#113200 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Jan 24, 2011 8:06 am Subject: [dsg] Re: pain truth_aerator Dear Nina, Thank you very much for your kind words. With metta, Alex #113201 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Jan 24, 2011 3:12 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: notes from Bangkok with A.Sujin 3b epsteinrob Hi Nina and Sarah. Thanks, Nina, for your notes on this! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob E and Sarah, > Op 20-jan-2011, om 8:59 heeft sarah het volgende geschreven: > > > S: Again, depending on the context. In the Vism explanation of > > passaddhi (calm), both the "tranquillizing of the mind" and "of the > > bodily formations" (citta- and kaya-passaddhi) are included in > > sankhara khandha. In the Anapanasati Sutta, where rupa-kaya is > > being referred to (as opposed to mental kaya), then, of course, > > it's rupa khandha that is meant. > ------- > N: Some quotes, Vis. Ch XIV, 144: > > 'tranquility of the > body'. The tranquilizing of consciousness is 'tranquility of > consciousness'. And here 'body' means the three [mental] aggregates, > feeling, [perception and formations] (see Dhs.40). > > The Commentary to the `Abhidhammattha Sangaha' (T.A. p 64) mentions > that calm of cetasikas also conditions bodily phenomena: tranquillity, etc., of consciousness brings about a state of > tranquillity, etc., of only consciousness, but tranquillity of the > body brings about these states of the material body also by virtue of > pervading the refined materiality arising from it; in order to make > this point as well, their twofold nature is stated.> Hm...I would like to know a little more about the "refined materiality" of the body. I'm not sure what that means, but it sounds like it is referring to rupas that are on the energetic-breath level of physical sensation/experience - just a wild guess. :-) > *** > > N: The Tiika explains that tranquilizing (passambhana.m) means the > calming of anxiety. Well I like this - however you define kaya, it's clear enough that there is a mind-state/body-state connection and that when mental-emotional anxiety is quelled, the physical body-experience will also become more calm. So in that sense I may better understand the approach to the "body" as being the mental-emotional body, and including the physical by extension. > It states that the term body, kaayo, denotes a > group, and it refers to the Dhammasangani which mentions the > tranquillity of the khandhas of feeling, remembrance (saññaa) and the > formations. With reference to these three khandhas that include the > cetasikas, the word body, kaayo, is used. > > Text Vis.: But both tranquility of the body and of consciousness > have, together, the characteristic of quieting disturbance of the > body and of consciousness. > What bothers me about this interpretation of kaayo or kaya is that it does not explicitly account for the physical body, and I wonder why where the body itself appears in this hierarchy of tranquilization, though I have suggested a possibility that occurred to me above. It seems that if kaya is mentioned and it literally means body, to see it as collection of khandas that does *not* include rupa and body -experience seems kind of weird to me, which suggests perhaps an omission or misinterpretation. Which is why I wonder if there is any alternative interpretation anywhere else. > -------- > By the way, Rob, vitakka also 'touches' any object experienced > through the mind-door, a concept or a reality and sa~n~naa marks it. Good information, thank you. I don't know why I am such a fan of vitakka - maybe it is from the descriptions of vitakka probing, poking, inspecting, turning over the object, and other colorful images of investigating the nature of a dhamma. I see that without sanna then marking the object, vitakka would have no way to remember whatever it discovered. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #113202 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Jan 24, 2011 3:19 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Final farewell! Many thanks to Sarah, Nina and all epsteinrob Hi Nina, and Phil. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Philip, > Op 21-jan-2011, om 3:44 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > > > I want to thank Sarah (and Jon of course) for this wonderful site, > > and Nina for her wonderful generosity! And all friends here, > > perhaps we'll meet elsewhere on the net or in the flesh, so to > > speak! And until that changes, this is a fond and official farewell. > ------ > N: You are very kind, Philip. Just one thing. You fell over; 'It is > gone', well, A.S. said this to Sarah after serious physical trouble, > and Sarah could appreciate this, since she understands that life > occurs only in one moment and then gone. Namely, only one citta > experiences one object at the time and then it falls away. Thus, when > we suffer from pain, there is also seeing in between. And at the > moments of seeing, one cannot experience pain at the same time. This > is very realistic, it is not an easy way for comfort, as you may > think. It takes a lot of considering realities and a beginning at > least of awareness when they occur. I find it an excellent reminder > not taking our troubles too seriously. We believe that things last. > Our whole life is ephemeral. Let us search for the truth. This is the > Path leading to the end of dukkha. > Not sure your farewell is for the last time;-)) Personally, I hope not. Come on back Phil anytime, when it seems like a suitable support for your path. No need to make an absolute decision one way or the other, but if it is serving you to be away, that is good too. I like having you around, but I guess that's just my own attachment. You bring a good sense of spontaneity and truthfulness that is helpful. If you do come back, think of it as a way of accumulating merit~! Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #113203 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Jan 24, 2011 3:40 pm Subject: Kusala intention (was, Re: The clansman who is a beginner ...) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > J: You imply that the intention to follow the path and follow the Buddha's instructions is likely to be kusala. If only it were that easy! Such intention is likely to be based on desire for results or a wish to be different from what we now are. I appreciate all that you wrote, and thanks for keeping each post to a discrete theme. I'm confused enough already! :-) I have a hard time with everything arising based on what seem to be "arbitrary" accumulations and "spontaneous" appearances. To be clear, I'm not advocating any kind of control of when things arise or what arises, but it seems to me that each thing that arises would still be based in a logical ascension through a logical chain of dependent arising. Sometimes it seems that the commentarial model has things arising at random times and events, rather than the conditions that cause them having a sensible series of steps. But I may be misinterpreting that. It just seems that way. I understand that if I say a cross word to someone, I may get a negative response back sometime later, and it may not occur at all, or may occur only when conditions align to allow it. And I can understand that this may occur in the world of dhammas as well. But I still don't quite resonate with the idea that the object of intention, the activity it leads to, and other things which seem like supporting conditions at very least, seem to have little consequence for what is kusala, or for how and when experiences take place. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #113204 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Jan 24, 2011 3:48 pm Subject: Re: Meditation (was, The clansman ...) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > J: The effort the Buddha spoke of was the (kusala) mental factor of that name, not the conventional idea we have of pushing oneself into doing something, or exerting hard to make something happen. > > Whenever the citta is kusala, it is accompanied by the kusala mental factor of effort (viriya or, at moments of insight, the mundane path factor known as samma vayama). This mental factor itself develops until it is of the strength necessary to accompany path consciousness. > > We should not think of effort in the conventional sense of making a conscious/deliberate effort since, in the case of the conscious/deliberate effort to have more kusala, that is likely to be attachment or wrong view of one form or another. I don't object to the idea of the mental factor of right effort arising as being part of the path, but it does not make sense of the Buddha's statements to 'try diligently' and practice with great ardor' or similar statements. They refer to someone putting forth "right effort," not recognizing it as an arising dhamma. I feel that is twisting things to say that he did not give such encouragements, since he clearly did instruct people to do specific things in specific cases, and in general encouraged followers to 'try hard,' 'keep going until you reach the goal' and other conventional things that a coach might say. > > =============== > > > The former need not involve the idea of making awareness arise or creating the conditions for its arising, whereas the latter necessarily does. > > > > They are both done to create conditions for awareness to arise and for path factors to develop. Nobody is on this list because they have nothing better to do, and if that is the case it's not going to make their participation more kusala. When I meditate I take what comes. I do it because I know the Buddha advocated it to develop awareness, and I don't try to dictate how or when that will take place. I am content to be on the path, and don't really have a schedule. I'm perfectly happy to read, meditate or discuss as the occasion allows, as taught by the Buddha in hundreds of suttas and in important parts of the Abhidhamma. > > =============== > > J: The Buddha spoke about hearing and discussing and reflecting upon the teachings as being necessary conditions for the development of the path. He did not say the same about any form of 'sitting practice'. Well, we continue to have a different way of seeing the constant, continual references to attainment within jhana and the formal insight sequences and exercises laid out in sutta, as well as specific instructions throughout the Visudhimagga. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = #113205 From: "Ken H" Date: Mon Jan 24, 2011 4:17 pm Subject: Re: pain kenhowardau Hi Alex and Sarah, Sorry to hear about your illness, Alex, I hope things get better soon. The same for you, Sarah, flu viruses might be common, but they are no less severe for that. (Be sure to get your inoculation before next season!) ------------ <. . .> >> S: Even at such times of pain and health problems or semi- >> consciousness, there can be awareness and understanding, Alex. > A: You are right. I do a lot of contemplation and investigation, since standard samatha-like practice doesn't go well with constant illness (either too much discomfort makes me restless or I get drowsy and loose the sort of sharp awareness needed). ------------- KH: It might help at these times if you tried to see the difference between right awareness and wrong awareness, or between right understanding and wrong understanding. A mistake I often make at times of pain is to think, "What can I do – what Buddhist practice is there – to make this pain go away?" And so I might say to myself, "Remember, no real sufferer exists; there is only this concept of a sufferer." But that is a mistake. It is done with the expectation of bringing about a result, and so it turns Dhamma contemplation into a religious rite or ritual. The best thing I can do is to understand the realities that exist right now. Regardless of whether this is a time of pain or a time of pleasure, right now there are only dhammas - no me, no self. Ken H #113206 From: "revtriple" Date: Mon Jan 24, 2011 10:23 pm Subject: Is there a set amount of people that we know of who have obtained Nibanna.... revtriple through out the history of the endless cycles of existence? Or NOT? Thank You! #113207 From: Vince Date: Mon Jan 24, 2011 11:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sotapanna cerovzt@... Dear Nina, you wrote: > The Sotaapanna has developed understanding of naama and ruupa and realises > these as impermanent, dukkha and anattaa. He has not eradicated all > defilements, he still has moments of lobha, dosa and moha. But he has no > wrong view about them. He has to develop understanding until all defilements > have been eradicated at the moment of reaching arahatship. yes, I wrote to Sarah about that. I don't understand this. If some people says the sotapanna don't have wrong views, Why he has to develop more understanding?. If both the arhant and sotapanna share a complete understanding of dhammas in any situation, What can be the difference between both? Are the defilements?. But defilements are dependent from ignorance, How can we say then the sotapanna can understand nama and rupa all the time? When a sotapanna is flooded by fear, lust, etc.. in these moments he or she is like any other common person. In these moments there is not understanding of nama and rupa but ignorance is ruling the moment. I wonder about many masters who says a sotapanna is unable to kill another human being... Well, I don't think so. Any person who can be flooded by these emotions also he can kill under powerful reasons. However, I wonder very much if these situations becomes missed for the sotapanna because another reasons. I don't say all this to speculate on sotapanna but because I cannot see how to fit that notion of the "understanding in any situation" that appears sometimes here. Until today I think it sounds closer to arhants. > This reminds us that we have a long, > long way to go. It is best to begin now and have more understanding > of naama and ruupa by listening and considering what they are. There > are naama and ruupa at this moment: seeing colour, hearing, sound, > thinking, attachment. Should we not learn more about them? yes, all the time. That's the point at all. What's the real utility of identifying "sotapanna" or the rest of levels?. Maybe this only can be useful in order to follow a right course in the progress. So for that same reason arises the question about that complete understanding of phenomena in any situation. Is the Sotapanna in that point, or it belongs to arhants? best, Vince. #113208 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jan 25, 2011 7:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Is there a set amount of people that we know of who have obtained Nibanna.... nilovg Dear Revtriple, Op 25-jan-2011, om 7:23 heeft revtriple het volgende geschreven: Is there a set amount of people that we know of who have obtained Nibana.... > through out the history of the endless cycles of existence? > > Or NOT? ------- N: Instead of asking who attained, is it not better to ask: what is the Path leading to it? The Buddha taught the Path leading to enlightenment. If it was impossible to reach the goal he would not have taught this Path. It is a long way, but we can begin now, investigating visible object, sound, and all the other objects as they appear one at a time through the six doors. We can learn that they are only conditioned dhammas and that there is no person who can make them arise. Nobody can cause the arising of seeing or hearing, they arise already when there are the right conditions for their arising. Anger or generosity arise when there are the proper condiitons for their arising. It is not my anger or my generosity. Many people in the Buddha's time reached enlightenment, we read about them in the Tipi.taka. It is not useful to ask ourselves: who did today? Then we think stories about others, it is only thinking, and thinking does not lead us anywhere. Instead let us develop the Path ourselves, just now. Nina. #113209 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Jan 25, 2011 7:23 am Subject: Re: pain truth_aerator Hello KenH, all, > Sorry to hear about your illness, Alex, I hope things get better >soon. Thank you. > KH: > A mistake I often make at times of pain is to think, "What >can >I do – what Buddhist practice is there – to make this pain go >away?" >And so I might say to myself, "Remember, no real sufferer >exists; >there is only this concept of a sufferer." >The best thing I can do is to understand the realities