the arising and falling of hardness (or unpleasant feeling, or some other related dhamma) and it will be understood as anatta and conditioned in nature at the time. Anatta and conditionality are what's important. Whether one then says "I just hit my foot at this rock/car/tree", or says, "there was an experience of hardness arising and falling" - doesn't seem very important to me. So, rather than trying to argue an analytical or philosophical point, I feel paramattha way of the exposition always tends to emphasize insight. On the other hand, using more conventional expressions like "person, rock, pain, cars", etc to explain insight can also work. But for me personally, the conventional terms come with a lot of baggage and preconceived ideas and attachment, which are more likely to drag me into some sort of speculation, instead of inspiring understanding of anatta, conditionality, etc. Best wishes pt > A: As for concepts vs reality. Some say that since wholes are made of parts, wholes do not exist. So ultimately speaking there are no pedestrians, no cars, no traffic lights. They exist only “conventionally” . This brings to paradoxes. > > 1) Can one really believe in this ultimate truth? > 2) Can one fully act that belief out? Just try to drive without seeing cars, pedestrians or traffic lights. Why worry about running over something that doesn’t exist (pedestrians) by the means of non-existent cars? > 3) Is this sort of teaching useful to cut down all craving? >... > The whole argument that “since wholes are made of parts, thus wholes do not exist” is not very convincing. What prevents wholes existing as san.khata dhamma? Since different wholes have different functions, they have to functionally exist. A big rock has a different function and use than a car. #108937 From: "ptaus1" Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 2:23 am Subject: [dsg] Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro ptaus1 Hi Fabian, > > Sarah: p.s Fabian, pls remember to trim your posts - I know we all forget at times. > Fabian: I am sorry I do not understand, do you think my post is too long or I didn't cut previous post? pt: "Trim your posts" refers to "cut previous post". Basically, when you click "Reply" to post an answer to someone's previous post, Yahoo will automatically generate that previous post in full. So, "trimming" posts refers to deleting all the parts of that previous post that are not relevant, and only leaving the most relevant bits. This is helpful because many users print out on paper all the messages that are posted here. So, if posts are not trimmed, there's a lot of duplicate material, waste of paper, energy, etc. Best wishes pt #108938 From: "ptaus1" Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 2:47 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Sabhava is just an Annihilationist Atta view applied to micro s... ptaus1 Hi KenO, > KO: whether a speech is harsh, depends on the kusala or [a]kusala that arise with it. A gentle speech can be harsh if the person who saying it, is actually cursing the other party who listens. A mother could scold a child harshly but for the sake of good of the child, that is not a harsh speech. pt: I agree in principle, but I feel that's a slightly different usage of the English terms "gentle/harsh". E.g. in the case of "A mother could scold a child harshly but for the sake of good of the child, that is not a harsh speech": my thinking is that the mother here might have a few kusala moments of genuine trying to educate/help the child, but if she's shouting and scolding the child harshly, that's more likely to be based on a lot of akusala moments related to fear of loosing the child, attachment to the child, anger, etc. All of which are akusala. To classify such speech as anything but "harsh" seems a bit confusing to me, though there certainly can be a few kusala cittas in-between for her. In the case of the Buddha though, things are very clear-cut I think - if he was scolding someone, I don't think there would be any akusala arising in his mind, so I doubt that he would ever shout or speak harshly - his speech would be gentle and never based on akusala. So, to me it seems simpler to consider things from the perspective of an awakened Buddha instead of an unawakened mother. Best wishes pt #108939 From: "ptaus1" Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 3:37 am Subject: Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro ptaus1 Hi KenH, > KH: According to the Visuddhimagga, only Buddhas, paccekabuddhas and chief disciples can use breath as the object of jhana. pt: Just for the record, is the Visuddhimagga saying "chief disciples" or "Buddha's sons"? As in the Vsm bit you quoted previously: "But this mindfulness of breathing is difficult, difficult to develop, a field in which only the minds of Buddhas, paccekabuddhas and Buddhas sons are at home. pt: If it really says "Budhha's sons" - then who are these guys? I would have thought that all savakas in a Buddha era classify as "Buddha's sons"? Maybe I'm wrong. Best wishes pt #108940 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 5:54 am Subject: Jhana adepts outside of teh Buddha sasana do not have belief in control ? rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > >> But in any case, belief in control over the arising or non-arising of [kusala] dhammas is wrong view. And so a jhana meditator would not have that particular belief. > > Ken H > Dear Ken do you suggest that these non-buddhist jhana people understand anatta to some degree? robert #108941 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 6:40 am Subject: Re: to be the buddah kenhowardau Hi Swee Boon, --- KH: > > I don't know where you got that from, Swee Boon. Do you really think it is the Buddha's teaching? Or is it Ven. Thanissaro's alternative teaching? SB: > <. . .> Is it not the case that with clinging to a doctrine of a self, there is further becomings, further births, further agings and further deaths as explained by way of Dependent Co-arising? --- Further becomings are conditioned by all kusala and akusala dhammas, not just by clinging. ------------- <. . .> SB: > It remains a fact that when one clings to a doctrine of a self, he is not released from the rounds of births and deaths. With clinging comes further becoming comes further birth comes further aging and death. -------------- You could also say, "when one performs good deeds he is not released from the rounds of births and deaths." The reason I objected was that you had originally written: "The Buddha teaches that clinging to a doctrine of a self is suffering, because it propels one towards further becomings, further births, further agings and further deaths." That is not right. ---------------------------- KH: > > You make it sound as if the doctrine of self was not inherently evil. You seem to be disseminating Thanissaro's line - that the doctrine of self is good and sound, and it is only when we *cling* to it that "stress" arises. > > SB: > A doctrine of a self is not inherently evil just as a concept is not inherently evil. A doctrine of a self is just mere idea, mere concept. I do not know if Nina or Sujin teaches that a concept is inherently evil or not. Maybe we can get Nina to verify this. ------------------------------- You are changing the subject. I used the term "doctrine of self" because you used it. I would normally use the term 'wrong view' or 'self view' or 'miccha-ditthi' or 'atta-ditthi.' The important point is that belief in self (wrong view) is inherently akusala. Ven Thanissaro says it is only when we *cling* to belief in self that akusala arises. He is wrong. ----------------------------------------------. <. . .> KH:> > No, he teaches that the Noble Eightfold path is the way that leads to the extinction of dukkha. .> > SB: > Well, clinging to a doctrine of a self is dukkha. ------------------------------------------------ Yes, that's true, but you are changing the subject again. I was objecting because you had written: "The Buddha teaches that the Noble Eightfold Path is the way that leads to the ceasing of clinging to a doctrine of a self." That is extremely misleading. It complies with Thanissaro's assertion that the Buddha *did not* teach no self. So why did you write it (if not to support Thanissaro's assertion)? --------------- SB: > With the ceasing of clinging to a doctrine of a self, there is also the ceasing of much dukkha. A sotapanna with at most seven remaining lifetimes has eliminated much suffering. --------------- A sotapanna is someone who has put an end to belief in a self. He has not put an end to clinging. ------------------------ KH: > > Wrong view - especially belief in a self - is the way that leads to the *continuation* of dukkha. SB: > Yes, continuation of dukkha, as well as continuation in the rounds of births and deaths. ------------------------ I might not have phrased that very well. Wrong view leads away from nibbana. It does also lead to the continuation of dukkha, but all kusala and akusal dhammas do that. So I might have played into the hands of the Thanissaro camp there. :-) The important point to remember is that the Buddha taught anatta, and anatta is the complete absence of a self. Anatta is not - as Thanissaro says it is - a mere meditation strategy. It is not a strategy of not clinging to the doctrine of self. Ken H #108942 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 6:50 am Subject: Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro kenhowardau Hi pt, --- <. . .> pt: > If it really says "Budhha's sons" - then who are these guys? I would have thought that all savakas in a Buddha era classify as "Buddha's sons"? Maybe I'm wrong. --- Yes, maybe just this once. :-) As I remember previous DSG discussions, 'Buddha's sons' was a term that applied only to the chief disciples. Ken H #108943 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 6:59 am Subject: Re: Jhana adepts outside of teh Buddha sasana do not have belief in control ? kenhowardau Hi Robert, ---- KH: >> But in any case, belief in control over the arising or non-arising of [kusala] dhammas is wrong view. And so a jhana meditator would not have that particular belief. > > R: > do you suggest that these non-buddhist jhana people understand anatta to some degree? --- No, I am suggesting that they did not have wrong view. At least in connection with their meditation. They would not have seen jhana meditation as a ritual or "formal practice." Ken H #108944 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 7:29 am Subject: Re: Jhana adepts outside of the Buddha sasana do not have belief in control ? rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Robert, > > ---- > KH: >> But in any case, belief in control over the arising or non-arising of [kusala] dhammas is wrong view. And so a jhana meditator would not have that particular belief. > > > > > R: > do you suggest that these non-buddhist jhana people understand anatta to some degree? > --- > > No, I am suggesting that they did not have wrong view. At least in connection with their meditation. > > They would not have seen jhana meditation as a ritual or "formal practice." > > Ken H > Dear Ken surely those people who attained jhana outside of a Buddha's dispensation had wrong view of self still firmly entrenched. As I understand the teachings the characteristic of anatta is powerlessness, no control. If they had no belief in control it implies they have understood anatta...or what..? I am sure they didn't see jhana as a ritual but that seems to be another issue. Robert #108945 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 7:45 am Subject: Re: Jhana adepts outside of the Buddha sasana do not have belief in control ? rjkjp1 Dear Ken Let's consider people who may not be interested in devleoping jhana but who do a lot of good devoting themselves to helping the poor, for example some Muslims and Christians say. They have a belief in soul and God: of course when they are praying for God to help them or trying to convert someone to their view that is akusala, but I think they still are having moments when they are only trying to help, and they have kusala citta. The wrong view is latent at that time . robert #108946 From: "ptaus1" Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 9:08 am Subject: Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro ptaus1 Hi KenH, > pt: > If it really says "Budhha's sons" - then who are these guys? I would have thought that all savakas in a Buddha era classify as "Buddha's sons"? Maybe I'm wrong. > --- > > KH: Yes, maybe just this once. :-) > > As I remember previous DSG discussions, 'Buddha's sons' was a term that applied only to the chief disciples. pt: Yes, you might be right. Found two previous messages: by Nina http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/97073 and by RobertK http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/14651 saying that "Buddha's sons" refers to chief disciples (RobertK used the term Mahapurisa). Though haven't seen any textual support as yet for this. Also makes me wonder what's the term for the rest of the disciples - Buddha's grandsons? Best wishes pt #108947 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 9:15 am Subject: [dsg] Sangiitisutta Sixes, sutta 16 and commentary. nilovg Dear friends, The sixes, sutta 16. Walshe DN 33.2.2(16) 'Six elements: the earth-, water-, fire-, air-, space- elements (aakaasa-dhaatu), the consciousness-element (vi~n~naa.na- dhaatu). (Cha dhaatuyo - pathaviidhaatu, aapodhaatu, tejodhaatu, vaayodhaatu, aakaasadhaatu, vi~n~naa.nadhaatu.) --------- N: The Co explains the earth element as a support or