that exist >right now. Regardless of whether this is a time of pain or a time of >pleasure, right now there are only dhammas - no me, no self. Right. When one can't make it go away, what is left is to consider impermanence of feelings, the separation of namas and rupas, dukkha of samsara and anatta. The contemplations do help to restrain emotions and I do them daily. With metta, Alex #113210 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jan 25, 2011 7:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sotapanna nilovg Dear Vince, good questions, and these help me to consider myself several things you ask. Op 25-jan-2011, om 8:49 heeft Vince het volgende geschreven: >> N: The Sotaapanna has developed understanding of naama and ruupa >> and realises >> these as impermanent, dukkha and anattaa. He has not eradicated all >> defilements, he still has moments of lobha, dosa and moha. But he >> has no >> wrong view about them. He has to develop understanding until all >> defilements >> have been eradicated at the moment of reaching arahatship. > > yes, I wrote to Sarah about that. I don't understand this. > > If some people says the sotapanna don't have wrong views, Why he > has to develop > more understanding? ------ N: He still has ignorance. Wrong view is not the same as ignorance. Ignorance arises with each kind of akusala. He still has akusala cittas and thus ignorance. But he has no wrong view about them, he does not take anger for 'my anger'. -------- > > V: If both the arhant and sotapanna share a complete understanding > of dhammas in > any situation, What can be the difference between both? -------- N:There are many degrees of understanding and the arahat has fully developed understanding, to the extent that it can eradicate all defilements. He has no more akusala cittas, he has no more ignorance. -------- > V: Are the defilements (the difference)?. But defilements are > dependent from ignorance, How can we > say then the sotapanna can understand nama and rupa all the time? ------ N: The sotaapanna has moments of ignorance, the arahat does not. As I said, wrong view is different from ignorance. Wrong view arises with cittas rooted in lobha, attachment. Ignorance arises with all akusala cittas. The sotaapanna has eradicated the types of cittas rooted in lobha that are accompanied by wrong view, but he still has the other types of cittas rooted in lobha that are not accompanied by wrong view. He clings to beautiful things and only the non-returner (third stage of enlightenment) has eradicated clinging to sense objects. But he still clings to jhaana. ---------- > > V:When a sotapanna is flooded by fear, lust, etc.. in these moments > he or she is > like any other common person. In these moments there is not > understanding of > nama and rupa but ignorance is ruling the moment. -------- N: Right. But a few moments later he can be aware of fear, lust, as not belonging to anyone, as non-self. ------ > > V: I wonder about many masters who says a sotapanna is unable to > kill another > human being... Well, I don't think so. Any person who can be > flooded by these > emotions also he can kill under powerful reasons. However, I wonder > very much > if these situations becomes missed for the sotapanna because > another reasons. ------- N: Good question. The akusala does not have the intensity of very bad kamma like killing that could give as result an unhappy rebirth. We should ask ourselves: what is the relationship between being without wrong view of self and not being able to perform very bad kamma. If someone has learnt to see citta, cetasika and ruupa as just impersonal elements, arising because of conditions, he will be less overcome by intense dosa. He will not be inclined to think: that bad person did this to me and now I will kill him. After all, he has thoroughly understood that there are no persons, no he or me. That radically changes one's life. Events and his reactions towards them cannot be the same as before. This does not mean that he cannot have aversion or fear, but not so intense as when he was a common person. -------- > > V: I don't say all this to speculate on sotapanna but because I > cannot see how to > fit that notion of the "understanding in any situation" that > appears sometimes > here. Until today I think it sounds closer to arhants. ------ N: Good question again. The sotaapanna does not have pa~n~naa continuously, but he can have understanding of whatever reality appears through one of the six doors. When there are conditions for pa~n~naa it arises and it can arise in whatever situation, even when he is in a crowd of people, or in very difficult situations. The arising of pa~n~naa is not dependent on the situation he is in, but it depends on his accumulations, that is, former arisings of pa~n~naa. ---------- > >> Quote N: This reminds us that we have a long, >> long way to go. It is best to begin now and have more understanding >> of naama and ruupa by listening and considering what they are. There >> are naama and ruupa at this moment: seeing colour, hearing, sound, >> thinking, attachment. Should we not learn more about them? > > V: yes, all the time. That's the point at all. > What's the real utility of identifying "sotapanna" or the rest of > levels?. > Maybe this only can be useful in order to follow a right course in > the progress. ------ N: It shows us that it is important at this moment to have less wrong view of self, less clinging to naama and ruupa as self. How? Investigate them at this moment. No need to think of the future or asking when defilements will be eradicated. That is too far away. ------ > V: So for that same reason arises the question about that complete > understanding > of phenomena in any situation. Is the Sotapanna in that point, or > it belongs > to arhants? ------- N: The arahat has perfect understanding. Even the understanding of the sotaapanna is not enough. He has to go on developing understanding until arahatship is reached. --------- Nina. #113211 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Jan 25, 2011 1:56 pm Subject: What are 5 sense faculties (pasada-rupa)? + momentariness truth_aerator Dear all, 1)5 sense faculties are classified as rupa. Right? 2) What relation do they have with flesh of the eyes, ear, nose, tongue, skin? 3) What about nerves within those physical organs? Are these pasada-rupa? 4) Since rupa is momentary, how come we don't see eyes/ears/nose/etc appear and disappear? With metta, Alex #113212 From: "colette" Date: Tue Jan 25, 2011 11:28 am Subject: Re: Is there a set amount of people that we know of who have obtained Nibanna.... ksheri3 [Revtriple] Can I say that you intentionally are trying to MANIFEST DUALITY and the problems that come with the manifestation of such an illness, mental illness? You are being OBJECTIVE, aren't you? "But how are prajnapti and vikalpa related? Again we consult Sthiramati who explains the relationship among causal factors (nimitta), names (naman) and vikalpa: "Amoung them, causal factors (nimitta) are the repository consciousness (alayavijnana), defiled mind (kli?tam manas), and the functioning consciousness (prav?tti-vijnana). [These are] causal factors because [they are in a] mutally causal relation. Name is signification as the reference to those causal factors, which exist, though are ineffible, just like a closed eye. Dichotomous conception (traidhatuka), and consists of the conceptual distingtion between these [causal factors] and the own-nature (svabhava) and distrinct characteristics (vise?a) of the aformentioned causal factors.(12)" John Y Cha toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "revtriple" wrote: > > through out the history of the endless cycles of existence? > > Or NOT? > > > Thank You! > #113213 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Tue Jan 25, 2011 1:57 pm Subject: All-Embracing Pity! bhikkhu5 Friends: How to train endless Pity and Compassion! Sitting alone, in silence, each early morning, with closed eyes, one wishes: May I radiate and meet with only infinite pity, sympathy, and compassion! May I & all the various beings on the 31 levels of existence develop & find only this genuine gentleness of infinite pity, sympathy, and compassion! May I & all beings on the sense-desire, fine-material, & the formless plane develop & encounter this tender infinite pity, sympathy, and compassion! May I & all beings in the front, to the right, the back, the left & below as above develop & experience caring infinite pity, sympathy, & compassion! May I & all beings in this city, country, and universe always be fully aware and deeply mindful of this warm infinite pity, sympathy, and compassion! May I & all beings in this city, country, and universe examine all details & subtle aspects of this benevolent infinite pity, sympathy, and compassion! May I & all beings in this city, country, & universe put enthusiastic effort in their praxis of this affectionate infinite pity, sympathy, & compassion! May I & all beings in this city, country and universe find enraptured joy & jubilant gladness in this fond infinite pity, sympathy, and compassion! May I & all beings in this city, country, & universe cultivate the tranquillity of quiet, silent, stilled, & endlessly merciful pity, sympathy, & compassion! May I & all beings in this city, country and universe attain concentrated & absorbed one-pointedness by this infinite pity, sympathy, and compassion! May I & all beings in this city, country, and universe dwell in imperturbable equanimity joined with this loving infinite pity, sympathy, and compassion... Yeah! Print this out, dwell in each state until clear, use ~ 25-45 minutes. Comment: All-Embracing Pity is the 2nd infinitely divine state (AppamaññÄ) This gradually reduces all aggressiveness, cruelty, ferocity, viciousness, rage, inner & outer violence, and unhappiness related with these states. Joined with the 7 links to Awakening it will later cause formless jhÄnas... <...> Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu SamÄhita _/\_ * <....> #113214 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue Jan 25, 2011 5:21 pm Subject: Re: pain kenhowardau Hi Alex, --- <. . .> > A: The contemplations do help to restrain emotions and I do them daily. --- KH: I would rather you said you *studied* or *read about* the contemplations daily. To say you *do* them implies some sort of control. Right contemplation involves panna, which is a cetasika that arises rarely, and only under very limited conditions. There is no control. :-) Ken H #113215 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Jan 25, 2011 5:38 pm Subject: Re: pain truth_aerator Hi KenH, all, > KH: I would rather you said you *studied* or *read about* the contemplations daily. To say you *do* them implies some sort of control. > > Right contemplation involves panna, which is a cetasika that arises rarely, and only under very limited conditions. There is no control. :-) > > Ken H OK, I can say. I "study" the present moment, and the proper way to relate to it. Meditators study their meditation subject... Of course there is no control. But events do occur. With metta, Alex #113216 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Jan 25, 2011 9:22 pm Subject: Satipatthana Sutta - Cemetary Contemplation (was, Re: A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > (b) primarily speaking to/for the benefit of those who were already (or who had the potential to become) experienced and highly skilled in that contemplation, and explaining how awareness/insight might be developed at the same time as samatha is further developed. Okay; and how would one determine - meaning us, not Buddha - whether one "had the potential to become...experienced and highly skilled in that contemplation..."? Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - #113217 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Jan 25, 2011 9:47 pm Subject: Re: Dhammas vs. Conventional objects/activities (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (112965) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon. > > ... > > Buddha said many things and his own stipulation is that he did not mention anything that was not meant to form the path out of suffering. He said "I teach only suffering and the cessation of suffering." So I assume if he is talking about something he thinks it's worthwhile for the path, whatever semantic framework it may be in. "If X, then Y" was the form of many of the teachings. They were still teachings, they were still Dhamma, and they were given to be followed by those for whom they were helpful. > > =============== > > J: I agree with what you say above, except that I would say that the teachings were given to be *understood* rather than to be *followed*. > > After all, there's a world of difference between the statement "If there is X, then Y will be the result" and the statement "If you want to achieve Y, then do some Xing". There are quite a few instances in which he spoke according to the latter formula as well, in the form of, for instance, "if a bhikku wants to develop X, he should put the achieving of X in his meditation." That's not an exact quote form, but I have quoted that sutta before. As usual I can't find it again. > To my understanding, when the Buddha is saying "If there is X, then Y will be the result", X and Y are to be understood as referring to specific dhammas, since it is the world of dhammas that the Buddha became enlightened to and taught about (pretty much everything else was already known to conventional wisdom). I disagree that his other teachings were already known. The application of anicca, anatta and dukkha to the conventional world has enormous impact on anyone who takes it seriously, which means not just in passing, and the meditation techniques he specified were an amazing evolution in specificity and detail, as well as principle, from the former techniques. > > =============== > > > The world of dhammas is another world altogether from the world of conventional objects. > > > > Well we disagree about that as well. The Abhidhammasangaha says that the conventional concepts we deal with in the conventional world are shadows of dhammas and they reveal the dhammas in a distorted way. > > =============== > > J: I recall the mention of 'shadows of dhammas', but not the mention of conventional objects as 'revealing dhammas in a distorted way'. Conventional objects do not reveal dhammas; if anything, they conceal them. What does "shadows of dhammas" mean? It means that there is a relation, albeit an obscured and distorted one, between conventional perception and the perception of actual dhammas, and that they exist on a continuum of delusion-enlightenment. As one sees conventional objects more specifically, clearly and as they actually form up in the moment, they break down into dhammas in the same way that conventional objects break down into atomic and sub-atomic particles in physics. There is no recognizeable relationship between subatomic particles and the objects which are composed of them, but we can study and recognize that these particles represent the reality - the paramatha dhammas - of the objective world. I believe there's a similar relation of actuality between what we perceive as conventional reality and the dhammas which they represent in a distorted or veiled way. To see them as two completely unrelated separate worlds makes absolutely no sense of either world. It leaves awakening from within the conventional world as a magical illogical event that is not based on recognizing the true nature of samsara, but on simply ignoring it and waiting for a reality that is wholly other to magically descend. There is no development in such a vision, just happenstance based on conditions that happen to accumulate for no particular reason except for other random happenings. > > =============== > In that way it is a distortion of the one world, seen in shadow and without full detail, not a totally separate world. That notion makes of our world a full-blown illusion, without any connection to reality. I believe that the Buddha taught that this world is the doorway to the path. After all, when you read the Dhamma, if it were totally illusion, it would have no connection to the path. > > =============== > > J: The idea of the conventional world as the doorway to the path, with conventional objects as the doorway to dhammas, is one that I've not heard expressed until now. It is not an unusual view to say that the conventional world is created by imposing concepts on the actuality that is experienced. Remove the conceptual definitions