foundation, pati.t.thaa. It acts as a support for the other ruupas arising together with it. As to the water element, it is described as binding or cohesion, aabandhanaa. It holds the ruupas it arises together with in one group (kalapa) together. As to the element of heat, it has the characteristic of maturing, paripaacana. It matures or maintains other ruupas. N: For instance when food is being digested, this element performs its function of maturing. The ?Visuddhimagga? (XI, 36) which gives an explanation of the words of this sutta states that the element of heat plays its part in the process of ageing: ?... whereby this body grows old, reaches the decline of the faculties, loss of strength, wrinkles, greyness, and so on.? The Co explains the element of wind as unstableness, vitthambana. This is motion or pressure. When we touch a body or an object with a certain resilience, the characteristic of motion or pressure may present itself. These are characteristics of the element of wind. It can also be described as vibration or oscillation. The ?Visuddhimagga? (XI, 109) states that the earth element acts as the foundation of the elements of water, fire and wind; the water element acts as cohesion for the other three Great Elements; the fire element maintains the other three Great Elements; the wind element acts as distension of the other three Great Elements. We should remember that the element of water or cohesion cannot be experienced through the bodysense, only through the mind-door, and that the elements of earth, fire and wind can be directly experienced through the bodysense. The element of earth appears as hardness or softness, the element of fire as heat or cold and the element of wind as motion or pressure. As to space, akaasa, the commentary states that this is intangible, asampju.t.thaa. N: It cannot be touched, it is empty. The Co. explains the element of consciousness as knowing, vijaanana. N: Citta clearly knows an object. Citta cannot arise without experiencing an object. For example, seeing clearly knows visible object, hearing clearly knows sound. Elements can be classified in many different ways and this classification of six elements is one among them. An element, dhaatu, is devoid of self. We are inclined to be taken in by the outward appearance of things, but in reality there are only elements. Time and again ruupas such as hardness or heat impinge on the bodysense but we are forgetful of what things really are. We let ourselves be deceived by the outer appearance of things. The ?Visuddhimagga? (XI, 100) states that the four Great Elements are ?deceivers?: ?And just as the great creatures known as female spirits (yakkhinii) conceal their own fearfulness with a pleasing colour, shape and gesture to deceive beings, so too, these elements conceal each their own characteristics and function classed as hardness, etc., by means of a pleasing skin colour of women?s and men?s bodies, etc., and pleasing shapes of limbs and pleasing gestures of fingers, toes and eyebrows, and they deceive simple people by concealing their own functions and characteristics beginning with hardness and do not allow their individual essences to be seen. Thus they are great primaries (mahaa-bhuuta) in being equal to the great creatures (mahaa- bhuuta), the female spirits, since they are deceivers.? ************* Nina. #108948 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 9:39 am Subject: Abhidhamma Series, no 24. The Seven Books of the Abhidhamma (part 1). nilovg Dear friends, The Seven Books of the Abhidhamma (part 1). The Abhidhamma consists of the following seven books: 1.Dhammasanga.nii (translated as 'Buddhist Psychological Ethics', P.T.S. and also translated by U Kyaw, Myanmar.) 2.Vibha?nga (translated as 'Book of Analysis', P.T.S.) 3.Dhaatukathaa (Translated as 'Discourse on Elements', P.T.S.) 4. Puggalapa~n~natti (Translated as 'A Designation of Human Types', P.T.S.) 5.Kathaavatthu (Translated as 'Points of Controversy', P.T.S.) 6.Yamaka (the Book of Pairs, not translated into English) 7.Pa.t.thaana (Translated in part as 'Conditional Relations', P.T.S. ) ------ A summary of the contents of these seven books has been given by Ven. Nyanatiloka in his ?Guide through the Abhidhamma Pi.taka? (BPS Kandy, 1971) and also by U Kyaw Khine in the introduction to his translation of the Dhammasa?nganii. Therefore, I will render only some salient features of each book with the purpose to show that the classifications found in the Abhidhamma are not mere lists to be read and memorized. They all point to the investigation of the realities of our daily life. In this way the pa~n~naa is developed that sees realities as they are, as impermanent, dukkha and anattaa. This kind of pa~n~naa leads to the eradication of defilements. The commentary to the Dhammasa?nganii, the first book, is the ?Atthasaalinii?, edited by the venerable Buddhaghosa and translated as ?Expositor?, The Dhammasa?nganii, begins, after the Matika, with a description of mahaa-kusala citta (kusala citta of the sense sphere) accompanied by pa~n~naa. It enumerates all the sobhana cetasikas assisting this citta while they accompany it just for a moment. It refers to mahaa- kusala citta experiencing an object, be it visible object, sound, odour, flavour, tangible object or dhamma object. This points to daily life. Time and again citta experiences an object through one of the six doors. The Dhammasa?nganii states with regard to the first type of mahaa- kusala citta of the sense sphere: and then sums up the accompanying cetasikas. The ?Expositor? (p. 76) explains the word samaya as time, occasion, concurrence of conditions, the mutual contribution towards the production of a common result: We cling to the idea of our own will that can direct dhammas, but this is not according to reality. Will or volition, be it wholesome, unwholesome or indeterminate, is only a conditioned element. The mahaa-kusala citta is accompanied by the cetasikas that always accompany citta, the ?universals?, such as contact, feeling or remembrance, sa~n~naa, as well as by the ?particulars?, pakinnakas, cetasikas that accompany many cittas but not all. Then follows a list of all the sobhana cetasikas necessary for the arising of even one moment of kusala citta of the sense sphere. For example, the cetasika confidence or faith, saddhaa, always has to accompany kusala citta. If there is no confidence in kusala, kusala citta could not arise. There have to be non-attachment and non- aversion. When we perform daana or observe siila we are not selfish, we are not thinking of our own pleasure and comfort. There is calm with each kusala citta, at such a moment there is no agitation. There has to be sati which is non-forgetful of kusala. Sobhana cetasikas are necessary so that mahaa-kusala citta with pa??aa can arise just for one extremely brief moment and perform its function, and then citta and cetasikas fall away together. The cetasikas condition the citta by way of conascence-condition and by several other conditions. Thus, we cannot make kusala arise at will, it has no possessor, there is no one who can direct its arising. It arises when the right conditions are present and then it falls away immediately, nobody can cause it to last. All the sobhana cetasikas that fall away are accumulated from moment to moment so that there are conditions for the arising again of kusala citta. We shall see that several cetasikas are listed more than once under different aspects, such as understanding as faculty, or as power. The list ends with: sampaja??a (sati and pa??a), samatha, vipassanaa, paggaaha (grasp, which is the faculty of energy), avikkhepa (balance, self-collectedness, another word for ekaggata cetasika, one-pointedness or concentration). Thus we see that these lists are not a mere summing up, but that they point to the development of right understanding of realities. ******* Nina. #108949 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 9:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] pondering over what one's read over and over 100k times nilovg Dear Alex, Op 23-jul-2010, om 21:13 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > You know how in VsM it says to recite 32 bodyparts over and over "a > hundred times, a thousand times, a hundred thousand times". > > "The recitation should be done verbally in this way a hundred times, > a thousand times, even a hundred thousand times. For it is through > verbal recitation that the meditation subject becomes familiar, and > the mind being thus prevented from running here and there, the > parts become evident and seem like [the fingers of] a pair of > clasped hands, like a row of fence posts." VsM VIII,56 -------- N: As pt said, it should be known whether counting is done with kusala citta or with akusala citta. Your quoted text is under the heading of samatha. There is no rule that everybody must count, it depends on the individual's accumulations. ------ Nina. #108950 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 9:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Common misconception on in & out breathing in Vipassana. nilovg Dear Fabian, Op 30-jul-2010, om 13:40 heeft chandrafabian het volgende geschreven: > But in Upacara Samadhi and/or Khanika Samadhi, the mind not still > completely, yet it is strong enough to see three characteristic and > therefore give way for understanding to arise. -------- N: I am inclined to see it the other way around. Understanding develops when the stages of insight are reached. In the beginning the three characteristics cannot be penetrated. First pa~n~naa should become more familiar with all realities appearing at the present moment through one of the six doors. Naama must be seen as naama and ruupa as ruupa. This is not a matter of samaadhi that has to focus first on a particular reality. Intellectual understanding develops so that there can be conditions for direct understanding. As pa~n~naa grows firmer also calm grows firmer. it is understanding that should be emphasized, not samaadhi. Nina. #108951 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 10:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A post I made on Dhammawheel about wisdom in the Path of Purification nilovg Dear Kevin, Thank you for your summary. I just have a few points. Op 2-aug-2010, om 21:36 heeft Kevin F het volgende geschreven: > The Vsm > makes it clear that there are specific ways to go about this and > that one must > first become very clear about materiallity before moving on to > mentallity. One > person does it by way of the Four Elements, another by way of the > the Eighteen > Elements, one by way of the Twelve Sense Bases, another by way of the > Defiinition of the Aggregates, another through a Brief Definition > on the Four > Primaries. Those are the only ways listed and they are all derived > from Suttas > and texts. One has to review again and again untill the distinction of > materiallity and mentallity becomes extremely, abundantly clear to > one by way > of one of these specific contemplations derived from Suttas. They are > intellectuall contemplations. First one does materiallity and only > then > mentallity. -------- N: When we read a text like this it may seem at first sight that ruupa has to be investigated first. But when we read on we see: the Vis. speaks about another ... another. People have different accumulations. It all depends on the sati and pa~n~naa what the object is, naama or ruupa. Nobody can direct sati to be aware of this first, then that. I do not think that these texts deal with intellectual contemplations. They pertain to direct awareness and understanding, like all the stages of insight. I heard something interesting on the second stage of tender insight. It seems that there has to be thinking about conditions, but Kh Sujin said direct understanding understands and does not need any words. To explain as the Visuddhimagga does, words are needed, but we should not underestimate direct understanding that is beyond words. When people read all these texts they may not know that they pertain to vipassanaa, not to mere intellectual understanding. ------ K: You can see how much easier it is for one who can gain mastery of jhanas: they can remain in their blissful abiding of jhana, exit it and review in brief the way told for those people ... ----- N: I think that jhaana and especially mastery of it is extremely difficult. We often discussed this on dsg. ------ Nina. #108952 From: "chandrafabian" Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 10:21 am Subject: Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro chandrafabian Dear Ken.... Hi Fabian, <. . .> KEN H: I hope you won't mind if I believe it was something other than jhana. =============== FABIAN: Dear Ken, of course I don't mind, I understand complexities of human mind, also I respect your opinion. As for me I've learned what is Jhana, I read the whole Visuddhi Magga and I have no doubt it is Jhana. ================ <.....> KEN H: According to the Visuddhimagga, only Buddhas, Paccekabuddhas and Chief Disciples can use breath as the object of jhana. The Visuddhimagga also says (somewhere) that the vast majority of jhana meditators used coloured kasinas as meditation objects. I remember reading about the strict procedures by which each beginner had to make his own kasina out of clay etc. It seems the genuine practice of jhana was a highly specialised, full-time way of life. ========================= FABIAN: With due respect, your opinion is not true Ken, Visuddhi Magga never say Only.... can use breath as object of Jhana. VM said "it is foremost..... among various meditation subjects, it is not easy if the meditator if practicing without leaving neighborhood of villages,......" (Visuddhi Magga page 289 phr: 155) There is nowhere you can find the statement vast majority use Kasina. ========================= <......> KEN H: Yes, but I understand meditation to mean "bhavana" as described in the texts. Bhavana is essentially a conditioned dhamma (citta) that arises with panna and other kusala cetasikas. ========================= FABIAN: That is true, meditation is Bhavana (Samatha and Vipassana) ========================= <. . .> It is natural for us to want to become a better person. And so it is natural that we will interpret the Dhamma as a way of becoming a better person. But that is not what it is. The Dhamma is a way of understanding the present reality. ========================= FABIAN: I agree we have to understand present reality, but how do you understand present reality, since you can't even see the reality of your mind arises and passes away? I believe you know, there are triple gate to liberation, and it is achieved with seeing the reality of impermanent, unsatisfactory and noself. Have you ever see the whole process of arising and passing away of your mind Ken....? How do you attain liberation if you've never see the arising and passing away of your mind? ========================= <. . .> KEN H: I believe you are referring here to the popular meaning of meditation. Some of us call it "formal meditation" to distinguish it from bhavana. The answer is yes. I heard about Buddhism when I was a young man, and practised various formal-meditation techniques (on and off) for the next twenty-six years. When I joined DSG, however, I learned about the Dhamma that was found *in the Pali Tipitaka and the ancient commentaries.* It was a very different Dhamma from the one I knew. ============================ FABIAN: I am happy you finally found this precious Dhamma Ken, but may I know what kind of meditation are you previously practicing..? how did you practice them? =========================== KEN H: And so I am not interested in knowing exactly when satipatthana will arise. It's a very rare dhamma, and probably not likely to arise in my lifetime, but that's of no concern to me. I am only interested in the present reality. In reality, the world is just the presently arisen conditioned dhammas. They are nothing to be frightened of, and nothing worth clinging to. ========================== FABIAN: Indeed this Dhamma, knowledge of Satipatthana from The Buddha is very rare, but to be able to have the opportunity to practice is rarer still. The penetrated understanding of reality is coming by knowing you should not cling to, but that penetrated understanding comes from actually practicing to release the mind from clinging. If we are not cling to conditioned dhammas, we can see conditioned dhammas as they presently arisen. The fact that we can not see when the conditioned dhammas arises and passes away, is because we still cling to conditioned dhammas. To be able to see the whole process of arising and passing away of conditioned dhammas, one must practice under guidance from experience teacher. ============================ <. . .> KEN H: Yes, a monastery is one of the few places that are suitable for jhana meditation, and in the Buddha's day many monks did practise it. It was a wholesome way of life, and so the Buddha urged them to continue with it (while, as you say, still learning Dhamma). Even though jhana is mentioned many times in the suttas, we must remember that most disciples did not practise it. And of those who did practise it, only a tiny minority were able to use jhana factors as objects of satipatthana. And so jhana meditation was essentially a wholesome activity that was practised *concurrently* with satipatthana - not as part of it. Ken H ========================================= FABIAN: Dear Ken, as a reminder you mention about Visuddhi Magga, In one story in Srilanka, there is a story of Elder Rakkhita who protecting the royal Naga who attend the sickness of Elder Maha-Rohana Gutta. At that time there were thirty thousand Bhikkus posessing supernormal power gathered together. (Visuddhi Magga page: 411, phr: 9) At that time more than three hundreds years has passed since Parinibbana of The Buddha. There are still so many Bhikkhus possesing Jhana and Abhinna. That is only from tiny Island of Srilanka not to mention India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Myanmar, Thailand, etc.... Can you imagine how many monks possesing supernormal powers when The Buddha still teaching? So I'm not agree if you said only tiny majority can use Jhana as a support for Satipatthana. Mettacittena, fabian #108953 From: "chandrafabian" Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 10:23 am Subject: [dsg] Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro chandrafabian Dear Pt... Please read my latest reply to Ken Howard, is that ok...? Mettacittena, fabian #108954 From: Gemunu Rohana Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 8:51 am Subject: The Discourse on Loving-kindness -Translated from the Pali by Piyadassi Thera. gemunu.rohana Sutta Nipata I.8 Karaniya Metta Sutta The Discourse on Loving-kindnessTranslated from the Pali by Piyadassi Thera. For free distribution only. Alternate translations: Acharya Buddharakkhita | The Amaravati Sangha | ?anamoli Thera | Thanissaro Bhikkhu This sutta also appears at Khp 9. From The Book of Protection, translated by Piyadassi Thera (Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society, 1999). Copyright ?1999 Buddhist Publication Society. Used with permission. Translator's IntroductionWhile the Buddha was staying at Savatthi, a band of monks, having received subjects of meditation from the master, proceeded to a forest to spend the rainy season (vassana). The tree deities inhabiting this forest were worried by their arrival, as they had to descend from tree abodes and dwell on the ground. They hoped, however, the monks would leave soon; but finding that the monks would stay the vassana period of three months, harassed them in diverse ways, during the night with the intention of scaring them away. Living under such conditions being impossible, the monks went to the Master and informed him of their difficulties. Thereon the Buddha instructed them in the Metta sutta and advised their return equipped with this sutta for their protection. The monks went back to the forest, and practicing the instruction conveyed, permeated the whole atmosphere with their radiant thoughts of metta or loving-kindness. The deities so affected by this power of love, henceforth allowed them to meditate in peace. The discourse gets divided into two parts. The first detailing the standard of moral conduct required by one who wishes to attain Purity and Peace, and the second the method of practice of metta. 1. "He who is skilled in (working out his own) well being, and who wishes to attain that state of Calm (Nibbana) should act thus: he should be dexterous, upright, exceedingly upright, obedient, gentle, and humble. 2. "Contented, easily supportable, with but few responsibilities, of simple livelihood, controlled in the senses, prudent, courteous, and not hanker after association with families. 3. "Let him not perform the slightest wrong for which wise men may rebuke him. (Let him think:) 'May all beings be happy and safe. May they have happy minds.' 4.& 5. "Whatever living beings there may be -- feeble or strong (or the seekers and the attained) long, stout, or of medium size, short, small, large, those seen or those unseen, those dwelling far or near, those who are born as well as those yet to be born -- may all beings have happy minds. 6. "Let him not deceive another nor despise anyone anywhere. In anger or ill will let him not wish another ill. 7. "Just as a mother would protect her only child with her life even so let one cultivate a boundless love towards all beings. 8. "Let him radiate boundless love towards the entire world -- above, below, and across -- unhindered, without ill will, without enmity. 9. "Standing, walking, sitting or reclining, as long as he is awake, let him develop this mindfulness. This, they say, is 'Noble Living' here. 10. "Not falling into wrong views -- being virtuous, endowed with insight, lust in the senses discarded -- verily never again will he return to conceive in a womb." #108955 From: "chandrafabian" Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 11:03 am Subject: Re: Common misconception on in & out breathing in Vipassana. chandrafabian Dear Fabian, <....> N: I am inclined to see it the other way around. Understanding develops when the stages of insight are reached. In the beginning the three characteristics cannot be penetrated. First pa~n~naa should become more familiar with all realities appearing at the present moment through one of the six doors. Naama must be seen as naama and ruupa as ruupa. This is not a matter of samaadhi that has to focus first on a particular reality. Intellectual understanding develops so that there can be conditions for direct understanding. As pa~n~naa grows firmer also calm grows firmer. it is understanding that should be emphasized, not samaadhi. Nina. ====================== Dear Nina, As far as I know, The Buddha said in Samadhi sutta: "Develop concentration monks, a concentrated monks can see things as they really are/as they actually present.." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.099.than.html What do we see as they really are? we see things/conditioned dhammas from nama and/or rupa arises and passes away/impermanent/inconstant. We can see cause and effect of nama and rupa. and many more, this is because of concentrated mind. After we see things as they really are, the understanding arises, this is like simile of tasting apricot or mango, the understanding arises after tasting. Likewise in Vipassana experience, for example the arising of Uddayabaya nana: The meditator after their mind concentrated, can see the whole process of thinking, They can see the thoughts arises and passes away, one after another like sinewave arising, matured and passing away, and then another thought arises almost without interval, matured and then passes away again, and so on and on... This experience lead to understanding that their thought is impermanent, it is just temporary, only a conditioned Dhamma and so forth. That is the way I see it. Mettacittena, fabian #108956 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 11:11 am Subject: Re: Jhana adepts outside of the Buddha sasana do not have belief in control ? kenhowardau Hi Robert, --------- R: > surely those people who attained jhana outside of a Buddha's dispensation had wrong view of self still firmly entrenched. --------- I have no argument with that. I don't think they would necessarily have it more firmly entrenched than any other non-Buddhist would. But that probably isn't what you are suggesting. ----------------- R: > As I understand the teachings the characteristic of anatta is powerlessness, no control. If they had no belief in control it implies they have understood anatta...or what..? ----------------- Let's take the example of an uninstructed worldling who is watching clouds. He doesn't believe he is controlling the way they move and change shape, does he? He has wrong views about controlling other things, but not clouds. Similarly, an uninstructed worldling who is a jhana meditator experiences jhana as he sits cross-legged at the foot of a tree. He doesn't think he is controlling jhana consciousness. Many others would, but he doesn't. ------------ R: > I am sure they didn't see jhana as a ritual but that seems to be another issue. ------------ Maybe we have different definitions of ritual. If someone does something in the belief it will bring about a certain result - when actually it won't - isn't that a ritual? Ken H #108957 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 8:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] going to... upasaka_howard Hi, Ryan - In a message dated 8/2/2010 8:19:07 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, gr8fuldawg@... writes: Hello Group, First I just want to say thanks to everyone for answering all my many questions, and for everyones kindness. I was just wondering, in most religious practices or the like, for instance when I was a christian, I would go to church every sunday, pray here a word etc..., etc.., Do buddhists have churchs/temples or whatever you want to call them? Place where you can go weekly and learn? I guess what I'm getting at is so far, I am reading some stuff online, listening to some teachings, but is there a place where you go to learn weekly & meditatie? Do buddhists have this kind of thing? Does the lay buddhist learn buddhist writtings etc..? And is this what a sitting group is? Or is a sitting group just a place you learn to meditate? Thanks with much appreciation Love and peace be yours Ryan ===================================== Typically one can find viharas (i.e., monasteries or residences for Buddhist monks), Buddhist centers, and "meditation centers" in most urban areas in the various branches of Buddhism - Theravadin, Ch'an/Zen, Tibetan, and Western amalgams. Internet searches can be helpful. The usefulness of such places will vary tremendously, and which are most suitable for you will be for you to determine. With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #108958 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 2:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro nilovg Dear pt, Op 3-aug-2010, om 11:08 heeft ptaus1 het volgende geschreven: > "Buddha's