and habits of perception and the true reality is revealed. It is often expressed in metaphors such as seeing a rope and mistaking it for a snake. You really are perceiving something, but you are conceptually misled about what it is and what it's nature is. > It seems to me to be an approach that would take one away from the understanding of the dhammas appearing at the present moment. No, it would take us directly into the present moment instead of waiting for panna to arrive magically and present us with a wholly other reality. The idea would be that what is taking place in the moment *now* is already there - its' not another world, it's this one, but we are not perceiving it correctly. One then corrects perception rather than removing one's vision from the world of experience and burying it in the concepts of books that talk about another reality. Don't you think that constant attention to pariyatti from Dhamma books takes you away from the present perception and into a conceptual universe? If you're not attending the senses mindfully, what kind of moment are you being presented with? A conceptual, philosophical one. That is indeed "taking one away from the...dhammas appearing at the present moment." > Consider, as an example, the present situation. As I am writing this post or as you are reading it, there is a computer monitor in our field of vision (among many other things). The dhammas that are seeing and visible object, however, have nothing to do with computer monitor (or any other conventional object). I don't see how focusing on the conventional object of computer monitor would help in coming to a better understanding of the dhammas of seeing consciousness or visible object. Well it's not at all true that the presently occurring dhammas have nothing at all to do with the "monitor" that you are perceiving. If you are perceiving light or color or movement on what we call the "monitor," you are only perceiving those because they are arising as objects of the senses within the realm of what we call "monitor." The fact that "monitor" is a concept does not prevent what we all the "monitor" to be actually composed of those dhammas of light, color and movement. Saying "it has nothing to do with" takes you *away* from the color and movement and into a concept about concepts. Stick with the monitor and you are perceiving what is really there - color, movement etc. and with enough understanding that takes the place of the concept of monitor. They are the same reality perceived and understood differently. It's not a separate world, it's this one in its reality and realization. > > =============== > > > > > > =============== > > > J: To my reading of the texts, the Buddha was at pains to separate the skilful contemplation of conventional objects (samatha bhavana) from the understanding of dhammas (vipassana bhavana). Regardless of the level of a disciples' skill in the former, it was the latter that was pointed to as being the path. > > > > Doesn't seem that way in the anapanasati sutta, or in the satipatthana sutta, where he goes back and forth between samatha and vipassana. > > =============== > > J: The point is that each is distinguished from the other, for the benefit of the person who is already experienced/skilled in samatha and is developing both samatha and awareness/insight. That's one way of looking at it. There's nothing there to indicate that the person is already skilled in samatha. When the anapanasati sutta says that "He breathes in, calming bodily fabrications," anyone can do that. They may calm down a little or a lot, but it's not an advanced instruction. When it gets to rapture and such, that's clearly advanced, but it is also based on the earlier samatha exercise which is simpler. There's a logical progression there is one wants to acknowledge it. The Visudhimagga talks about counting breaths, and by anyone's estimation that is a beginner's way to start paying attention to breath with mindfulness, not for advanced practitioners. So if you're right, why is counting breath in the Visudhimagga? And why does the anapanasati sutta's introductory paragraphs say that there were many hundreds of beginning monks being trained in anapanasati by the more advanced monks? > > =============== > > > Of the 3 kinds of contemplation mentioned in this passage, I would say it's only the third that is awareness/insight (the first 2, which talk about 'constituents' and 'component 'parts', would be bhavana, as I read it). > > =============== > > J: Sorry, there was a typo in my post. It should have read "the first 2, which talk about 'constituents' and 'component 'parts', would be *samatha* bhavana, as I read it". See sutta text repasted at end of this message.) > > > =============== > > Is the sutta or the commentary advocating that only the third contemplation is correct practice? When you say bhavana about the other two, are you saying they are steppingstones to the third way of contemplating? > > =============== > > J: See my clarification just above. To my understanding, all 3 contemplations are bhavana; the first 2 are samatha, the last vipassana. > > The purpose is to indicate how, for those experienced and skilled in samatha bhavana based on the foulness of the body, vipassana bhavana is something else yet again. Don't quite get this. Can you re-quote the relevant stanza and explain a bit more? Thanks, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #113218 From: nichicon cp Date: Tue Jan 25, 2011 10:05 pm Subject: mom nichiconn dear friends, mom’s surgery went well. they did have to take a little bit of her jaw but she should be cancer free now. peace, connie #113219 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jan 25, 2011 10:56 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] mom sarahprocter... Dear Connie & all, --- On Wed, 26/1/11, nichicon cp wrote: >mom’s surgery went well. they did have to take a little bit of her jaw but she should be cancer free now. .... S: Jon & I are very glad to hear the surgery went well and hope that's the end of the cancer in her cheek. I expect that with the skin grafting and so on, she'll be back in good shape in no time. Please wish her a speedy recovery and all the courage and strength from her confidence in present moment understanding. A friend of mine in Hong Kong's younger sister recently had half her tongue removed because of tongue cancer and she's a single mother with several young children. Cheek cancer, tongue cancer.....we never know how or when we'll be seriously tested in our understanding of just namas and rupas at this very moment. Time to develop understanding and equanimity towards what appears now! "Monks, doctors give a purgative for warding off diseases caused by bile, diseases caused by phlegm, diseases caused by the internal wind property. There is a purging there; I don't say that there's not, but it sometimes succeeds and sometimes fails. "So I will teach you the noble purgative that always succeeds and never fails, a purgative whereby beings subject to birth are freed from birth; beings subject to aging are freed from aging; beings subject to death are freed from death; beings subject to sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress & despair are freed from sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress & despair. Listen & pay close attention. I will speak." "As you say, lord," the monks responded. "The Blessed One said: "Now, what is the noble purgative that always succeeds and never fails, a purgative whereby beings subject to birth are freed from birth; beings subject to aging are freed from aging; beings subject to death are freed from death; beings subject to sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress & despair are freed from sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress & despair? "In one who has right view, wrong view is purged away, and the many evil, unskillful mental qualities that come into play in dependence on wrong view are purged away as well, while the many skillful mental qualities that depend on right view go to the culmination of their development. "In one who has right resolve, wrong resolve is purged away... "In one who has right speech, wrong speech is purged away... "In one who has right action, wrong action is purged away... "In one who has right livelihood, wrong livelihood is purged away... "In one who has right effort, wrong effort is purged away... "In one who has right mindfulness, wrong mindfulness is purged away... "In one who has right concentration, wrong concentration is purged away... "In one who has right knowledge, wrong knowledge is purged away... "In one who has right release, wrong release is purged away, and the many evil, unskillful mental qualities that come into play in dependence on wrong release are purged away as well, while the many skillful mental qualities that depend on right release go to the culmination of their development. "This, monks, is the noble purgative that always succeeds and never fails, a purgative whereby beings subject to birth are freed from birth; beings subject to aging are freed from aging; beings subject to death are freed from death; beings subject to sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress & despair are freed from sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress & despair." [AN X.108] Metta Sarah ======= #113220 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jan 26, 2011 12:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] mom nilovg Dear Connie and Sarah, Op 26-jan-2011, om 7:05 heeft nichicon cp het volgende geschreven: > dear friends, > mom’s surgery went well. they did have to take a little bit of her > jaw but she should be cancer free now. > > > ------- That is certainly a relief and I am very glad, Connie. I wish your mother a speedy recovery. Sarah, thank you for the reminders: the noble purgative that always succeeds and never fails. ----- Nina. #113221 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jan 26, 2011 1:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] What are 5 sense faculties (pasada-rupa)? + momentariness nilovg Dear Alex, Op 25-jan-2011, om 22:56 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > 1)5 sense faculties are classified as rupa. Right? ------- N: Yes, they do not know anything, but they are the conditions for experiencing sense objects. They are the doorways for the whole sense- door-process of cittas, and, for the sense-cognitions of seeing etc. they are both doorway and physical base, place of origin. -------- > > 2) What relation do they have with flesh of the eyes, ear, nose, > tongue, skin? ------- N: The Expositor makes a distinction. Eye as compound organ and as sentient organ. "Of these , a lump of flesh is situated in the cavity of the eye, bound by the bone of the cavity of the eye below..." This pertains to the fleshly eye, the compound organ. The sentient organ is an extremely tiny ruupa that has the capability to receive visible object. This is the pasada ruupa. Visuddhimagga Ch XIV, 48: 'The sensitivity with which he sees a visible object is small and it is subtle too, no bigger than a louse's head'. -------- > > A: 3) What about nerves within those physical organs? Are these > pasada-rupa? ------- N: No, but it is said: Tiika Vis.(47, 48) : "By the expression, pervading the seven layers of the eye, he teaches that the eye is connected with several groups of materiality." The eyesense itself arises in a group of ten ruupas: The eyedecad consists of ten rupas in one group: the four great elements, the eyesense, life-faculty, colour, odour, flavour and nutritive essence. Thus, apart from eyesense there are five other derived ruupas. It is produced by kamma. ------- > A: 4) Since rupa is momentary, how come we don't see eyes/ears/nose/ > etc appear and disappear? ------- N: The arising and falling away realised by insight concerns paramattha dhammas, not the conventional eyes, ears, etc. Moreover, this is actually not seen by eyesense, but 'seen' by pa~n~naa. We should not have a mental picture of dhammas arising and falling away, that is misleading. #113222 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Jan 26, 2011 1:32 am Subject: Re: Suicide DN16 Ud8.9 sarahprocter... Dear Alex, Kevin & all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > In Udana 8.9 Dabba Mallaputta has committed what looks like a suicide using his magic powers. > > Then Ven. Dabba Mallaputta went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One: "Now is the time for my total Unbinding, O One-Well-Gone!" > > "Then do, Dabba, what you think it is now time to do." > > Then Ven. Dabba Mallaputta, rising from his seat, bowed down to the Blessed One and, circling him on the right, rose up into the air and sat cross-legged in the sky, in space. Entering the fire property and emerging from it, he was totally unbound. Now, when Dabba Mallaputta rose up into the air and, sitting cross-legged in the sky, in space, entered the fire property and then emerged from it and was totally unbound, his body burned and was consumed so that neither ashes nor soot could be discerned > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.8.09.than.html .... S: I just checked the Udana commentary for more detail on this passage: We read: " 'The time for my parinibbaana (parinibbaanakaalo me)': he indicates: 'Lord, the time for my parinibbaana by way of that element of nibbaana that is without remnant of substrate has presented itself; I desire to attain parinibbaana, once I have informed the Lord of this'. "Some, however, say that the elder begged leave of the Teacher for the sake of (attaining) parinibbaana, despite the fact that he was neither decrepit nor sick, this being the reason for this: that he begged leave of the Teacher after coming to the conclusion that 'The monks Mettiya and Bhummajaka previously charged me with a Defeat that was without foundation, yet they still curse me even though the case has been settled; whilst other puthujjanas, believing them, treat me with irreverence and contempt. What business have I with hauling around thus useless burden of dukkha? Therefore, I should attain parinibbaana right now'. "But this is unreasonable. For those in whom the aasavas have been destroyed do not, so long as their lifespan's formations are not completely exhausted, set their hearts upon parinibbaana, apply and exert themselves for the sake of same, for fear of blame and so on on the part of others; yet nor do they remain for long for the sake of applause and so forth on the part of others. "Rather they await the complete exhaustion of their own lifespan's formations solely as a result their own (process of) functioning [sarasen'eva; in other words, they simply let those formations run their course until they become completely exhausted], in accordance with which: " 'I do not long for dying, I do not long for living; yet I look forward to my time, as does a hireling his wages' (Thag 606) was said. "The Lord, having also surveyed his lifespan's formations and come to know of their complete exhaustion, said : 'You, Dabba, should do that for which you deem it now to be the time'. S: With regard to the part about "entered the fire property" as quoted above, we read in the commentary: "(Lest it should be asked) what he did after rising into mid-air, he said 'Seated himself in a cross-legged position in the sky, in the air' and so on. Herein: 'attained the element of heat (tejodhaatu.m samaapajjitvaa): attained the attainment consisting of the fourth jhaana in the fire-kasi.na. For the elder, stationed at that time to one side after having saluted the Lord and circumambulated him three times by the right, said: 'Over the hundred thousand kalpas, Lord, that I lived (and) performed meritorious deeds in this place and that with you, I acted with reference to this goal alone; that very same goal has today reached its climax - this is (your) last sight (of me)'. To some amongst those there who were putthujjana monks or sotaapannas and once-returners, there arose great compassion, (whilst) some amongst them ended up weeping. "Then the Lord, having discerned his integrity of mind (cittaacaara.m), said: 'Well, in that case, Dabba, display the potency-miracle to me and the order of monks'. Straightaway the whole order of monks congregated; then the venerable Dabba displayed all the miracles shared by saavakas handed down after the method of 'Having been one, he becomes multifold' and so on, once more saluted the Lord, rose into the sky, fashioned earth in the sky and then, seated in a cross-legged position thereon, performed the preliminary work towards that attainment in the fire-kasina, attained that attainment, resolved that element of heat should cremate his body, and then finally attained parinibbaana. His whole body became ablaze with fire along with that resolving. And through the power of that resolving, that fire, as with the fire that ushers in the end of the kalpa, instantaneously cremated whatever had taken formation, even the size of an atom, without leaving anything behind there as a remanant, not even mere soot, and then became extinguished..." S: In other words, it's clear that knowing death was coming, his time was up, he emerged form jhana (fire-kasina), attained parinibbaana immediately following the death consciousness and instantly his body was cremated by the fire he had resolved upon. There was no "suicide". As the text said, arahats ***'await the complete exhaustion of their own lifespan's formations solely as a result their own (process of) functioning.'