sons" refers to chief disciples (RobertK used the term > Mahapurisa). ------- N: Mahapurisa is a term usually designating ariyan disciples. Nina. #108959 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 2:10 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] going to... nilovg Dear Ryan, Op 3-aug-2010, om 2:16 heeft Ryan Brawn het volgende geschreven: > Do buddhists have churchs/temples or whatever you want to call > them? Place where you can go weekly and learn? ------ N: As Howard answered, there are many kinds. In Bangkok, Kh Sujin gives people the opportunity to discuss dhamma and ask Questions in the 'Dhamma Study and Support Foundation', Saturday and Sunday. In Myanmar, many laypeople have associations and study the Abhidhamma. Han gave us the link: The Study of the Abhidhamma: Amongst the Laity in Myanmar > By Daw Yujana???? Tutor, Department of Abhidhamma, Faculty of > Pariyatti, ITBM University, Myanmar > http://atbu.org/node/10 ------ As to centers of meditation, it depends on what you are looking for. There are many in different countries. Nina. #108960 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 2:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro nilovg Dear Swee Boon, Op 2-aug-2010, om 17:24 heeft Swee Boon het volgende geschreven: > I posted my photo I just took with my cellphone. ------- N: I like it. You come over as a very kind person, Nina. #108961 From: "Swee Boon" Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 2:39 pm Subject: Re: to be the buddah nidive Hi Ken H, > The reason I objected was that you had originally written: "The Buddha teaches that clinging to a doctrine of a self is suffering, because it propels one towards further becomings, further births, further agings and further deaths." > That is not right. I am sorry. I do not understand why that is not right. It is explained in Dependent Co-arising. > The important point is that belief in self (wrong view) is inherently akusala. > Ven Thanissaro says it is only when we *cling* to belief in self that akusala arises. He is wrong. But when you believe in a doctrine of a self, you are already clinging to it. > "The Buddha teaches that the Noble Eightfold Path is the way that leads to the ceasing of clinging to a doctrine of a self." > That is extremely misleading. --------------------------- http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.009.ntbb.html 34. "And what is clinging, what is the origin of clinging, what is the cessation of clinging, what is the way leading to the cessation of clinging? There are these four kinds of clinging: clinging to sensual pleasures, clinging to views, clinging to rituals and observances, and clinging to a doctrine of self. With the arising of craving there is the arising of clinging. With the cessation of craving there is the cessation of clinging. The way leading to the cessation of clinging is just this Noble Eightfold Path; that is, right view... right concentration. --------------------------- Clinging to a doctrine of a self is one of the four clingings. > A sotapanna is someone who has put an end to belief in a self. He has not put an end to clinging. But he has put an end to clinging to a doctrine of a self. He has put an end to believing in a doctrine of a self. > Wrong view leads away from nibbana. It does also lead to the continuation of dukkha, but all kusala and akusala dhammas do that. I don't understand. Do you mean right view of the NEP also leads away from nibbana and to continuation of dukkha? > So I might have played into the hands of the Thanissaro camp there. :-) I am not interested whether you have played into my hands or not since I do not belong to the Thanissaro camp which you wrongfully accuses me of. This accusation by you is not at all friendly despite your smiling face, my dear friend, and I ask of you to abandon this very evil thought. > The important point to remember is that the Buddha taught anatta, and anatta is the complete absence of a self. The Buddha did not define anatta as the complete absence of a self. He defined anatta in this way: --------------------- http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.059.nymo.html "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." "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 emphasis of anatta is on this very contemplation: 'This is not mine, this is not I, this is not myself.' It is not about views of "there is presence of a self" or "there is absence of a self". Swee Boon #108962 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 3:07 pm Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? truth_aerator Hi Pt, all, > Hi Alex, > > Just my thoughts on the issues you raise. > > When it comes to ultimate vs conventional reality argument, my >thinking is that exposition in paramattha terms is not so much about >analysis into parts and denying the existence of conventions, but >more about pointing towards insight, or rather - encouraging >insight. Right. IMHO analysis into parts is great to show the anicca characteristic, lack of control and the resultant dukkha. SOmething that is made of many components, each with its own function does help to understand the lack of full control (especially of 'let there be happiness forever' variety) Unfortunately some seem to take very ontological and rigid view, and that what may give unintended consequences as I've shown in my post. With metta, Alex #108963 From: "Daniel" Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 3:37 pm Subject: Re: What is the ALL actually? onco111 > ...analysis into parts is great to show the anicca characteristic Or, perhaps, when "analysis into parts" arises, the word we use to describe it is "anicca". #108964 From: Kevin F Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 4:16 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A post I made on Dhammawheel about wisdom in the Path of Purification farrellkevin80 Hi Nina: Nina: When we read a text like this it may seem at first sight that ruupa has to be investigated first. But when we read on we see: the Vis. speaks about another ... another. People have different accumulations. It all depends on the sati and pa~n~naa what the object is, naama or ruupa. Nobody can direct sati to be aware of this first, then that.* I do not think that these texts deal with intellectual contemplations. ...* ...*When people read all these texts they may not know that they pertain to vipassanaa, not to mere intellectual understanding.* Kevin: Hi Nina, the Vsm first talks about the soil of wisdom, which simply entails understanding certain things and clearing up confusion about them. What the soil is is very clear from the text. It describes as understanding the aggregates, the sense bases, the elelements, and so on. One is implored to understand and ask questions about these things. Then it talks about the five purifications of the trunk.. This too is different from actual insight knowledges. There are only five ways listed to approach the first purification, the Purification of View. "One meditator does it by way of the Four Elements", "another by way of the Eighteen Elements", "another by way of the Twelve Bases", "another...", and so on. So one breaks down the "soil" and all the information that one knows into a conceptual package of only "nama" and "rupa" by way of one of these five classifications given. These are specific classifications of nama and rupa that are recommended to be contemplated by the meditator. They each break things down into only mentallity (nama) and materiallity (rupa) but using different *classifications* of doing so. Then one is implored to always regard things as either the mentallity section or the rupa section of whichever classification one uses. This is not the same as actual moments of vipassana that arise naturally. This is a conceptual exercise. It is a way one is implored to regard things before one moves on. We don't get into contemplating the causes for things yet, just understanding wether they are nama or rupa. So this helps refine conceptual wisdom to understand that all phenomena are just nama and rupa very, very clearly. More than understanding that it is this cetasika or that (although while understanding that also as well) one regards all things as just "materiallity" or "mentallity" by whichever way one classifies it (ie. the bases or the elements and so on) again and again. One doesn't try to focus on objects to insight them, but conceptually, one understands this and that. It's clear that it is an intellectual exercize. After that there is more to do based on the clear idea that all is nama and rupa. All the best, Kevin Nina: N: I think that jhaana and especially mastery of it is extremely difficult. We often discussed this on dsg. Kevin: I agree. But I think the exercises of insight are easier for one who uses jhana as the basis. Kevin ___________ With metta Kevin The business of an intellectual is to think. Most people think religion is staring at the perfection of a rose bud. They don't understand the decay of the rose bud nor of the mind that admires it and then quickly decays. - me I never fall. Because strength of mind is divine over all. - MC Mr. Voodoo #108965 From: Ryan Brawn Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 11:49 am Subject: Thich Nhat Hanh gr8fuldawg2010 I found this guy has alot of reading material. I think he is a Mayahana Buddhist though. Any thoughts on him? Would he be good to read? Peace, Love & Happy Living Ryan #108966 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 4:19 pm Subject: wholes and parts truth_aerator Hi Daniel, Pt, KenH, all >A: ...analysis into parts is great to show the anicca characteristic > >D: Or, perhaps, when "analysis into parts" arises, the word we use >to describe it is "anicca". Anything that arises, ceases. The arising of a new state infact requires the cessation of previous state. A whole is a functional assemblage of inter-related parts. Because it is made up of many parts, it can break up into its constituent parts. Its parts can stop functioning, they can fall apart. Only a zero (which has no parts), cannot possibly be divided. Since integrated parts can disintegrate, the whole is inconstant and fully dependend on its various parts and their functional relationship to each other. Of course this is not highest happiness, it is stressful. What is stressful is not-Self. So not only the assemblage means anatta, it means anicca and dukkha. Of course the functional assemblage does exist since it has a certain function. If you take a car and ask a person, "is this a car"? That person will say yes. If you take the car apart and ask "is there a car"? That person will say "no". The same amount of parts is there. It is just that in one case they were assembled in one way, and in the latter case they were disassembled into a heap that cannot function as a car. In both cases the same parts were there, but their assemblage and function was different. So wholes as assemblage of parts does empirically exist and fulfill certain function. With metta, Alex #108967 From: han tun Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 5:00 pm Subject: Cetasikas hantun1 Dear Nina, Can I ask you a question, please? Among the 14 akusala cetasikas, why are Thina-middha and Vicikicchaa grouped separately? Why cannot they belong to the other three Groups in the classification of akusala cetasikas? Thank you very much. Respectfully, Han #108968 From: "chandrafabian" Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 5:03 pm Subject: Re: Thich Nhat Hanh chandrafabian RYAN: I found this guy has alot of reading material. I think he is a Mayahana Buddhist though. Any thoughts on him? Would he be good to read? Peace, Love & Happy Living Ryan ================================== FABIAN: Dear Ryan, In my opinion Thich Nath Han is a populist. In one of his books he said, we were born as a plant or stone in the past. Mettacittena, fabian #108969 From: "Daniel" Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 5:19 pm Subject: Re: wholes and parts onco111 > So wholes as assemblage of parts does empirically exist... Empirically? Really? "Assemblage" sounds to me more like a construct of the mind than empirical sense data. #108970 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 7:14 pm Subject: Re: wholes and parts truth_aerator Hi Daniel, All, >"Daniel" wrote: > > > So wholes as assemblage of parts does empirically exist... > > Empirically? Really? "Assemblage" sounds to me more like a construct >of the mind than empirical sense data. Does car exist? Does its parts have to be assembled properly for it to function? Please forgive me for being blunt, but I think this is important. Don't jump under a moving car. It is a bit more than imagination or mental construct. I hope that no one serious believes while driving that cars, pedestrians, traffic lights, road accidents, do not exist. And it seems a bit wrong to believe the existence of these things on one occasion and deny their existence on another. With metta, Alex #108971 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 7:11 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: wholes and parts sarahprocter... Hi Dan, Great to see you making one of your "star" appearances:-) Hope your family are all having a good summer! ... --- On Wed, 4/8/10, Daniel wrote: >> So wholes as assemblage of parts does empirically exist... >Empirically? Really? "Assemblage" sounds to me more like a construct of the mind than empirical sense data. .... S: Empiracally? Really? Indeed! Metta Sarah p.s same old drill here - a name at the top and another name at the end. "Dan" is only 3 more letters to type:-) TIA! ===== #108972 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Tue Aug 3, 2010 9:33 pm Subject: Re: Jhana adepts outside of the Buddha sasana do not have belief in control ? rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > suggesting. > > ----------------- > R: > As I understand the teachings the characteristic of anatta is powerlessness, no control. If they had no belief in control it implies they have understood anatta...or what..? > ----------------- > > Let's take the example of an uninstructed worldling who is watching clouds. He doesn't believe he is controlling the way they move and change shape, does he? He has wrong views about controlling other things, but not clouds. > > Similarly, an uninstructed worldling who is a jhana meditator experiences jhana as he sits cross-legged at the foot of a tree. He doesn't think he is controlling jhana consciousness. Many others would, but he doesn't. > > +++++++ Dear Kenh While in jhana there is no outward sign of wrong view, it is latent , However, the jhana meditator outside the Buddha dispensation is very prone to wrong view of self- (and its characteristic - the idea of control). Thus the idea that a jhana meditator has more insight into the uncontrollability of vinnana khandha than other worldlings is ,as far as I can see, incorrect: In the Brahmajala sutta the Buddha explained the wrong views dependent on the 4 mundane jhanas: http://www.purifymind.com/Suttas1.htm """There are some ascetics and Brahmins who are Eternalists, who proclaim the eternity of the self and the world in four ways. On what grounds?" Wrong view l "Here, monks, a certain ascetic or Brahmin has by means of effort, exertion, application, earnestness and right attention attained to such a state of mental concentration that he thereby recalls past existences - one birth, two births, three, four, five, ten births, a hundred, a thousand, a hundred thousand births, several hundred, several thousand, several hundred thousand births. `There my name was so-and-so, my clan was so-and-so, my caste was so-and-so, my food was such-and-such, I experienced such-and-such pleasant and painful conditions, I lived for so long. Having passed away from there, I arose there. There my name was so-and-so ... And having passed away from there, I arose here.' Thus he remembers various past lives, their conditions and details. And he says: `The self and the world are eternal, barren32 like a mountain-peak, set firmly as a post. These beings rush round, circulate, pass away and re-arise, but this remains eternally. Why so? I HAVE BY MEANS OF EFFORT ATTAINED TO SUCH A STATE OF MENTAL COCENTRATION that I have thereby recalled various past existences. That is how I KNOW THE SELF AND THE WORLD ARE ETERNAL ?' That is the first way in which some ascetics and Brahmins proclaim the eternity of the self and the world."endquote Robert #108973 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 4, 2010 12:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A post I made on Dhammawheel about wisdom in the Path of Purification nilovg Dear Kevin, Sorry to hear about your lyme disease, it is rather a nasty disease, from tics. You do not need to answer my posts, it is more my way of thinking aloud. I read something and then I get some ideas that is all. Nobody needs to answer my posts. Op 3-aug-2010, om 18:16 heeft Kevin F het volgende geschreven: > More than understanding that it is this cetasika or that (although > while understanding that also as well) one regards all things as just > "materiallity" or "mentallity" by whichever way one classifies it > (ie. the bases > or the elements and so on) again and again. One doesn't try to > focus on objects > to insight them, but conceptually, one understands this and that. > It's clear > that it is an intellectual exercize. After that there is more to do > based on > the clear idea that all is nama and rupa. ------ N: Whenever I read classifications in the Abhidhamma I take it that these are about realities now, nothing else. The same about the classifications in the Visuddhimagga. I feel that it does not make much sense to see these as an intellectual exercise. There are naama and ruupa now, no matter how they are classified. Should these not be investigated now? I found this very clear when making my study of Ch XIV, with commentary and Tiika. It took me long, but I found it very worth while. I am glad this is not just an intellectual exercise, it is life. Our daily life. The aayatanas, the elements, wonderful to hear about them, they are so actual, occurring just now. Even thinking about them now, just elements that think, no Nina. Nina. #108974 From: "Ken H" Date: Wed Aug 4, 2010 12:46 am Subject: Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro kenhowardau Hi Fabian, ------ <. . .> FABIAN: > I agree we have to understand present reality, but how do you understand present reality, since you can't even see the reality of your mind arises and passes away? ------ I understand the present reality from the Dhamma that I have heard and considered. My understanding is just a basic, theoretical one, but even so it's a wonderful thing to have. ------------- F: > I believe you know, there are triple gate to liberation, and it is achieved with seeing the reality of impermanent, unsatisfactory and noself. Have you ever see the whole process of arising and passing away of your mind Ken....? How do you attain liberation if you've never see the arising and passing away of your mind? --------------- Who attains liberation? There are only dhammas. There is no one who can attain anything. ----------------------- <. . .> FABIAN: > I am happy you finally found this precious Dhamma Ken, but may I know what kind of meditation are you previously practicing..? how did you practice them? ------------------------ I honestly can't remember the details. I used to read the popular Buddhist books that most people read, and followed their instructions. I joined a local study group, and we practised meditation techniques from articles written by various Burmese Sayadaws. The fault was not that I was practising the wrong techniques. The fault was that I was practising techniques of any kind. I should have been learning about conditioned dhammas. -------------------------------- FABIAN: > Indeed this Dhamma, knowledge of Satipatthana from The Buddha is very rare, but to be able to have the opportunity to practice is rarer still. -------------------------------- That's where we differ, Fabian. You understand practice to be something we do: I understand practice to be a conditioned reality (panna). There is no control over realities. In reality there are only dhammas arising and falling away by conditions. There is no one who can watch them, and there is no one who can influence them in any way. And that's the way it should be. Who would want it any other way? ----------------------- <. . .> FABIAN: In one story in Srilanka, there is a story of Elder Rakkhita <. . .> > So I'm not agree if you said only tiny majority can use Jhana as a support for Satipatthana. ------------------------ I agree there were many jahna meditators and even many jhana masters in those ancient times. But not many of them were able to use jhana as a support for satipatthana. Only a select few could do that. In fact, there were jhana meditators and jhana masters who could not even understand the Dhamma in theory, no matter how hard they tried. There were even some who were opposed to it. And, at the same time, there were householders and monks with no jhana experience who could practise satipatthana and vipassana - right up to the stage of arahantship. Ken H #108975 From: "ptaus1" Date: Wed Aug 4, 2010 2:20 am Subject: [dsg] Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro ptaus1 Dear Nina, > N: Mahapurisa is a term usually designating ariyan disciples. Thanks for the clarification. Best wishes pt #108976 From: "ptaus1" Date: Wed Aug 4, 2010 2:33 am Subject: [dsg] Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro ptaus1 Hi Fabian, Regarding trimming posts: > F: Please read my latest reply to Ken Howard, is that ok...? Thanks for doing this. Basically, use your best judgment. I would have deleted even more from KenH's post, but if you think it's important to repeat it, then it's ok not to delete it. The instruction given in the Guidelines: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/DSG Guidelines.htm "Always assume that other members have read the post you are replying to, and remove anything that is not essential to understanding your reply." So, it's up to you to decide what's essential in the post you're replying to. Thanks again for your help. Best wishes pt #108977 From: "Ken H" Date: Wed Aug 4, 2010 3:24 am Subject: Re: to be the buddah kenhowardau Hi Swee Boon, ----------------- <. . .> KH: > > "The Buddha teaches that the Noble Eightfold Path is the way that leads to the ceasing of clinging to a doctrine of a self." That is extremely misleading. SB: > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.009.ntbb.html 34. "And what is clinging, what is the origin of clinging, what is the cessation of clinging, what is the way leading to the cessation of clinging? There are these four kinds of clinging: clinging to sensual pleasures, clinging to views, clinging to rituals and observances, and clinging to a doctrine of self. With the arising of craving there is the arising of clinging. With the cessation of craving there is the cessation of clinging. The way leading to the cessation of clinging is just this Noble Eightfold Path; that is, right view... right concentration." Clinging to a doctrine of a self is one of the four clingings ------------------ Yes, the sutta is talking about all kinds of clinging. So can't you see how misleading it was of you to single out "clinging to a doctrine of self"? You gave the same wrong impression as before: namely, that the "doctrine of self" was not the problem. ----------------------------- KH: > > A sotapanna is someone who has put an end to belief in a self. He has not put an end to clinging. > > SB: > But he has put an end to clinging to a doctrine of a self. He has put an end to believing in a doctrine of a self. ------------------------------ The sotapanna can have lobha but, because wrong view has been completely annihilated, he can never have lobha and wrong view together (which is the worst kind of lobha). ---------------------------- KH: > > Wrong view leads away from nibbana. It does also lead to the continuation of dukkha, but all kusala and akusala dhammas do that. > > SB: > I don't understand. Do you mean right view of the NEP also leads away from nibbana and to continuation of dukkha? --------------------------- Read it again, I said *wrong* view led away from nibbana. As to whether right view leads to further rebirth, I can't say. It has been discussed at DSG, but I forget. Certainly the right view of an arahant does not. (An arahant has neither kusala nor akusala kamma.) ----------------------------------------- KH: > > So I might have played into the hands of the Thanissaro camp there. :-) > > SB: > I am not interested whether you have played into my hands or not since I do not belong to the Thanissaro camp which you wrongfully accuses me of. This accusation by you is not at all friendly despite your smiling face, my dear friend, and I ask of you to abandon this very evil thought. ------------------------------------------ I am guilty of careless writing but not of referring to you as being in the Thanissaro camp. At the time, I was thinking of Thanissaro supporters as a whole (or of the Thanissaro side of the argument). But I wonder why you were offended. Are you opposed to his teachings? --------------------------------------------------- KH: > > The important point to remember is that the Buddha taught anatta, and anatta is the complete absence of a self. > > SB: > The Buddha did not define anatta as the complete absence of a self. > He defined anatta in this way: > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.059.nymo.html > "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." > "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.' -------------------------------------------------- In our early days, there was a DSG member called Victor who used to define anatta exactly that way (by quoting that sutta). Despite constant pressuring, he would never admit to any affiliation with Ven Thanissaro. However, when he finally left DSG, it was to ordain at Thanissaro's monastery, Wat Metta. When properly understood, that sutta is saying there is no self. Ven Thanissaro and Victor - and now you - use it to give the impression that conditioned dhammas are not self *but something else is self.