*** I hope this helps clarify. Metta Sarah ======= #113223 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Jan 26, 2011 1:53 am Subject: Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? sarahprocter... Hi Pt & Ken H, #108183 I had put this aside for a possible comment and see now that it relates to some of Pt's more recent qus to me, perhaps arising from your discussion: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: >KH: don't know much about Brahmas. Do they inhabit the fine non-material sphere? I had the idea that the fine non-material sphere was inhabited by jhana masters who simply blissed-out on jhana meditation for several aeons before being eventually reborn in the lower realms. ... S: You've mentioned this before, suggesting that there is just the arising of jhana cittas experiencing a kasina (or other meditation object) "for billions of years" without there ever being any consciousness of the jhana cittas or cetasikas or anything else. I don't think this is correct. There can be other kinds of cittas, even akusala cittas in between the sets of jhana cittas. ... > pt: I'm not sure either, I think fine-material brahmas (reborn as a result of first four form-jhanas) can do all the things that other lower beings can, but they only have three senses - mind, eye and ear, so no taste, touch and smell. Non-material brahmas on the other hand (reborn as a result of four formless jhanas) have no senses, save the mind sense (and non-percipient brahmas don't have the mind-sense either). ... S: Yes. Even the non-material brahmas can have other kinds of kusala cittas arise, possibly even some lokuttara cittas, also vipaka cittas, such as bhavanga cittas, akusala cittas of lobha and moha (but not dosa, as I recall), kiriya cittas. ... > > KH: To answer your question, however, I would say that the inhabitants of the non-material sphere could not practise insight because they could not hear the Dhamma there. Hearing depends on material phenomena. > > pt: Not sure either. I think only non-material brahmas can't hear Dhamma teachings because they don't have eyes and ears. Though I'm not sure. Wouldn't they posses divine eye and divine ear? I mean, are divine eye/ear a part of the mind-sense or eye- and ear-sense? ... S: Also, if already sotapannas, insight can continue to develop and as you say, they may be able to 'hear' and 'see' using jhanic powers, not requiring senses. .... > > > KH: I don't believe their existence would be anything like deep sleep. It would be blissful concentration. > > pt: Hm, isn't bliss their vipaka so to speak? I mean, it's not like every single citta in their life would be a jhana citta? I assume they would still have a/kusala javanas, and still have cetana, thus committing acts, thus generating kamma, which would mean, they are not in jhanic concentration their whole life... Don't know. ... S: Yes, I agree with Pt here. And at the end of their lives, it'll depend on previous kamma (from a previous life of that life) as to where rebirth will take place. [As I recall, it cannot be from rupa or arupa-brahma realm to a woeful plane immediately, but would need to check the details of this again. In any case, not important!] Thinking, speculating with curiosity? What's the citta now? Metta Sarah ====== #113224 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jan 26, 2011 2:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: notes from Bangkok with A.Sujin 3b nilovg Dear Rob E, Op 25-jan-2011, om 0:12 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > The Commentary to the `Abhidhammattha Sangaha' (T.A. p 64) mentions > > that calm of cetasikas also conditions bodily phenomena: > tranquillity, etc., of consciousness brings about a state of > > tranquillity, etc., of only consciousness, but tranquillity of the > > body brings about these states of the material body also by > virtue of > > pervading the refined materiality arising from it; in order to make > > this point as well, their twofold nature is stated.> > > Hm...I would like to know a little more about the "refined > materiality" of the body. I'm not sure what that means, but it > sounds like it is referring to rupas that are on the energetic- > breath level of physical sensation/experience - just a wild guess. :-) ------ N: but tranquillity of the > body brings about these states of the material body also by virtue of > pervading the refined materiality arising from it.. Calm is also a condition for ruupas of the body, it influences ruupas. We read this also in the suttas, where it is asked; you look so serene, what is the cause? These are subtle changes, and perhaps that is why 'refined materiality 'is used. Kusala conditions an outward appearance different from anger. > --------- > > N: The Tiika explains that tranquilizing (passambhana.m) means the > > calming of anxiety. > > Well I like this - however you define kaya, it's clear enough that > there is a mind-state/body-state connection and that when mental- > emotional anxiety is quelled, the physical body-experience will > also become more calm. So in that sense I may better understand the > approach to the "body" as being the mental-emotional body, and > including the physical by extension. ------- N: I am not so inclined to use mental-emotional body. Sometimes body refers to cetasikas, naamas, sometimes to ruupas and this depends on the context. ------------- > R: It seems that if kaya is mentioned and it literally means body, > to see it as collection of khandas that does *not* include rupa and > body -experience seems kind of weird to me, which suggests perhaps > an omission or misinterpretation. Which is why I wonder if there is > any alternative interpretation anywhere else. ------ N: It is not an omission. As said, it depends on the context. I would like to repeat what I mentioned before. Sometimes there seems to be a contradiction, but it is a matter of different aspects from where a certain subject is viewed. -------- Nina. #113225 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jan 26, 2011 2:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? nilovg Dear Sarah, Op 26-jan-2011, om 10:53 heeft sarah het volgende geschreven: > [As I recall, it cannot be from rupa or arupa-brahma realm to a > woeful plane immediately, but would need to check the details of > this again. ------- N: I found this, Vis. CH XVII, 144, Tiika: The Tiika explains that there cannot be a pa.tisandhicitta that is ruupaavacara vipaakacitta after the death-consciousness that is aruupaavacaravipaakacitta. We read in T.A. (Topics of Abhidhamma, p. 211): < Following decease in the formless realms, there is relinking in the formless realms, though not in a lower formless realm, since beings in a higher formless realm do not accumulate kamma of one lower. > The Tiika to the Visuddhimagga gives an example which illustrates that there cannot be rebirth in a lower aruupa brahmaplane. When the cuticitta of the life that is ending is of the fourth aruupajhaana, thus with a past object, then the pa.tisandhicitta that is aruupaavacara vipaakacitta could not be the result of a lower stage of aruupa jhaana, with a 'not-so-classifiable' object, such as the object experienced by the aruupaavacaracitta of the third stage. We read further on in T.A.: Thus, after having been in an aruupa brahma plane, one may be reborn in a sensuous plane, but then one is reborn with alobha, adosa and pa~n~naa. ------- Nina. #113226 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Jan 26, 2011 2:16 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Discussions in Bangkok with K.Sujin, Jan 2011(6) sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > I see, I hadn't realized that there is a mundane version of vitakka that does the ordinary touching of the object. I thought of vitakka as the higher kind that investigates the object along with sati. That is interesting to find out. ... S: Yes, I thought that was what you had in mind. Vitakka now, at almost every instant, regardless of whether the citta is kusala or akusala. ... > > >S: ...Vitakka can accompany kusala, akusala, vipaka or kiriya cittas. Sati, of course, never accompanies akusala cittas. You may be thinking of the examples of kusala vitakka referred to in suttas and to samma-sankappa (vitakka), the second factor of the eightfold path. These, of course, are accompanied by sati. > >R: So the samma-sankappa kind of vitakka has the same name as the ordinary kind. They ought to give it a different name, like maha-vitakka or something. .... S: Yes, you could call it "maha-vitakka"! It's the same for many other mental factors which arise with every citta (such as sanna, cetana, vedana and so on) or with most cittas (such as vitakka, vicara, viriya and so on) which can be either kusala, akusala, vipaka or kiriya. We have to know from the context of a text which kind is being referred to, whether it's kusala or not. ... >R: So vitakka touches concepts too? ... S: Yes. In fact, when there is thinking about concepts, as there is most the day, vitakka plays a very important role. This is why it's often translated as 'thinking'. ... >R: That seems a little odd, as I thought that concepts don't really get contact in a sense, but perhaps I am confused about that. I know thinking takes place, but as the concept is unreal, in what sense is it touched or investigated by vitakka? .... S: It's is 'touched' or 'investigated' in the sense of 'thought about'. Thinking has to 'latch onto', or 'touch' an idea. Actually, many, many, many moments of thinking have to 'touch' many, many, many concepts for there to be a thought, of course. Now, to type one word, there have to be numerous processes of cittas, numemerous moments of thinking. ... > Is concept an object for sanna as well? ... S: Yes, sanna arises with each citta, 'marking' and 'remembering' each concept or idea as well as each sense object when it appears. ... >We remember concepts obviously, and do we perceive them in some form? For instance, I think of "mother" and I see her image in my thought. If I think about her more thoroughly, things she said, her characteristics, would vitakka be bringing out those different attributes even though it is a conceptual area I am investigating? ... S: Yes, we hear a word "mother" and there are immediately countless cittas, countless mind-door processes of thinking about various concepts. Immediately we're lost in our day-dreams about "mother". As it happens, I just spoke to my mother before writing these posts and as I write, in between the sense objects, the thoughts about the words here, there are also thoughts about my mother and what she said. So much of this is the work of sanna and vitakka in particular, forever thinking and remembering various concepts, almost always with lobha and moha. Thinking on and on and on, usually with no awareness at all. However, even now, there can be awareness of thinking - just a nama. The thinking, the remembering are real, the ideas about attributes, what was said and so on are not real. It's really heplful to understand the distinction so that sati and panna can grow and see what is real, what is important to know. ... >>S:....It's the same now - I think the more we appreciate the importance of understanding just now, the more patience and acceptance there is of present dhammas, the less apprehension and anxiety there is. What do you think? > >R: I think that's a very useful analysis. To some extent I've experienced that - when I look at what's really happening it usually only involves 1/10 of what I'm concerned about. Most of it is speculation about the future - good to focus on that and realize that it's all mental proliferation for the most part. I agree that if we look to what's really happening now, that is very good therapy. :-) ... S: Yes, the only therapy for the insanity we all suffer from: the understanding of the reality now :-) Thanks for the discussion, Rob! Metta Sarah ======== #113227 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jan 26, 2011 2:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? sarahprocter... Dear Nina, Thankyou for the quick and helpful reference which I was thinking about: --- On Wed, 26/1/11, Nina van Gorkom wrote: >S: [As I recall, it cannot be from rupa or arupa-brahma realm to a > woeful plane immediately, but would need to check the details of > this again. ------- N:>Thus, after having been in an aruupa brahma plane, one may be reborn in a sensuous plane, but then one is reborn with alobha, adosa and pa~n~naa. ------- S: That's it - so there can be rebirth in a human realm (with 3 roots), for example, but not in any of the woeful planes. Metta Sarah ====== #113228 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Jan 26, 2011 2:28 am Subject: Satipatthana Sutta - Repulsiveness of the body jonoabb Hi Robert E (112991) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > ... > Are suttas actual by the way, or just concepts? > =============== J: ;-)) If we are talking about paramattha dhammas (also referred to in the suttas as the khandhas, dhatus (elements), ayatanas ('bases'), etc.), they do not include something called 'sutta'. At the time the suttas were delivered, the dhammas arising for the listeners were the same as those appearing for you and me now (seeing and visible object, hearing and sound, etc.), but those listeners were fortunate enough to be associating with the 'good friend' and hearing the teachings explained in a manner appropriate to their level of understanding (2 of the necessary conditions specified by the Buddha for developing the path). > =============== > > > [4] "Furthermore... just as if a sack with openings at both ends were full of various kinds of grain — wheat, rice, mung beans, kidney beans, sesame seeds, husked rice — and a man with good eyesight, pouring it out, were to reflect, 'This is wheat. This is rice. These are mung beans. These are kidney beans. These are sesame seeds. This is husked rice,' in the same way, monks, a monk reflects on this very body from the soles of the feet on up, from the crown of the head on down, surrounded by skin and full of various kinds of unclean things: 'In this body there are head hairs, body hairs, nails, teeth, skin, flesh, tendons, bones, bone marrow, kidneys, heart, liver, pleura, spleen, lungs, large intestines, small intestines, gorge, feces, bile, phlegm, pus, blood, sweat, fat, tears, skin-oil, saliva, mucus, fluid in the joints, urine.' > > > =============== > > > > J: The commentary to this passage (from the part on Reflection on the Repulsiveness of the Body) has the following: > > I wonder what you would think of the above passage without the commentary? > =============== J: Without the body of commentaries, my understanding of the suttas would be quite different, no doubt about that. But that doesn't resolve the matter. Because without the commentaries it would be impossible to reconcile all the different things said in the suttas, and there'd be no basis for coming to a view on their interpretation. > =============== I would also like to question a little more closely who wrote the commentaries? Is there any readily available info about the status of the commentaries, how they were adopted and when they were written? There are places in the commentaries where they veer quite widely away from the literal sense of the words. > =============== J: I'd agree that there are times when the commentary explanation is surprising on a first reading. But the commentaries are consistent throughout, and do not contradict the suttas in any respect. As regards the provenance of the commentaries, this