* That something else, it turns out, is what Ven T describes as an unbound consciousness (one that leaves the conditioned world and enters nibbana). --------------- SB: > The emphasis of anatta is on this very contemplation: 'This is not mine, this is not I, this is not myself.' > It is not about views of "there is presence of a self" or "there is absence of a self". ----------------- Yes, that is what Ven T teaches. But it is wrong, and nothing could be more wrong. Ken H "....in truth and reality there obtains neither self nor what belongs to self...." (Alagadduupama Sutta ) #108978 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 4, 2010 6:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: wholes and parts nilovg Dear Alex, Op 4-aug-2010, om 4:14 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > I hope that no one serious believes while driving that cars, > pedestrians, traffic lights, road accidents, do not exist. > > And it seems a bit wrong to believe the existence of these things > on one occasion and deny their existence on another. ------ N: Thinking about persons, circumstances etc. is not denied. It is even indispensable in our daily life. Let us learn that also thinking is a naama, a mental reality. Nina. #108979 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 4, 2010 6:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Cetasikas nilovg Dear Han, Op 4-aug-2010, om 2:00 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > Among the 14 akusala cetasikas, why are Thina-middha and > Vicikicchaa grouped separately? > Why cannot they belong to the other three Groups in the > classification of akusala cetasikas? -------- N: Are you thinking of the hindrances or of all the different groups of defilements? Doubt is classified as a latent tendency and also as a kilesa. Do you mean, why are they separately mentioned among the hindrances? Nina. #108980 From: han tun Date: Wed Aug 4, 2010 8:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Cetasikas hantun1 Dear Nina, > > Han: Among the 14 akusala cetasikas, why are Thina-middha and Vicikicchaa grouped separately? Why cannot they belong to the other three Groups in the classification of akusala cetasikas? -------- > Nina: Are you thinking of the hindrances or of all the different groups of defilements? Doubt is classified as a latent tendency and also as a kilesa. Do you mean, why are they separately mentioned among the hindrances? --------- Han: The classification of the 14 akusala cetasikas are as follows. (1) Moha-catukka (akusala-saadhaara.na) [4] A group of four cetasikas headed by moha (i) Moha = avijjaa: delusion, ignorance, dullness (ii) Ahirika: lack of moral shame, impudence (iii) Anottappa: lack of moral dread, recklessness (iv) Uddhacca: unrest, restlessness, distraction. (2) Lobha-tri (papa~nca-dhamma) [3] A group of three cetasikas headed by lobha (v) Lobha = raaga = ta.nhaa: greed, attachment, sensuous desire (vi) Di.t.thi: wrong view, evil opinion (vii) Maana: conceit, pride (3) Dosa-catukka (hateful ones) [4] A group of four cetasikas headed by dosa (viii) Dosa = pa.tigha: hatred, anger, aversion (ix) Issa: envy, jealousy (x) Macchariya: avarice, stinginess, selfishness (xi) Kukkucca: worry, scruples, remorse (4) End-tri (dull and wavering ones) [3] The last three immoral cetasikas (xii) Thina: sloth (xiii) Middha: torpor (xiv) Vicikiccchaa: sceptical doubt, perplexity. ---------- Han: Now, my question is why Thina, Middha and Vicikicchaa are in a separate group, apart from Moha group, Lobha group, and Dosa group of akusala cetasikas? When we study the cittas there are only three groups of akusala cittas, namely, Lobha-muula cittas, Dosa-muula cittas, and Moha-muula cittas. Why can't there be only three groups in akusala cetasikas (Moha group, Lobha group, Dosa group) as well, like the three groups in akusala cittas? Why must there be the fourth group of Thina, Middha and Vicikicchaa in the akusala cetasikas? I am comparing the classification of akusala cetasikas with the classification of akusala cittas. But if my questions do not make sense, kindly ignore them. Respectfully, Han #108981 From: "Swee Boon" Date: Wed Aug 4, 2010 8:57 am Subject: Re: to be the buddah nidive Hi Ken H, > Yes, the sutta is talking about all kinds of clinging. So can't you see how misleading it was of you to single out "clinging to a doctrine of self"? There are only four clingings described: sensual pleasures, views, rituals & observances and doctrine of self. It is not "all kinds of clingings". Even if I only single out the clinging to a doctrine of self, one who has ceased clinging to that would have penetrated to the Dhamma Eye and also ceased much suffering. > You gave the same wrong impression as before: namely, that the "doctrine of self" was not the problem. Yes, it is indeed not the problem > The sotapanna can have lobha but, because wrong view has been completely annihilated, he can never have lobha and wrong view together (which is the worst kind of lobha). So do you agree with my statement? > Read it again, I said *wrong* view led away from nibbana. > As to whether right view leads to further rebirth, I can't say. It has been discussed at DSG, but I forget. Certainly the right view of an arahant does not. (An arahant has neither kusala nor akusala kamma.) But you said both kusala and akusala dhammas lead to dukkha and to further becomings in the rounds of births and deaths in your previous post. It seems that you have become uncertain now. Sorry if I am being rash about that statement. > I am guilty of careless writing but not of referring to you as being in the Thanissaro camp. At the time, I was thinking of Thanissaro supporters as a whole (or of the Thanissaro side of the argument). > But I wonder why you were offended. Are you opposed to his teachings? You are indeed guilty. I only feel gratitude to him for making his translations of the suttas so easily available. > When properly understood, that sutta is saying there is no self. Ven Thanissaro and Victor - and now you - use it to give the impression that conditioned dhammas are not self *but something else is self.* That something else, it turns out, is what Ven T describes as an unbound consciousness (one that leaves the conditioned world and enters nibbana). If Thanissaro really teaches that, I would also disagree with him. I don't believe in an unbound consciousness that leaves the conditined world and enters nibbana. It sounds like believing there is a self that continues on after awakening. > SB: > The emphasis of anatta is on this very contemplation: 'This is not mine, this is not I, this is not myself.' > > It is not about views of "there is presence of a self" or "there is absence of a self". > Yes, that is what Ven T teaches. But it is wrong, and nothing could be more wrong. In that case I disagree with you. Do you come to the realization of no self by taking up the view "anatta is the absence of a self", or do you come to the realization of no self by taking up the contemplation: 'This is not mine, this is not I, this is not myself.'? In my opinion, taking up the view "anatta is the absence of a self" does not lead one to the realization of no self. It is merely a view-belief system that does not liberate one from the rounds of births and deaths. Pardon me if I say this: I think your doctrine of "only dhammas rolling on" is a view-belief system that you cling onto. You find delight in it, you crave for it, you cling to it. This view-belief system is a doctrine of no-self, which is the direct opposite of a doctrine of self. It is not liberating at all because it is not the middle way which is this contemplation: 'This is not mine, this is not I, this is not myself.' > "....in truth and reality there obtains neither self nor what belongs to self...." (Alagadduupama Sutta ) Yes I agree, if we rightly contemplate with this contemplation: 'This is not mine, this is not I, this is not myself.' Swee Boon #108982 From: "Daniel" Date: Wed Aug 4, 2010 10:01 am Subject: Re: wholes and parts onco111 Alex, Does car exist? Of course it does. But why would Buddha make such a big deal about the difference between type of existence a car has and the type of existence paramattha dhammas have? Is there a difference? Dan #108983 From: "Daniel" Date: Wed Aug 4, 2010 10:05 am Subject: [dsg] Re: wholes and parts onco111 Hi Sarah, It has been a wonderful summer thus far. I didn't mean to make an appearance, but somehow I ended up here--totally against my will! :D -Dan > #108984 From: "chandrafabian" Date: Wed Aug 4, 2010 11:25 am Subject: Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro chandrafabian Dear Ken, Hi Fabian, <. . .> KEN H: I understand the present reality from the Dhamma that I have heard and considered. My understanding is just a basic, theoretical one, but even so it's a wonderful thing to have. ============================================= FABIAN: Dear Ken, Indeed it is a wonderful thing to have a theoretical Dhammas, its a great blessing, and I admire you for that. ============================================== <.....> KEN H: Who attains liberation? There are only dhammas. There is no one who can attain anything. ============================================= FABIAN: Don't you think Buddhas and Arahants attain liberation? Do you know the meaning of liberation Ken? Liberation from what? ============================================= <. . .> KEN H: I honestly can't remember the details. I used to read the popular Buddhist books that most people read, and followed their instructions. I joined a local study group, and we practised meditation techniques from articles written by various Burmese Sayadaws. The fault was not that I was practising the wrong techniques. The fault was that I was practising techniques of any kind. I should have been learning about conditioned dhammas. =========================================== FABIAN: Forgive me to make comments about your practice, in my opinion your fault was because you practice without guidance from competent teacher. Practicing Vipassana only from books without competent teacher is, like a person without knowledge/prior experience try to build highrise buildings by learning from books. Or a person without knowledge/prior experience try to build jumbo jet by learning from books. There are many aspects in Vipassana practice, therefore we need guidance. Actually practicing Vipassana in essence is learning the conditioned dhammas by actual practicing. ============================================== <....> KEN H: That's where we differ, Fabian. You understand practice to be something we do: I understand practice to be a conditioned reality (panna). There is no control over realities. In reality there are only dhammas arising and falling away by conditions. There is no one who can watch them, and there is no one who can influence them in any way. And that's the way it should be. Who would want it any other way? ============================================== FABIAN: Well Ken, is it your own assumption? The Buddha said: "better than to become a monk for a hundred years without being able to SEE the arising and passing away of nama-rupa, is a monk who is only one day old but able to SEE the arising and passing away of nama-rupa" In Samadhi Sutta The Budddha also said, "develop concentration monks, a monk who developed concentration can SEE things as they are arisen" ============================================= <. . .> KEN H: I agree there were many jahna meditators and even many jhana masters in those ancient times. But not many of them were able to use jhana as a support for satipatthana. Only a select few could do that. In fact, there were jhana meditators and jhana masters who could not even understand the Dhamma in theory, no matter how hard they tried. There were even some who were opposed to it. And, at the same time, there were householders and monks with no jhana experience who could practise satipatthana and vipassana - right up to the stage of arahantship. Ken H ============================================ FABIAN: I am going to ask simple question to you. What do you think? Is concentration would help in developing something or is it a stumbling block? I'd like to quote your last statements, where did you read about Jhana masters could not understand Dhamma in theory no matter how hard they tried? Who do you think opposed to Jhana? Do you know their reason...? Mettacittena, fabian #108985 From: "chandrafabian" Date: Wed Aug 4, 2010 11:28 am Subject: [dsg] Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro chandrafabian Dear Pt, Thanks for your guidance, I'll try to trim more if possible. Mettacittena, fabian #108986 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Aug 4, 2010 1:01 pm Subject: Re: wholes and parts truth_aerator Hi Dan, all, >D: Does car exist? Of course it does. But why would Buddha make such >a big deal about the difference between type of existence a car has >and >the type of existence paramattha dhammas have? Is there a >difference? IMHO it is more important to look at the characteristics (anicca, dukkha, anatta) rather than at phenomena itself. It is better to develop wisdom to stop craving rather than develop some interesting metaphysical theory of the world. Clinging doesn't occur only for material things. One can cling to one's cherished True idea to be "only this is true, anything else is false", and all that clinging is just adhering to more dukkha - goes against wisdom of 4NT. With metta, Alex #108987 From: "Ken H" Date: Wed Aug 4, 2010 2:26 pm Subject: Re: Jhana adepts outside of the Buddha sasana do not have belief in control ? kenhowardau Hi Robert, ----------- R: > While in jhana there is no outward sign of wrong view, it is latent , However, the jhana meditator outside the Buddha dispensation is very prone to wrong view of self- (and its characteristic - the idea of control). Thus the idea that a jhana meditator has more insight into the uncontrollability of vinnana khandha than other worldlings is ,as far as I can see, incorrect: ------------ That sounds right to me. But what do you think about my suggestion: that the jhana meditator has *no wrong view* with regard to the development of jhana? He might not have right view (especially outside a sasana) but he won't have wrong view. I think everyone agrees that all wrong views lie latent in worldling consciousness. Worldlings can have moments of kusala but they are interspersed amongst many more moments of akusala. Jhana worldlings are a bit different: they can have mainly kusala and comparatively few akusala cittas. (And eventually they can eliminate the akusala ones altogether for quite extensive periods of time.) So, it seems to me that those few akusala cittas (when they arise amongst the mainly kusala ones) would not include the view that jahan was controllable by free will. That's what I meant by my example of cloud watching. The jhana meditator would not see jhana as something that could be controlled (any more than he would see clouds as something that could be controlled). It just wouldn't occur to him. He knows from experience that there is no jhana when there is attachment. Wrong views always come with attachment, and so the jhana meditator has somehow learnt to avoid having views of any kind with regard to jhana. ----------------------- R: > In the Brahmajala sutta the Buddha explained the wrong views dependent on the 4 mundane jhanas: http://www.purifymind.com/Suttas1.htm """There are some ascetics and Brahmins who are Eternalists, who proclaim the eternity of the self and the world in four ways. On what grounds?" <. . .