has been discussed at length here before (no surprise there, I'm sure). I will check out some headings in Useful Posts if you're interested in further reading. > =============== > > "The following is the application of the simile: Like the bag with the two openings is the body made up of the four great primaries, earth, water, fire and air." > > > > The four great primaries (earth, water, fire and air) are rupas. So I see this passage as referring to awareness of dhammas. The meaning is that what we take for the body is, in terms of paramattha dhammas, nothing more than the 4 primary rupas. > > I am sorry but this seems very removed from what the Buddha said, and I don't see the justification for it. That is not what the sutta says, and it seems pretty clear that the commentators are taking the occasion of the sutta to bend its meaning to their own philosophy. There isn't the slightest indication in the sutta that this is what Buddha is driving at, when he says that like investigating the contents of a rice sack, one inventories the contents of the body and he talks about the actual physical contents, including all the organs and fluids. The point is obvious - he wants us to understand and contemplate the actual nature of the physical body rather than seeing it as a lovely, prettified person, but to see it as a mechanism with many unattractive and utilitarian features and functions. > =============== J: I see it somewhat differently ;-)) As with all kinds of samatha bhavana, the purpose of the contemplation is to reduce and eventually suppress (temporarily) the attachment that arises dependent on objects experienced through the sense doors. In the case of the parts of the body contemplation, what is normally taken as attractive is seen as lacking any attractiveness at all. The simile of the sack of grains, however, has nothing to do with the repulsiveness aspect. The point being illustrated is the impersonal nature of the different items, with each being independent of the others. This implies seeing rupas as rupas, rather than seeing parts of the body as parts of the body. > =============== To turn that into an analysis of the four great elements and paramatha dhammas with absolutely no regard for any of the content of the actual sutta, is not only ludicrous to me, but insulting to the Buddha. I'm sorry, but I don't think the commentator here is doing any justice to the Buddha's message, and I would really like to know who he is and when he wrote it. For the commentary to appear valid, it should at least have *something* to do with the words the Buddha spoke and not just say "well it's really about this." Otherwise it is just signing the Buddha's name to a completely different tract.Buddha didn't just say "the parts of the body," he listed them, so it was perfectly clear what the subject of his discussion was. > =============== J: This brings us back to the question of whether this part of the sutta is (a) specifying a practice of reflection on the repulsiveness of the body as being itself the development of insight, or (b) addressing monks who were already skilled in samatha with the parts of the body as object, and indicating there could be at the same time the reflection on the elements at the same time. Btw, elsewhere in the suttas the reflection on repulsiveness of the body is included in the list of samatha objects, so that would be consistent with the fact of something more being intended by the inclusion of this passage in the Satipatthana Sutta. Jon #113229 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Jan 26, 2011 2:38 am Subject: Satipatthana Sutta - Modes of Materiality jonoabb Hi Robert E (112991) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > ... > =============== For the commentary to appear valid, it should at least have *something* to do with the words the Buddha spoke and not just say "well it's really about this." Otherwise it is just signing the Buddha's name to a completely different tract. ... The Buddha was not such a bad communicator that he has to be completely reinterpreted in order to understand what he "really" meant. > =============== J: Agreed. It's not a question of the Buddha being a bad communicator, but of the rest of the world (apart from those who were ready to attain enlightenment) being an uninformed audience. > =============== > And since we do have an "actual sutta" to talk about, are we going to talk about the sutta at all, or only about the commentary and what it imputes to the sutta? > =============== J: We can indeed talk about the sutta itself, but to do so in any meaningful way without the assistance of the commentaries would require a good knowledge of the whole sutta pitaka and of the other pitakas as well. Even then it would inevitably come down to individual views held. What the commentaries provide is the received wisdom of the time on the detailed meaning of the teaching as given. > =============== > > J: As regards the reference to contemplating the body in the body, the commentary explains that 'in the body' means 'in the corporeal group' i.e., in rupa-khandha. > > Well it may very well be that "the body" is in "the corporeal group." That makes simple sense, doesn't it? But that doesn't mean that this is the level of understanding that the Buddha was aiming at. "The body in the body" and "the feelings in the feelings," etc. ,have had several different interpretations in different commentaries, and I'm not really sure what the final meaning is, but since the Buddha says "IN THIS WAY he remains focused internally on the body..." it clearly says that the listing and inventory that the Buddha has made is "the way" that the body is to be contemplated in this case. One can't ignore the words that are inconvenient or invent alternate meanings. We should try to pay heed to what the Buddha actually said, and the sense in the words. > =============== J: It depends in each case on how the simile given by the Buddha is to be understood. In the case of the parts of the body/repulsiveness, for example, the simile is explaining something well beyond the description of reflection of body parts/repulsiveness with which the section begins. > =============== > > > [5] "Furthermore... just as a skilled butcher or his apprentice, having killed a cow, would sit at a crossroads cutting it up into pieces, the monk contemplates this very body — however it stands, however it is disposed — in terms of properties: 'In this body there is the earth property, the liquid property, the fire property, & the wind property.' > > > =============== > > > > J: This part of the sutta (on Reflection on the Modes of Materiality (Elements, Dhatu)) begins with the words: > > > > "A bhikkhu reflects on just this body according as it is placed or disposed, by way of the mode of materiality, thinking thus: 'There are, in this body, the mode of solidity, the mode of cohesion, the mode of caloricity, and the mode of oscillation.' > > > > The terms "solidity", "cohesion", "caloricity" and "oscillation" are translations of the Pali terms for the 4 primary rupas. Again, the sutta is referring to awareness of dhammas. > > This section IS about the analysis of the four elements in the body, because *it says so.* I would note that the Buddha begins by saying "Furthermore...", which is to say that the previous passages were *not* about the 4 elements, a direct contradiction to what the commentary says about the laundry list of organs and fluids. > =============== J: Each of the 14 parts in the section on Contemplation of the Body except the first begins with the word "Furthermore" and ends with the sentence: "Thus also, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu lives contemplating the body in the body." So I take the 'Furthermore' to be indicating simply that there is more to come. > =============== > It seems very clear to me that the Buddha is moving through different contemplations and different levels, starting with the inventory of the organs and fluids, then contemplating the four elements, and so on. They are not all the same thing, they form a progression that allows the Buddha to make his case for how to build understanding from one contemplation to the next. We should pay attention to his plan, his program, his order, and his subject matter, not decide that every passage is not about what it says, but is all about a generalization about dhammas, over and over again. Otherwise it's not Buddhism - it's "overlay-your-own-philosophy-ism" and enjoy reading your own message in the Buddha's words. > =============== J: I don't think the idea of a progression works. It does not, for example, account for the breathing section being at the beginning or the Cemetery Contemplations being at the end. Jon #113230 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Jan 26, 2011 2:48 am Subject: Satipatthana Sutta - Reflection on corpses jonoabb Hi Robert E (112991) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > ... > > > > =============== > > > [6] "Furthermore, as if he were to see a corpse cast away in a charnel ground — one day, two days, three days dead — bloated, livid, & festering, he applies it to this very body, 'This body, too: Such is its nature, such is its future, such its unavoidable fate'... > > > =============== > > > > J: The commentary to this passage gives the following: > > > > "This has been stated: By the existence of these three: life [ayu], warmth [usma], consciousness [viññanam], this body can endure to stand, to walk, and do other things; by the separation of these three however this body is indeed a thing like that corpse, is possessed of the nature of corruption, is going to become like that, will become swollen, blue and festering and cannot escape the state of being like that, cannot transcend the condition of swelling up, become blue and festering." > > > > To my reading, the terms life [ayu], warmth [usma], consciousness [viññanam], are references to dhammas. > > Well you can translate as you wish, and the commentators can too. It seems to me that here the commentator echoes the Buddha in his own preferred language. However, there is no doubt about the Buddha's point: we are to give up the illusion of immortality which we all adopt to enjoy our lives, and see that our body is impermanent and corruptible and that it will enjoy the same fate as a corpse. By contemplating this, not casually, but seriously, we take away the illusion of sameness, solidity and incorruptibility of the body and self. > =============== J: If you read these sections as simply a disquisition on the mortality of beings, I think you are doing the Buddha an injustice ;-)). His message was much more profound than that. > =============== I am not going to give up the Buddha's message for one that is more abstract and philosophical, however meaningful it may be for one who is as advanced as the commentator, and who can sit back and dissect the Buddha's words into more precise sub-categories. That was not the Buddha's intent, and so it is not mine either. > =============== J: The question of just what *is* the Buddha's message is one we are all engaged in. The problem is that the suttas were pretty much geared to persons of far greater understanding that we have, so the true message is not readily apparent to us. > =============== > > J: Are you saying that before the Buddha's enlightenment nobody had realised the inevitability of death and the dissolution of the body (the 'long arc of our fate')? > > > > I think there must be more to it than this. > > I really love this argument whenever it arises, that to be a valid philosophy or a useful path, that it has to be something that no one has ever thought of before. I am sorry to say that even the idea of momentary arising and falling phenomena was known to Hindu philosophy for centuries prior to Buddhism. None of it, in and of itself, is original, I think, except for the specific ideas of anatta and the path out of suffering. What is most original to Buddha are his specific methods for developing insight and panna, particularly his meditation methods. :-) > =============== J: You seem to be suggesting that insight and panna were known before the Buddha's time, but not the specific methods (i.e., meditation methods) taught by the Buddha. This is not the case. In the suttas it is stated that the Four Noble Truths were newly discovered by the Buddha -- see the Buddha's first sermon (the Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta, SN 56:011) and the various 'Gradual Teaching' (ānupubbī-kathā) passages as quoted by Nina recently. I also understand that the teaching on dhammas and their characteristics is unique to the Buddha. The teaching on the Four Noble Truths includes the teaching on satipatthana and dependent origination. > =============== > > In any case, the way that he instructed people to contemplate their lives was uniquely designed to confront them with the illusions we construct through rationalization and conceptualization of life - but starting with the level of the feeling of immortality, sameness, identity and other factors that are conventional, as well as the more philosophical analysis of the breakdown of absolute reality. The latter is for those who are ready for a refined analysis. Those who are still living life as interested persons, as committed worldlings, need a message that is closer to home, and they did get it. It's been written down in sutta, and the Buddha apparently thought it was a significant message or he would have said "don't waste your time inventorying the kidneys and the bile and phlegm. When you taste the phlegm and feel the bile, and when someone punches you in the kidney, those are all mere conceptual constructs. Instead let's talk about the rupas of movement and hardness that are really taking place, because that is where enlightenment lies. Strangely, in most suttas he didn't say that, but talked about the realities of life for worldlings. The more consistent microscopic analysis is saved for the Abhidhamma. > =============== J: I think you'll find that in most if not all suttas the teaching went beyond what you call the realities of life for worldlings. In some, the reference to dhammas/the teaching at the level of satipatthana is a somewhat oblique one, but that would be because that was all the then listeners required in order to 'get it'. > =============== > > J: If there is not first the correct intellectual basis there will never be the direct discernment of dhammas by panna. > > If, as you think, there are really separate worlds of dhammas and concepts and the two never meet, you may be right that we must have an understanding that leads us to ignore the things we perceive in everyday life in order to wait for a different universe to appear. > =============== J: Nobody is suggesting that things perceived in everyday life should be ignored. A real straw man, that one ;-)) Jon #113231 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jan 26, 2011 12:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: pain upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Alex) - In a message dated 1/25/2011 8:21:36 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Alex, --- <. . .> > A: The contemplations do help to restrain emotions and I do them daily. --- KH: I would rather you said you *studied* or *read about* the contemplations daily. To say you *do* them implies some sort of control. Right contemplation involves panna, which is a cetasika that arises rarely, and only under very limited conditions. There is no control. :-) ----------------------------------------------------- Alex doesn't read about contemplations but engages in them! The contemplating occurs, but it is Alex's, or, more precisely, what we call "Alex's," and neither yours nor mine. That helpful contemplating occurs as a result, among other things, of decision procedures (of Alex's, not yours or mine) involving thinking and volition (of his, not yours or mine), and that is what normal people call "Alex deciding to contemplate," and the resultant willed contemplating (of his, not yours or mine) is referred to by native speakers of English as "being done by Alex." Also, while you and I for sure commiserate with Alex and dearly hope for the lessening of his pain, the pain is his, and neither yours nor mine. In that sense, it is quite personal. John Donne wrote that no man is an island, and while I believe, as do most mystically inclined folks, that phenomena and beings are interrelated and inseparable, distinctions, though matters of convention, are not pure fiction cut from whole cloth. ----------------------------------------------------- Ken H ================================ With metta, Howard P. S. You write "There is no control," Ken. Happily, you are wrong. Alex can choose to take some medication to reduce the extent of his pain (and that's his pain, not yours or mine), and he can do (and does do) daily contemplations, engaging in helpful thinking and recollections to assuage his suffering from the pain. That is exercising a degree of control. And thank God for that! Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #113232 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jan 26, 2011 12:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: pain upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 1/25/2011 8:38:27 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hi KenH, all, > KH: I would rather you said you *studied* or *read about* the contemplations daily. To say you *do* them implies some sort of control. > > Right contemplation involves panna, which is a cetasika that arises rarely, and only under very limited conditions. There is no control. :-) > > Ken H OK, I can say. I "study" the present moment, and the proper way to relate to it. Meditators study their meditation subject... Of course there is no control. But events do occur. With metta, Alex =================================== Alex, I must commend you! You are one of the most mild and calm and peace-loving of folks I know! If I wore a hat, it would be off for you. :-) With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #113233 From: Vince Date: Wed Jan 26, 2011 7:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sotapanna cerovzt@... Dear Nina you wrote: > N: He still has ignorance. Wrong view is not the same as ignorance. > Ignorance arises with each kind of akusala. He still has akusala > cittas and thus ignorance. But he has no wrong view about them, he > does not take anger for 'my anger'. oh, ok.. If I understand you right, the problem would be of attachment due to these kinds of akusala. Then the sotapanna would be not aware of what happens in the present moment despite having knowledge of the nature of phenomena. So it seems to be much more a problem of old habits and trends, and in that case the growing of understanding is what causes detachment. Can we understand "detachment" as the result of a citta in company of panna?. Any detachment experience would be that action in different degrees, even when the result is not nibbana? > N: The sotaapanna has moments of ignorance, the arahat does not. As I > said, wrong view is different from ignorance. Wrong view arises with > cittas rooted in lobha, attachment. Ignorance arises with all akusala > cittas. The sotaapanna has eradicated the types of cittas rooted in > lobha that are accompanied by wrong view, but he still has the other > types of cittas rooted in lobha that are not accompanied by wrong > view. He clings to beautiful things and only the non-returner (third > stage of enlightenment) has eradicated clinging to sense objects. But > he still clings to jhaana. ok. What you says is very clarifying. So the wrong view depends closely from non-eradicated fetters, from attachments. While Ignorance depends of not knowing the nature of phenomena. Therefore, in the case of a sotapanna, the problem would be the attachment causing a manifestation of ignorance, despite the ignorance was eradicated. So it can be as those people who lose one arm or one leg, although in the first days they feel the member still is present despite they know the surgery has been made. I think that our deluded knowledge also is knowledge at all and it also works to calm our anguish. I wonder if the attachment is not just towards a type of knowledge (truth/false) but to an old way to escape of our constant dukhha. > The akusala does not have the intensity of very bad kamma like killing that > could give as result an unhappy rebirth. We should ask ourselves: what is the > relationship between being without wrong view of self and not being able to > perform very bad kamma. If someone has learnt to see citta, cetasika and > ruupa as just impersonal elements, arising because of conditions, he will be > less overcome by intense dosa. He will not be inclined to think: that bad > person did this to me and now I will kill him. After all, he has > thoroughly understood that there are no persons, no he or me. That > radically changes one's life. Events and his reactions towards them > cannot be the same as before. This does not mean that he cannot have > aversion or fear, but not so intense as when he was a common person. ok, I understand. > When there are conditions for pa~n~naa it arises and it can arise in whatever > situation, even when he is in a crowd of people, or in very difficult > situations. The arising of pa~n~naa is not dependent on the situation he is > in, but it depends on his accumulations, that is, former arisings of > pa~n~naa. How to identify these conditions?. What impedes panna?. I wonder how attachment impedes the arising of panna, even we are looking for kusala or we are Dhamma focused. Please, Can you explain where is the exact connection between panna and detachment in the present moment?. I believe my doubts are finally condensed in this last question. Hope it will be my last question in the thread. Thanks to clarify all these things, it has been very helpful! :) best, Vince. #113234 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Jan 26, 2011 8:13 am Subject: Re: What are 5 sense faculties (pasada-rupa)? + momentariness truth_aerator Dear Nina, >A: 1)5 sense faculties are classified as rupa. Right? > ------- >N: Yes, they do not know anything, but they are the conditions for >experiencing sense objects. They are the doorways for the whole >sense->door-process of cittas, and, for the sense-cognitions of seeing >etc. they are both doorway and physical base, place of origin. Would it be correct to say that these conditions (for experiencing sense objects) arise and fall instantaneously (and perhaps billions of times per second?) Thank you for your other replies, With metta, Alex #113235 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Jan 26, 2011 1:39 pm Subject: Re: notes from Bangkok with A.Sujin 3b epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob E, > Op 25-jan-2011, om 0:12 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > > > The Commentary to the `Abhidhammattha Sangaha' (T.A. p 64) mentions > > > that calm of cetasikas also conditions bodily phenomena: > > tranquillity, etc., of consciousness brings about a state of > > > tranquillity, etc., of only consciousness, but tranquillity of the > > > body brings about these states of the material body also by > > virtue of > > > pervading the refined materiality arising from it; in order to make > > > this point as well, their twofold nature is stated.> > > > > Hm...I would like to know a little more about the "refined > > materiality" of the body. I'm not sure what that means, but it > > sounds like it is referring to rupas that are on the energetic- > > breath level of physical sensation/experience - just a wild guess. :-) > ------ > N: but tranquility of the > > body brings about these states of the material body also by virtue of > > pervading the refined materiality arising from it.. > > Calm is also a condition for ruupas of the body, it influences > ruupas. We read this also in the suttas, where it is asked; you look > so serene, what is the cause? These are subtle changes, and perhaps > that is why 'refined materiality 'is used. Kusala conditions an > outward appearance different from anger. > > --------- > > > N: The Tiika explains that tranquilizing (passambhana.m) means the > > > calming of anxiety. > > > > Well I like this - however you define kaya, it's clear enough that > > there is a mind-state/body-state connection and that when mental- > > emotional anxiety is quelled, the physical body-experience will > > also become more calm. So in that sense I may better understand the > > approach to the "body" as being the mental-emotional body, and > > including the physical by extension. > ------- > N: I am not so inclined to use mental-emotional body. Sometimes body > refers to cetasikas, naamas, sometimes to ruupas and this depends on > the context. > ------------- Okay; however it seemed in this case that the commentary wanted to identify it as mental and emotional kaya rather than material body. It just seemed out of context to me, since calming of consciousness is also mentioned separately. But I'm glad that you think it will vary with context; that leaves some flexibility for what is being interpreted in a particular case. > > R: It seems that if kaya is mentioned and it literally means body, > > to see it as collection of khandas that does *not* include rupa and > > body -experience seems kind of weird to me, which suggests perhaps > > an omission or misinterpretation. Which is why I wonder if there is > > any alternative interpretation anywhere else. > ------ > N: It is not an omission. As said, it depends on the context. I would > like to repeat what I mentioned before. Sometimes there seems to be a > contradiction, but it is a matter of different aspects from where a > certain subject is viewed. Well, I guess my question would be whether the commentators are seen as infallible themselves; or whether there is sometimes more than one view or interpretation of a sutta that can be referred to. The commentators are a lot smarter than me, but I sometimes see what seems to be an agenda going into the interpretation when it is far off from the literal meaning of the sutta. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #113236 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Jan 26, 2011 1:45 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Discussions in Bangkok with K.Sujin, Jan 2011(6) epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > >>S:....It's the same now - I think the more we appreciate the importance of understanding just now, the more patience and acceptance there is of present dhammas, the less apprehension and anxiety there is. What do you think? > > > >R: I think that's a very useful analysis. To some extent I've experienced that - when I look at what's really happening it usually only involves 1/10 of what I'm concerned about. Most of it is speculation about the future - good to focus on that and realize that it's all mental proliferation for the most part. I agree that if we look to what's really happening now, that is very good therapy. :-) > ... > S: Yes, the only therapy for the insanity we all suffer from: the understanding of the reality now :-) > > Thanks for the discussion, Rob! Thanks, that was a very helpful exchange, and very enjoyable. Now if you can just get Jon to cooperate with me - our point-for-point debate is giving me a tummy ache... ;-) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #113237 From: "Ken H" Date: Wed Jan 26, 2011 2:05 pm Subject: Re: pain kenhowardau Hi Howard and Alex, ---- <. . .> >> KH: I would rather you said you *studied* or *read about* the contemplations daily. To say you *do* them implies some sort of control. >> >> Right contemplation involves panna, which is a cetasika that arises rarely, and only under very limited conditions. There is no control. :-) >> > H: Alex doesn't read about contemplations but engages in them! ---- KH: I think Alex was referring to certain contemplations specifically listed in the texts. In that case there *would* be some reading involved. Whether Alex, or any of us, actually *engages* in those contemplations is another matter. It would require right understanding of what had been read. Without that right understanding, we would be engaging in entirely different contemplations. ------------ > H: The contemplating occurs, but it is Alex's, or, more precisely, what we call "Alex's," and neither yours nor mine. ------------ KK: I think you are referring to what I wrote above (about contemplation being ultimately just a conditioned dhamma). But I can't agree that conditioned dhammas could be anyone's property in any way. I think the whole idea of Dhamma study is to see them as just "rolling on" - totally independent of a possessor or a controller. While we are on the subject, I can't agree that to say "what we call Alex's" would be any more precise than to simply say "Alex's." Whichever way we say it, there is ultimately no Alex; there is no anyone. There are only dhammas. There is no way around it. :-) --------------------------------------- > H: That helpful contemplating occurs as a result, among other things, of decision procedures (of Alex's, not yours or mine) involving thinking and volition (of his, not yours or mine), and that is what normal people call "Alex deciding to contemplate," and the resultant willed contemplating (of his, not yours or mine) is referred to by native speakers of English as "being done by Alex." --------------------------------------- KH: Irrespective of what normal people might say, the fact remains that dhammas simply roll on. They are no one's property. ---------------------- > H: Also, while you and I for sure commiserate with Alex and dearly hope for the lessening of his pain, the pain is his, and neither yours nor mine. In that sense, it is quite personal. ---------------------- KH: Can we agree that the pain is ultimately not anyone's? And, if we can, shouldn't we leave at that? What useful purpose could be served by adding riders about 'his' 'your' 'my' pain? ---------------------------- > H: John Donne wrote that no man is an island, and while I believe, as do most mystically inclined folks, that phenomena and beings are interrelated and inseparable, distinctions, though matters of convention, are not pure fiction cut from whole cloth. ---------------------------- KH: Whatever we say, there *are* dhammas and there are *only* dhammas. Dhamma exist, function and cease without ever being anyone's property. Ken H #113238 From: "Ken H" Date: Wed Jan 26, 2011 3:08 pm Subject: Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? kenhowardau Hi Sarah and pt, It is hard to get anything into my head, but once it is in there it is even harder to get it out! ---------- <. . .