> > "Why so? I HAVE BY MEANS OF EFFORT ATTAINED TO SUCH A STATE OF MENTAL COCENTRATION that I have thereby recalled various past existences. That is how I KNOW THE SELF AND THE WORLD ARE ETERNAL ?' That is the first way in which some ascetics and Brahmins proclaim the eternity of the self and the world."endquote ------------------- OK, that's hard to argue against. :-) We all have to agree, however, that there is no wrong view *during* jhana. So there is never a wholesome moment in which someone has wrong view of a self who is putting forth effort. We seem to disagree, however, as to the proximity of the wrong views that will inevitably surface in the worldling. I still say if a meditator believed he could bring about jhana by 'trying' he would never practise correctly. He would always be miles away from jhana attainment. So there! :-) Ken H #108988 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Aug 4, 2010 2:36 pm Subject: Re: Jhana adepts outside of the Buddha sasana do not have belief in control ? truth_aerator Hi KenH, all, > I still say if a meditator believed he could bring about jhana by >'trying' he would never practise correctly. He would always be miles >away from jhana attainment. And what teacher teaches that? Ajahn Brahm for example does stress that you can't control anything, that if "you" try you will fail. If you do anything, that is just disturbing the peace. Jhana is letting go of the controller. Now here is the important thing. If a person cannot temporary let go of 5 hindrances, what makes you think that he can do it permanently? If a person cannot temporary let go of 5 hindrances, what makes you think that he can do it permanently? With metta, Alex #108989 From: han tun Date: Wed Aug 4, 2010 3:26 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Cetasikas (after further consideration) hantun1 Dear Nina, On second thought, I think I will withdraw my questions. Because, the classification of akusala cetasikas into four groups is found only in The Essence of Buddha Abhidhamma by Dr Mehm Tin Mon. So this classification may not have any major significance, and the 14 akusala cetasikas may have to be considered as just one group of akusala cetasikas. Thus, you may kindly ignore my questions. Respectfully, Han #108990 From: Kevin F Date: Wed Aug 4, 2010 4:23 pm Subject: My Forums farrellkevin80 Hi everyone, I started some new discussion board forums. It would be nice to see some people sign up, whether you decide to post or not. Kevin Link http://dhammasnippets.webs.com/ ___________ With metta Kevin The business of an intellectual is to think. Most people think religion is staring at the perfection of a rose bud. They don't understand the decay of the rose bud nor of the mind that admires it and then quickly decays. - me I never fall. Because strength of mind is divine over all. - MC Mr. Voodoo http://www.marklevinshow.com/sectional.asp?id=32930# #108991 From: "Ken H" Date: Wed Aug 4, 2010 6:03 pm Subject: Re: to be the buddah kenhowardau Hi Swee Boon, ---------- KH: > > You gave the same wrong impression as before: namely, that the "doctrine of self" was not the problem. > > SB: > Yes, it is indeed not the problem ---------- If you look up "ditthi" in the Buddhist Dictionary you will see: "No other thing than evil views do I know, o monks, whereby to such an extent the unwholesome things not yet arisen arise, and the unwholesome things already arisen are brought to growth and fullness. No other thing than evil views do I know, whereby to such an extent the wholesome things not yet arisen are hindered in their arising, and the wholesome things already arisen disappear. No other thing than evil views do I know, whereby to such an extent human beings at the dissolution of the body, at death, are passing to a way of suffering, into a world of woe, into hell." Further in A. I, 23: "Whatever a man filled with evil views performs or undertakes, or whatever he possesses of will, aspiration, longing and tendencies, all these things lead him to an undesirable, unpleasant and disagreeable state, to woe and suffering."(end quote) Doesn't that say to you that wrong view is the problem? ------------ KH: > > The sotapanna can have lobha but, because wrong view has been completely annihilated, he can never have lobha and wrong view together (which is the worst kind of lobha). > > SB: > So do you agree with my statement? ------------- That depends on which statement. Your original statement was entirely misleading, and I strongly disagree with it. Your second statement was a watered-down version of the first, and I suppose I can agree with it - with the above proviso. ---------------------- <. . .> KH: > > As to whether right view leads to further rebirth, I can't say. It has been discussed at DSG, but I forget. Certainly the right view of an arahant does not.(An arahant has neither kusala nor akusala kamma.) > > SB: > But you said both kusala and akusala dhammas lead to dukkha and to further becomings in the rounds of births and deaths in your previous post. It seems that you have become uncertain now. Sorry if I am being rash about that statement. -------------------- That's very kind of you to consider my feelings, but no, I am not uncertain. You had been talking about Dependent Origination, and I tried to point out to you that, according to that doctrine, both kusala and akusala kamma were causes of rebirth. -------------------------- <. . .> KH: > > But I wonder why you were offended. Are you opposed to his teachings? > > SB: > You are indeed guilty. I only feel gratitude to him for making his translations of the suttas so easily available. --------------------------- You haven't answered my question. Are you opposed to his teachings? Or do you think he is right in announcing to the world that anatta is just a meditation strategy and does not mean there is no self? ----------------------------------- KH: > > <. . .> is what Ven T describes as an unbound consciousness (one that leaves the conditioned world and enters nibbana). > > SB: > If Thanissaro really teaches that, I would also disagree with him. I don't believe in an unbound consciousness that leaves the conditined world and enters nibbana. It sounds like believing there is a self that continues on after awakening. ------------------------------------- I think Ven Thanissaro learned that particular wrong view from his teacher (and his teacher before him). He refined it by adding the "not-self strategy" theory. --------------------------------------------- <. . .> KH: > >Yes, that is what Ven T teaches. But it is wrong, and nothing could be more wrong. > > SB: > In that case I disagree with you. Do you come to the realization of no self by taking up the view "anatta is the absence of a self", or do you come to the realization of no self by taking up the contemplation: 'This is not mine, this is not I, this is not myself.'? ----------------------------------------------- We are talking about two things here. Firstly, there is the notion that anatta does not mean "no self". I am pleased to learn that we both dismiss that notion. Secondly, there is your question above. My answer is: I understand anatta to be the absence of self. It is one of three characteristics that are borne by all conditioned dhammas - impermanence (anicca), unsatisfactoriness (dukkha), and absence of self (anatta). As for the phrase, 'This is not mine, this is not I, this is not myself,' I believe that addresses three separate issues: craving, conceit and wrong view. Ken H #108992 From: Sukinderpal Date: Wed Aug 4, 2010 6:31 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Jhana adepts outside of the Buddha sasana do not have belief in control ? sukinderpal Hi Robert, Ken H (and Ken O), Butting in. > ----------- > R: > While in jhana there is no outward sign of wrong view, it is > latent , However, the jhana meditator outside the Buddha dispensation > is very prone to wrong view of self- (and its characteristic - the > idea of control). Thus the idea that a jhana meditator has more > insight into the uncontrollability of vinnana khandha than other > worldlings is ,as far as I can see, incorrect: > ------------ > > That sounds right to me. But what do you think about my suggestion: > that the jhana meditator has *no wrong view* with regard to the > development of jhana? > > He might not have right view (especially outside a sasana) but he > won't have wrong view. > > I think everyone agrees that all wrong views lie latent in worldling > consciousness. Worldlings can have moments of kusala but they are > interspersed amongst many more moments of akusala. > > Jhana worldlings are a bit different: they can have mainly kusala and > comparatively few akusala cittas. (And eventually they can eliminate > the akusala ones altogether for quite extensive periods of time.) > > So, it seems to me that those few akusala cittas (when they arise > amongst the mainly kusala ones) would not include the view that jahan > was controllable by free will. > > That's what I meant by my example of cloud watching. The jhana > meditator would not see jhana as something that could be controlled > (any more than he would see clouds as something that could be > controlled). It just wouldn't occur to him. He knows from experience > that there is no jhana when there is attachment. Wrong views always > come with attachment, and so the jhana meditator has somehow learnt to > avoid having views of any kind with regard to jhana. > S: I agree with Ken H, and this is more or less what I was trying to point out to Ken O earlier this year beginning from when in KK. I haven't read the earlier posts in this thread (being about 400 posts behind in my reading), but in my consideration, these discussions on Jhana come up as a result of suggestion by 'meditators' of the role of Jhana in the development of the Path. This to me is sign of wrong view unlike what otherwise may arise in a Jhana meditator outside of Buddhist teachings. As you are stressing Ken, Jhana can't be developed with wrong view and in fact would very unlikely arise in one who is ready for it, given especially the fact of the very high level of panna (of the samatha kind of course) which sees danger in sense contacts. Indeed it would appear that were he motivated by wrong view to practice, he'd not ever attain any of those Jhanas. Sure as Robert points out, the wrong view is latent and can arise after the experience of Jhana, but this would be only because the Jhanalabi is not involved at the time in its development. > ----------------------- > R: > In the Brahmajala sutta the Buddha explained the wrong views > dependent on the 4 mundane jhanas: > http://www.purifymind.com/Suttas1.htm > > """There are some ascetics and Brahmins who are Eternalists, who > proclaim the > eternity of the self and the world in four ways. On what grounds?" > > <. . .> > > > "Why so? I HAVE BY MEANS OF EFFORT ATTAINED TO SUCH A > STATE OF MENTAL COCENTRATION that I have thereby recalled various past > existences. That is how I KNOW THE SELF AND THE WORLD ARE ETERNAL ...' > That is the first way in which some ascetics and Brahmins proclaim the > eternity of the self and the world."endquote > ------------------- > > OK, that's hard to argue against. :-) > > We all have to agree, however, that there is no wrong view *during* > jhana. So there is never a wholesome moment in which someone has wrong > view of a self who is putting forth effort. > > We seem to disagree, however, as to the proximity of the wrong views > that will inevitably surface in the worldling. > > I still say if a meditator believed he could bring about jhana by > 'trying' he would never practise correctly. He would always be miles > away from jhana attainment. > S: Right. And the kind of wrong view associated with the Buddhist who thinks to practice Jhana points to neither Jhana itself nor Vipassana being possibly developed. With reference to the latter, the understanding involved points to the fact of the present moment being all there is to be known being that it has arisen by conditions and anatta. In the case of the former, this too points to the present moment, although not with an understanding of it being a conditioned dhamma , but to whether the citta is with or without lobha, akusala or kusala, agitated or calm. In other words it is all about the particular kind of wisdom beginning with seeing harm of attachment in daily life which leads him to sit in a secluded place concentrating on a meditation object suited to his accumulations. The Buddhist today talks in terms of 'practice / meditation' and never about the present moment. This is symptomatic of delusion as far as I can see. Even when he makes the particular connection between meditation and need for good sila, this in reality is by-product of ditthi papanca where sila is basically seen as means to the achievement of meditation and not as something to be encouraged for its own sake. In fact if there was any real understanding connected with seeing danger in sensual attachments, sila would be more or less his topic of conversation and not 'meditation' when meeting anyone. Teachers today who teach Jhana, are therefore like the blind leading the blind. And when these teachers claim to be teaching what the Buddha taught, in doing so they are committing very bad kamma indeed. Butting out and hoping that no one wants to arghue with me. ;-) Metta, Sukinder #108993 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Aug 4, 2010 6:55 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Jhana adepts outside of the Buddha sasana do not have belief in control ? truth_aerator Hi Sukinder, all, >S: The Buddhist today talks in terms of 'practice / meditation' and >never about the present moment. Not all. Ajahn Brahm for example starts with "present moment awareness" then stage 2 is "silent present moment awareness". Many teachers who teach vipassana do talk about knowing and understanding the present moment. With metta, Alex #108994 From: "sukinderpal" Date: Wed Aug 4, 2010 7:30 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Jhana adepts outside of the Buddha sasana do not have belief in control ? sukinderpal Hi Alex, > >S: The Buddhist today talks in terms of 'practice / meditation' and >never about the present moment. > > > Not all. Ajahn Brahm for example starts with "present moment awareness" then stage 2 is "silent present moment awareness". > > > Many teachers who teach vipassana do talk about knowing and understanding the present moment. This is when sitting, right? And how do ideas such as stage 1, stage 2, methods etc. have anything to do with understanding the present moment? Metta, Sukinder #108995 From: "ptaus1" Date: Wed Aug 4, 2010 9:11 pm Subject: Re: wholes and parts ptaus1 Hi Alex, Dan, all, > >Dan: Does car exist? Of course it does. But why would Buddha make such >a big deal about the difference between type of existence a car has >and >the type of existence paramattha dhammas have? Is there a >difference? > > Alex: IMHO it is more important to look at the characteristics (anicca, dukkha, anatta) rather than at phenomena itself. pt: That's the thing though, as I understand - for wisdom to arise and understand the three characteristics - it would have to have the phenomenon (dhamma) as the object. In other words, the three characteristics are inseparable from the actual phenomena. So, in the case of the car example, it would have to be either the hardness, or the visible data, etc, that wisdom looks at as the object. Not the concept (an assemblage) of the car. If the object is the concept of the car, then afaik three characteristics cannot be experienced by wisdom. Sure, concepts such as a car are important in daily life, but when it comes to insight, it's the phenomena that count. > Alex: It is better to develop wisdom to stop craving rather than develop some interesting metaphysical theory of the world. pt: I agree, but I think the things are the other way around - thinking in terms of concepts, cars and persons is the actual metaphysics, while craving can stop only if wisdom arises and understands the anatta, anicca and dukkha characteristics of arising phenomena such as hardness, contact, perception, feeling, craving, etc. > Alex: Clinging doesn't occur only for material things. One can cling to one's cherished True idea to be "only this is true, anything else is false", and all that clinging is just adhering to more dukkha - goes against wisdom of 4NT. pt: I think I understand what you are trying to describe - craving (lobha) arising in connection with certain ideas about Dhamma/dhammas. In that case, I guess it's again in essence the problem of wisdom not seeing the three characteristics of that lobha. So, it happens for sure, but I don't think that people here are trying to encourage more lobha when they speak about dhammas and their characteristics. Lobha itself has the characteristics of anatta, etc, so when people try to point these things out (instead of talking in terms of cars and concepts) I think the idea is to encourage insight and understanding of anatta, not more lobha and attachment. Best wishes pt #108996 From: "Ken H" Date: Wed Aug 4, 2010 9:54 pm Subject: Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro kenhowardau Hi Fabian, ------------- <. . .> KEN H: > Who attains liberation? There are only dhammas. There is no one who can attain anything. > > FABIAN: > Don't you think Buddhas and Arahants attain liberation? -------------- Yes they attain liberation, but we have to remember when we say 'Buddha' 'arahant' - or any living being - that we are actually talking about the five khandhas. To the extent that we know the khandhas, or any nama or rupa that has arisen now, we also know the Buddha the arahants and everyone. -------------------------- F: > Do you know the meaning of liberation Ken? Liberation from what? -------------------------- I suppose there could be several right answers. Is it liberation from the cycle of death and rebirth? ------------------------------------ <. . .> FABIAN: > There are many aspects in Vipassana practice, therefore we need guidance. Actually practicing Vipassana in essence is learning the conditioned dhammas by actual practicing. ------------------------------------ Yes, but you and I have different understandings of the term 'practice' as it applies to satipatthana (or vipassana). I could repeat my previous question: who practises? who attains liberation? We both agree in principle that there is no self, but do we understand how there can be practice without a self? ------------------------------------------------ <. . .> FABIAN: > Well Ken, is it your own assumption? The Buddha said: "better than to become a monk for a hundred years without being able to SEE the arising and passing away of nama-rupa, is a monk who is only one day old but able to SEE the arising and passing away of nama-rupa" In Samadhi Sutta The Budddha also said, "develop concentration monks, a monk who developed concentration can SEE things as they are arisen" ------------------------------------------------- I am not saying there shouldn't be any practice. There should be practice. But there is no one who practises, and no one who doesn't practice. And so there is no one who benefits from practising, and no one who suffers from not practising. So it's a very different kind of practice. And the only factors that can lead to this kind of practice are the ones I listed in a previous post - association with wise friends, hearing the true Dhamma and wisely considering what we have heard. When those factors have been established, we have the required conditions for right practice. And when right practice occurs, it will be in the form of a citta that experiences another conditioned dhamma with right understanding. So that is the practice called satipatthana. At no stage does it involve any special focusing on selected objects, or sitting quietly "looking" for dhammas, or anything like that. ---------------------- FABIAN: > I am going to ask simple question to you. What do you think? Is concentration would help in developing something or is it a stumbling block? ---------------------- Concentration is definitely helpful in developing anything. But with samatha or vipassana bhavana it has to be right concentration. Right concentration is a nama and so it is conditioned to arise and fall away in a billionth of a second. A chess master, for example, has lots of ordinary concentration but not necessarily any right concentration. Someone who is developing samatha or vipassana has lots of right concentration but not necessarily any ordinary concentration. And so we read in the suttas about a woman who had vipassana insight when she noticed she had burnt the curry. Or the man who attained vipassana insight while falling off a cliff! They both had very weak ordinary concentration, but very strong right concentration. That is always the way it happens - naturally in the course of daily life. It doesn't happen when someone tries to make it happen. ------------------------------------ FABIAN: > I'd like to quote your last statements, where did you read about Jhana masters could not understand Dhamma in theory no matter how hard they tried? Who do you think opposed to Jhana? Do you know their reason...? ---------------------------------------- You are referring to where I wrote: ". . . there were jhana meditators and jhana masters who could not even understand the Dhamma in theory, no matter how hard they tried. There were even some who were opposed to it. And, at the same time, there were householders and monks with no jhana experience who could practise satipatthana and vipassana - right up to the stage of arahantship." I can't remember exactly where, but I have heard and read about those things. Do you recall reading about Jains, for example, who could practise jhana but could not understand the Dhamma - or even who were strongly opposed to it? Also, there was the obvious example of Devadattha, a jhana master who tried to kill the Buddha. I am sure you will be able to find references to faithful Buddhist monks who could practice jhana, but not satipatthana. It's all due to different accumulations. Unless you are a Buddha, there is no way of telling who will be able to practise what. Ken H #108997 From: Kevin F Date: Wed Aug 4, 2010 10:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro farrellkevin80 Hi Ken, Alex, all, (By the way Alex, sorry I didn't respond to all your messages >> time, fatigue, life... these things all happen -Kevin.) Ken: Hi Fabian, ------------- <. . .> KEN H: > Who attains liberation? There are only dhammas. There is no one who can attain anything. > > FABIAN: > Don't you think Buddhas and Arahants attain liberation? -------------- Yes they attain liberation, but we have to remember when we say 'Buddha' 'arahant' - or any living being - that we are actually talking about the five khandhas. To the extent that we know the khandhas, or any nama or rupa that has arisen now, we also know the Buddha the arahants and everyone. _________________________ _________________________ Me: That is not exactly true. It is true that there is no self and that there are only five khandas. But it is an important point that one should regard the *experience* of each seperately arising mind stream, however conceptual that may be. That is the same reason the Buddha that the Buddha who had enough wisdom in the lifetime he became bodhisatta to attain Arahatta, delayed it to help other beings. Until one attains nibbana, one always regards things as self. This happens for eons. To each mind stream there appears to be a self. So while there is not, and while what you said is absolutely true, on the conventional level, there is "Kevin" and so forth. "Kevin" attains nibbana and realizes that all dhammas are not self. That isconventionally. Then, when kevin is sotapanna, "Kevin" knows that no arising dhamma is actually "him", yet even then he still regards a self --. he just knows that no dhamma is self. He can not pinpoint where this self is and he knows that "he" is "freed". The Arahant feels nothing of this, the Arahant knows all dhammas correctly because all fetters are removed. This is in conformity with the sutta about the female ariya (I think she was sakadagami or anagami I cannot remember) who asked an Arahant about when "she" would attain cessation. When questioned she still regarded a "she" but admitted truthfully that "she" knew that no being was there - she could not pinpoint any dhamma as a "self" - but regard that a "she" somehow existed. Can anyone please provide the sutta if you know it? Thanks, Kevin This is the truth. ___________ With metta Kevin The business of an intellectual is to think. Most people think religion is staring at the perfection of a rose bud. They don't understand the decay of the rose bud nor of the mind that admires it and then quickly decays. - me I never fall. Because strength of mind is divine over all. - MC Mr. Voodoo http://www.marklevinshow.com/sectional.asp?id=32930# #108998 From: Kevin F Date: Wed Aug 4, 2010 10:35 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro farrellkevin80 Ken, Alex, "She" regarded a "she" or a "self" that still existed although a completely hollow one. Kevin ___________ With metta Kevin The business of an intellectual is to think. Most people think religion is staring at the perfection of a rose bud. They don't understand the decay of the rose bud nor of the mind that admires it and then quickly decays. - me I never fall. Because strength of mind is divine over all. - MC Mr. Voodoo http://www.marklevinshow.com/sectional.asp?id=32930# ________________________________ #108999 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 4, 2010 10:56 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On the intricacies of a Sotapannas mind-stream and decision making pro nilovg Dear Kevin, Op 5-aug-2010, om 7:22 heeft Kevin F het volgende geschreven: > When questioned she still > regarded a "she" but admitted truthfully that "she" knew that no > being was there > - she could not pinpoint any dhamma as a "self" - but regard that a > "she" > somehow existed. ----- N: This could be an example of 'I am' conceit. It is conceit, not wrong view. Nina.