> >>> KH: I had the idea that the fine non-material sphere was inhabited by jhana masters who simply blissed-out on jhana meditation for several aeons before being eventually reborn in the lower realms. >>> > S: You've mentioned this before, suggesting that there is just the arising of jhana cittas experiencing a kasina (or other meditation object) "for billions of years" without there ever being any consciousness of the jhana cittas or cetasikas or anything else. I don't think this is correct. There can be other kinds of cittas, even akusala cittas in between the sets of jhana cittas. ---------- Yes, I have mentioned it before. And I can remember now that you have tried to put me straight on at least one occasion. Maybe this time it will sink in. It makes sense (what you say). I can imagine a sublime-sphere inhabitant coming out of his absorption and thinking [unwholesomely] "This must be nibbana!" and then going back into absorption for another aeon or so. :-) -------------------------- >> pt: I'm not sure either, I think fine-material brahmas (reborn as a result of first four form-jhanas) can do all the things that other lower beings can, but they only have three senses - mind, eye and ear, so no taste, touch and smell. Non-material brahmas on the other hand (reborn as a result of four formless jhanas) have no senses, save the mind sense (and non-percipient brahmas don't have the mind-sense either). >> >S: Yes. Even the non-material brahmas can have other kinds of kusala cittas arise, possibly even some lokuttara cittas, also vipaka cittas, such as bhavanga cittas, akusala cittas of lobha and moha (but not dosa, as I recall), kiriya cittas. --------------------------- KH: You're just a couple of know-it-alls. :-) ------------------ >>> KH: To answer your question, however, I would say that the inhabitants of the non-material sphere could not practise insight because they could not hear the Dhamma there. Hearing depends on material phenomena. >>> >> pt: Not sure either. I think only non-material brahmas can't hear Dhamma teachings because they don't have eyes and ears. Though I'm not sure. Wouldn't they posses divine eye and divine ear? I mean, are divine eye/ear a part of the mind-sense or eye- and ear-sense? >> >S: Also, if already sotapannas, insight can continue to develop and as you say, they may be able to 'hear' and 'see' using jhanic powers, not requiring senses. ------------------ KH: Leaving aside sotapannas, what about the Buddha's (or the Bodhisatta's) two jhana teachers? After his enlightenment he regretted the fact that they had both gone to their respective spheres – where he couldn't teach them the Dhamma. (?) --------------------------------- >>> KH: I don't believe their existence would be anything like deep sleep. It would be blissful concentration. >>> >> pt: Hm, isn't bliss their vipaka so to speak? I mean, it's not like every single citta in their life would be a jhana citta? I assume they would still have a/kusala javanas, and still have cetana, thus committing acts, thus generating kamma, which would mean, they are not in jhanic concentration their whole life... Don't know. >> > S: Yes, I agree with Pt here. -------------------------------- KH: I am glad we are having this conversation. I might even be learning something! --------------- > S: And at the end of their lives, it'll depend on previous kamma (from a previous life of that life) as to where rebirth will take place. [As I recall, it cannot be from rupa or arupa-brahma realm to a woeful plane immediately, but would need to check the details of this again. In any case, not important!] Thinking, speculating with curiosity? What's the citta now? ------------- That's a good way of ending any conversation. DSG's equivalent of Amen. :-) Ken H #113239 From: "Ken H" Date: Wed Jan 26, 2011 3:22 pm Subject: Re: pain kenhowardau Hi Howard, I missed your postscript. ---- > H: P. S. You write "There is no control," Ken. Happily, you are wrong. Alex can choose to take some medication to reduce the extent of his pain (and that's his pain, not yours or mine), and he can do (and does do) daily contemplations, engaging in helpful thinking and recollections to assuage his suffering from the pain. That is exercising a degree of control. And thank God for that! ---- KH: No, I was not wrong on that occasion. The fact that dhammas are not self means there can be no control over them. That doesn't mean that we can't control what we do in the world. It means there is no "we" in the world to control anything. Ken H #113240 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jan 26, 2011 11:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: pain upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 1/26/2011 5:05:18 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard and Alex, ---- <. . .> >> KH: I would rather you said you *studied* or *read about* the contemplations daily. To say you *do* them implies some sort of control. >> >> Right contemplation involves panna, which is a cetasika that arises rarely, and only under very limited conditions. There is no control. :-) >> > H: Alex doesn't read about contemplations but engages in them! ---- KH: I think Alex was referring to certain contemplations specifically listed in the texts. In that case there *would* be some reading involved. Whether Alex, or any of us, actually *engages* in those contemplations is another matter. It would require right understanding of what had been read. Without that right understanding, we would be engaging in entirely different contemplations. ------------ > H: The contemplating occurs, but it is Alex's, or, more precisely, what we call "Alex's," and neither yours nor mine. ------------ KK: I think you are referring to what I wrote above (about contemplation being ultimately just a conditioned dhamma). But I can't agree that conditioned dhammas could be anyone's property in any way. ------------------------------------------------------------------- We are able to distinguish among people, because the namas and rupas hang together in distinguishable groups. I don't scratch my head when you have an itch. (I only scratch my head when I am amazed at what you say! ;-)) ------------------------------------------------------------------ I think the whole idea of Dhamma study is to see them as just "rolling on" - totally independent of a possessor or a controller. ---------------------------------------------------------------- There are no controllers, but willing and willed phenomena occur within integrated groups called beings. --------------------------------------------------------------- While we are on the subject, I can't agree that to say "what we call Alex's" would be any more precise than to simply say "Alex's." Whichever way we say it, there is ultimately no Alex; there is no anyone. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Yet you don't eat when Alex is hungry. So, your analysis is too simple. ------------------------------------------------------------- There are only dhammas. There is no way around it. :-) -------------------------------------------------------------- But there is more to say about them pertaining to their co-occurring and interrelationships. Dhammas are not just things; they are things-in-relation. ------------------------------------------------------------ --------------------------------------- > H: That helpful contemplating occurs as a result, among other things, of decision procedures (of Alex's, not yours or mine) involving thinking and volition (of his, not yours or mine), and that is what normal people call "Alex deciding to contemplate," and the resultant willed contemplating (of his, not yours or mine) is referred to by native speakers of English as "being done by Alex." --------------------------------------- KH: Irrespective of what normal people might say, the fact remains that dhammas simply roll on. They are no one's property. ------------------------------------------------------------ You're just repeating an assertion. There is more to it! ------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------- > H: Also, while you and I for sure commiserate with Alex and dearly hope for the lessening of his pain, the pain is his, and neither yours nor mine. In that sense, it is quite personal. ---------------------- KH: Can we agree that the pain is ultimately not anyone's? ----------------------------------------------------------------- No, we cannot. (And who is this "we"?) ------------------------------------------------------------------ And, if we can, shouldn't we leave at that? What useful purpose could be served by adding riders about 'his' 'your' 'my' pain? ---------------------------- > H: John Donne wrote that no man is an island, and while I believe, as do most mystically inclined folks, that phenomena and beings are interrelated and inseparable, distinctions, though matters of convention, are not pure fiction cut from whole cloth. ---------------------------- KH: Whatever we say, there *are* dhammas and there are *only* dhammas. Dhamma exist, function and cease without ever being anyone's property. ----------------------------------------------------------- And they interrelate!!!! ------------------------------------------------------------ Ken H =============================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #113241 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed Jan 26, 2011 1:15 pm Subject: Unique is Awareness by Breathing! bhikkhu5 Friends: Awareness by Breathing is a Unique Thing! Once in Savatthi the Blessed Buddha said this: "Bhikkhus, there is one unique thing, which when trained and cultivated, is of great fruit and great advantage. What is that one unique thing? It is Awareness by Breathing ( Ânâpânasati)! And how, Bhikkhus, is this Awareness by Breathing trained, developed, cultivated and refined so that it is of really great fruit and of immense long-term advantage? Bhikkhus, when a Bhikkhu, who have gone to the forest, or to the root of a tree, or to an empty hut, then he sits down cross-legged, having straightened his body and back, and set up awareness around the nostrils, then just plain aware of only that itself, he breathes in, and then just solely aware of only that breathing itself, he breathes out... 1: Breathing in long, he knows, notes and understands: I inhale long! Breathing out long, he knows, notes and understands: I exhale long! 2: Breathing in short, he knows, notes and understands: I inhale short! Breathing out short, he knows, notes and understands: I exhale short! 3: He trains thus: Experiencing the entire body, I will breathe in-&-out! 4: Calming all bodily activity, I will breathe in-&-out! 5: Experiencing enraptured joy, I will breathe in-&-out! 6: Experiencing a happy pleasure, I will breathe in-&-out! 7: Experiencing all mental activity, I will breathe in-&-out! 8: Calming all mental activity, I will breathe in-&-out! 9: Experiencing the present mood, I will breathe in-&-out! 10: Elating and satisfying the mind, I will breathe in-&-out! 11: Concentrating and focusing mind, I will breathe in-&-out! 12: Releasing, and liberating the mind, I will breathe in-&-out! 13: Contemplating impermanence, I will breathe in-&-out! 14: Contemplating disillusion, I will breathe in-&-out! 15: Contemplating ceasing, I will breathe in-&-out! 16: He trains thus: Contemplating relinquishment, I will breathe in-&-out! It is, Bhikkhus, when Awareness by Breathing is trained, developed and refined in exactly this way, that it is of great fruit and advantage!" Comments: These 16 steps should be memorized fully. Print out and bring to pillow! Breath meditation produces both calm (Samatha ) and insight (Vipassanâ ) by stilling the bursts of distractions, which obstructs all plans of thinking. It is capable of inducing all the four levels of mental absorption (Jhâna ). Continuous awareness can be established by this technique, which has no adverse side-effects, is simple yet profound, and especially well suited for those plagued by stress, agitation, restlessness, worries, speculation, anxiety, fear, hesitation, doubts, uncertainty and confusion. Nobody!, who have trained this technique, have ever regretted it! Most just smiles silently... ;-), not without reason, like the Buddha image illustrated below! <...> Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikâya. [V:311] section 54: Ânâpânasamyutta. Thread 1: A Unique Thing! Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samâhita _/\_ * <...> #113242 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jan 27, 2011 5:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: notes from Bangkok with A.Sujin 3b nilovg Dear Rob E, Op 26-jan-2011, om 22:39 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > N: It is not an omission. As said, it depends on the context. I would > > like to repeat what I mentioned before. Sometimes there seems to > be a > > contradiction, but it is a matter of different aspects from where a > > certain subject is viewed. > > Well, I guess my question would be whether the commentators are > seen as infallible themselves; or whether there is sometimes more > than one view or interpretation of a sutta that can be referred to. ----- N: When that was the case Buddhaghosa was very careful and mentioned that. "Some (keci) say" or the old teachers (porana) say..." He just edited much older material he found. Old commentaries that were rehearsed at the Councils but since then lost. Buddhaghosa also mentioned when something was his personal opinion. This did not happen very often, he mainly edited what he found. ------- > R: The commentators are a lot smarter than me, but I sometimes see > what seems to be an agenda going into the interpretation when it is > far off from the literal meaning of the sutta. ------ N: Sutta reading is difficult although it may seem simple. Commentaries help. Also interesting to compare subcommentaries, like those of Dhammapala who lived at about the same time as Buddhaghosa. Do you have any example of sutta and commentary you find a problem? Perhaps it can be solved. There is another point, we are dependent on translations and these differ. Best to compare several translations, not just using only one, like access to insight. ------- Nina. #113243 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jan 27, 2011 6:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What are 5 sense faculties (pasada-rupa)? + momentariness nilovg Dear Alex, Op 26-jan-2011, om 17:13 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > N: Yes, they do not know anything, but they are the conditions for > >experiencing sense objects. They are the doorways for the whole > >sense->door-process of cittas, and, for the sense-cognitions of > seeing >etc. they are both doorway and physical base, place of origin. > > Would it be correct to say that these conditions (for experiencing > sense objects) arise and fall instantaneously (and perhaps billions > of times per second?) ----- N: Yes. But ruupa does not fall away as rapidly as citta, although it is still extremely fast. A sense object can be the object of cittas arising in a sense-door process, and the ruupa that is doorway can be doorway of cittas arising in a sense-door process. ----- Nina. #113244 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jan 27, 2011 2:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What are 5 sense faculties (pasada-rupa)? + momentariness upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 1/27/2011 9:44:36 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: Dear Alex, Op 26-jan-2011, om 17:13 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > N: Yes, they do not know anything, but they are the conditions for > >experiencing sense objects. They are the doorways for the whole > >sense->door-process of cittas, and, for the sense-cognitions of > seeing >etc. they are both doorway and physical base, place of origin. > > Would it be correct to say that these conditions (for experiencing > sense objects) arise and fall instantaneously (and perhaps billions > of times per second?) ----- N: Yes. But ruupa does not fall away as rapidly as citta, although it is still extremely fast. ------------------------------------------------ A rupa is extremely fast as compared to what? The duration of macroscopic, conceptual objects like cars, trees, and park benches? (If that is what you mean, it makes sense to me.) ------------------------------------------------ A sense object can be the object of cittas arising in a sense-door process, and the ruupa that is doorway can be doorway of cittas arising in a sense-door process. ----- Nina. ================================= With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #113245 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Jan 27, 2011 9:05 am Subject: Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Reflection on corpses truth_aerator Hi Jon, RobertE, all, What do we do when the suttas clearly talk about contemplations that would be considered "conceptual" ? Should we ignore those kinds of contemplations? If so, why? For me, the gross type of contemplation outlined in Satipatthana and MN28 regarding gross impermanence of the Body (especially compared to Earth that lasts billions of years) seem to be more effective than about rupas that arise, age, and die billion of times per second. I can definitely see the drawbacks of attaching to the body that can be healthy and young today but old and sick tomorrow... But regarding radical impermanence, I don't see how it can really affect the person causing dispassion and fading away of lust. IMHO the impermanence (anicca) doesn't seem to be what later became called "momentariness" (khanikavada). Latter doesn't seem to bring the same amount of dispassion as the former. And ultimately what the contemplations should do is to grow more and more dispassion and revulsion causing the fetters to fade away. ""And what is the earth property? The earth property can be either internal or external. Which is the internal earth property? Whatever internal, within oneself, is hard, solid, & sustained [by craving]: head hairs, body hairs, nails, teeth, skin, flesh, tendons, bones, bone marrow, kidneys, heart, liver, pleura, spleen, lungs, large intestines, small intestines, contents of the stomach, feces, or whatever else internal, within oneself, is hard, solid, & sustained: This is called the internal earth property. Now both the internal earth property and the external earth property are simply earth property. And that should be seen as it actually is with right discernment: 'This is not mine, this is not me, this is not my self.' When one sees it thus as it actually is with right discernment, one becomes disenchanted with the earth property and makes the mind dispassionate toward the earth property. "Now there comes a time, friends, when the external liquid property is provoked,[2] and at that time the external earth property vanishes. So when even in the external earth property — so vast — inconstancy will be discerned, destructibility will be discerned, a tendency to decay will be discerned, changeability will be discerned, then what in this short-lasting body, sustained by clinging, is 'I' or 'mine' or 'what I am'? It has here only a 'no.'"... "And what is the liquid property? The liquid property may be either internal or external. What is the internal liquid property? Whatever internal, belonging to oneself, is liquid, watery, & sustained: bile, phlegm, pus, blood, sweat, fat, tears, skin-oil, saliva, mucus, fluid in the joints, urine, or whatever else internal, within oneself, is liquid, watery, & sustained: This is called the internal liquid property. Now both the internal liquid property and the external liquid property are simply liquid property. And that should be seen as it actually is present with right discernment: 'This is not mine, this is not me, this is not my self.' When one sees it thus as it actually is present with right discernment, one becomes disenchanted with the liquid property and makes the mind dispassionate toward the liquid property. "Now there comes a time, friends, when the external liquid property is provoked and washes away village, town, city, district, & country. There comes a time when the water in the great ocean drops down one hundred leagues, two hundred... three hundred... four hundred... five hundred... six hundred... seven hundred leagues. There comes a time when the water in the great ocean stands seven palm-trees deep, six... five... four... three... two palm-trees deep, one palm-tree deep. There comes a time when the water in the great ocean stands seven fathoms deep, six... five... four... three... two fathoms deep, one fathom deep. There comes a time when the water in the great ocean stands half a fathom deep, hip-deep, knee-deep, ankle deep. There comes a time when the water in the great ocean is not even the depth of the first joint of a finger. "So when even in the external liquid property — so vast — inconstancy will be discerned, destructibility will be discerned, a tendency to decay will be discerned, changeability will be discerned, then what in this short-lasting body, sustained by clinging, is 'I' or 'mine' or 'what I am'? It has here only a 'no.'... http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.028.than.html Any ideas? With metta, Alex #113246 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Thu Jan 27, 2011 4:09 pm Subject: The Lamp! bhikkhu5 Friends: Having Free Choice of Emotional Response? Bhikkhus, the concentration gained by Awareness by Breathing, when developed and cultivated, is of great fruit & advantage. And how, Bhikkhus, is concentration by Awareness by Breathing developed & cultivated so that it is of great fruit & advantage? Bhikkhus, when a Bhikkhu, who have gone to the forest, or to the root of a tree, or to an empty hut, there he sits down cross-legged, having straightened his body and back, & set up awareness around the nostrils, then just plain aware of that itself he breathes in, and then just solely aware of only that breathing itself he breathes out... 1: Breathing in long, he knows, notes & understands: I inhale long! Breathing out long, he knows, notes & understands: I exhale long! ... ... ... ( steps 2-15) 16: He trains thus: Contemplating relinquishment, I will breathe in! He trains thus: Contemplating relinquishment, I will breathe out! It is, Bhikkhus, when Awareness by Breathing is trained, developed & refined in exactly this way that it is of great fruit & advantage! I too, Bhikkhus, before my enlightenment, while still a Bodhisatta , generally dwelt in this dwelling. Then neither did my body, nor did my eyes became tired & my mind, by not clinging, was freed from the mental fermentations ... Therefore, Bhikkhus, if a Bhikkhu wishes: May neither my body nor my eyes become tired & may my mind, by not clinging, become freed from the mental fermentations , this same concentration won by Awareness by Breathing should be closely attended to. Therefore, Bhikkhus, if a Bhikkhu wishes: May all the memories and motivations of the household life be left all behind by me, then this same concentration by Awareness by Breathing should be frequently trained and enthusiastically attended to. Therefore, Bhikkhus, if a Bhikkhu should come to wish: May I perceive only disgust in what is attractive & tempting... or May I perceive only beauty in what is repulsive & disgusting... or May I dwell unaffected in equanimity & quite aloof of both the attractive & the repulsive, just aware & clearly comprehending... then this same concentration by Awareness by Breathing should be cultivated often and devoted much wholehearted attention! <...> Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikâya. [V:316-7] section 54: Ânâpânasamyutta. Thread 8: The simile of the Lamp! The Lamp! Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samâhita _/\_ * <...> #113247 From: "Ken H" Date: Thu Jan 27, 2011 8:02 pm Subject: Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Reflection on corpses kenhowardau Hi Alex (Jon and Robert E), Jumping in if I may: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hi Jon, RobertE, all, > > >What do we do when the suttas clearly talk about contemplations that would be considered "conceptual" ? --------------- KH: In my opinion, the first thing we should do is to remember that no conceptual thing actually exists. In our conditioned world there is nothing that lasts for more than one moment of nama or rupa. ---------------------- > A: Should we ignore those kinds of contemplations? If so, why? ---------------------- KH: It is not a matter of should, or should we not, do anything. It is a matter of right understanding. ------------------------------ > A: For me, the gross type of contemplation outlined in Satipatthana and MN28 regarding gross impermanence of the Body (especially compared to Earth that lasts billions of years) seem to be more effective than about rupas that arise, age, and die billion of times per second. ----------------------------- KH: I can't help you there. For as long as you insist on seeing the Satipatthana Sutta as a conventional teaching, we will always be talking about two different things. ---------------------- > A: I can definitely see the drawbacks of attaching to the body that can be healthy and young today but old and sick tomorrow... ---------------------- KH: Can you? I think most people like to enjoy the good times (youth, health etc.) while they can. And good luck to them too! I wouldn't want to see young people dwelling on the evils of sensual pleasure. Let them have their fun. ------------------------- >A: But regarding radical impermanence, I don't see how it can really affect the person causing dispassion and fading away of lust. ------------------------- KH: But it does, doesn't it? According to the Dhamma, right understanding of conditioned dhammas is the way that leads to the permanent cessation of suffering. Many of us here swear that our right understanding of conditioned dhammas (however slight it may be) is the best thing that ever happened to us. ----------------------------------- > A: IMHO the impermanence (anicca) doesn't seem to be what later became called "momentariness" (khanikavada). Latter doesn't seem to bring the same amount of dispassion as the former. And ultimately what the contemplations should do is to grow more and more dispassion and revulsion causing the fetters to fade away. ----------------------------------- KH: With luck, you will be able use your conventional understanding of impermanence as a model (or a metaphor) for right understanding of conditioned dhammas and their anicca characteristics. Ken H #113248 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Jan 27, 2011 10:11 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: notes from Bangkok with A.Sujin 3b epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > N: Sutta reading is difficult although it may seem simple. > Commentaries help. Also interesting to compare subcommentaries, like > those of Dhammapala who lived at about the same time as Buddhaghosa. > Do you have any example of sutta and commentary you find a problem? > Perhaps it can be solved. There is another point, we are dependent on > translations and these differ. Best to compare several translations, > not just using only one, like access to insight. That sounds like it would be very interesting to compare the subcommentaries in some cases. Of course I still have to get to the main commentaries. Even the ones that are translated, like that for the satipatthana sutta, I haven't really looked at closely, and I will hopefully get to that, as well as other commentaries that are readily available. Obviously many are not. I remember the sutta that talks about "crossing the flood" and Ken H. and I had a fairly turbulent discussion about the commentary because it seemed far off to me from what seemed obvious to me in the sutta's message. I had a similar conversation recently with Jon regarding the commentary for the body contemplation in the satipatthana sutta. Those might be two good examples. I appreciated your comments about Buddhaghosa and how he indicated the source of the commentaries or opinions being expressed. I think it would be quite interesting to see how he assembled the commentaries that he did. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #113249 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Jan 27, 2011 10:27 pm Subject: Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Modes of Materiality epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (112991) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon. > > ... > > =============== > For the commentary to appear valid, it should at least have *something* to do with the words the Buddha spoke and not just say "well it's really about this." Otherwise it is just signing the Buddha's name to a completely different tract. ... The Buddha was not such a bad communicator that he has to be completely reinterpreted in order to understand what he "really" meant. > > =============== > > J: Agreed. It's not a question of the Buddha being a bad communicator, but of the rest of the world (apart from those who were ready to attain enlightenment) being an uninformed audience. Perhaps. > > =============== > > And since we do have an "actual sutta" to talk about, are we going to talk about the sutta at all, or only about the commentary and what it imputes to the sutta? > > =============== > > J: We can indeed talk about the sutta itself, but to do so in any meaningful way without the assistance of the commentaries would require a good knowledge of the whole sutta pitaka and of the other pitakas as well. That is one point of view. I personally think it is partially a straw man, to demand total understanding of everything in order to have any understanding of anything. One can always hold this up as a reason not to trust one's understanding of even the most obvious things. Not everything the Buddha said was so esoteric that it requires a team of scholars, commentators and discussion committees to decide if any of it can be taken at its word. I admit that some of it actually might require that, but if Buddha says "We should strive to eradicate the defilements" we don't have to wonder too strenously what he meant. It's obvious in such a case. Some cases may not seem so obvious and then we may have to do more investigations, but not everything is like that. I don't think "Breathing in long, he is aware that he is breathing in long" requires a deep reinterpretation. "In the seen will be only the seen" may have more implications if one knows more of the tipitaka, but it is still meaningful in its own right. It means not to add proliferations, and that is a clear starting point for its significance. > Even then it would inevitably come down to individual views held. What the commentaries provide is the received wisdom of the time on the detailed meaning of the teaching as given. I wouldn't deny the helpfulness and usefulness of the commentaries in balancing one's individual opinions and views of sutta and other parts of the Dhamma, but questions remain, such as: 1. After considering the commentaries, does one return to the sutta to fully encounter its meaning again, or does one leave the suttas behind to rest in the commentaries? Big difference there. 2. Does one have some critical understanding of the role and limitations of the commentaries, or does one take them as the single authority on the Buddha's teachings? 3. Is one certain that their own view of the commentaries is accurate? If we are worried about our understanding of sutta on its face, we may also fail to understand the actual role, significance and meaning of the commentaries. Anyway, I am sure you have considered all of the above. > > =============== > > > J: As regards the reference to contemplating the body in the body, the commentary explains that 'in the body' means 'in the corporeal group' i.e., in rupa-khandha. > > > > Well it may very well be that "the body" is in "the corporeal group." That makes simple sense, doesn't it? But that doesn't mean that this is the level of understanding that the Buddha was aiming at. "The body in the body" and "the feelings in the feelings," etc. ,have had several different interpretations in different commentaries, and I'm not really sure what the final meaning is, but since the Buddha says "IN THIS WAY he remains focused internally on the body..." it clearly says that the listing and inventory that the Buddha has made is "the way" that the body is to be contemplated in this case. One can't ignore the words that are inconvenient or invent alternate meanings. We should try to pay heed to what the Buddha actually said, and the sense in the words. > > =============== > > J: It depends in each case on how the simile given by the Buddha is to be understood. In the case of the parts of the body/repulsiveness, for example, the simile is explaining something well beyond the description of reflection of body parts/repulsiveness with which the section begins. > > > =============== > > > > [5] "Furthermore... just as a skilled butcher or his apprentice, having killed a cow, would sit at a crossroads cutting it up into pieces, the monk contemplates this very body — however it stands, however it is disposed — in terms of properties: 'In this body there is the earth property, the liquid property, the fire property, & the wind property.' > > > > =============== > > > > > > J: This part of the sutta (on Reflection on the Modes of Materiality (Elements, Dhatu)) begins with the words: > > > > > > "A bhikkhu reflects on just this body according as it is placed or disposed, by way of the mode of materiality, thinking thus: 'There are, in this body, the mode of solidity, the mode of cohesion, the mode of caloricity, and the mode of oscillation.' > > > > > > The terms "solidity", "cohesion", "caloricity" and "oscillation" are translations of the Pali terms for the 4 primary rupas. Again, the sutta is referring to awareness of dhammas. > > > > This section IS about the analysis of the four elements in the body, because *it says so.* I would note that the Buddha begins by saying "Furthermore...", which is to say that the previous passages were *not* about the 4 elements, a direct contradiction to what the commentary says about the laundry list of organs and fluids. > > =============== > > J: Each of the 14 parts in the section on Contemplation of the Body except the first begins with the word "Furthermore" and ends with the sentence: "Thus also, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu lives contemplating the body in the body." So I take the 'Furthermore' to be indicating simply that there is more to come. Yes, it is more to come, but it also indicates something coming that did not come before. If I say "furthermore," I am making a new point - 'more to come' of a new kind. If the "furthermore" referred to "more" material on the 4 elements, rather than a first mention of them, then it would say "furthermore as regards the 4 elements" or something like that. Anyway, I've lost the thread, but that is my general sense of how those terms are used. > > =============== > > It seems very clear to me that the Buddha is moving through different contemplations and different levels, starting with the inventory of the organs and fluids, then contemplating the four elements, and so on. They are not all the same thing, they form a progression that allows the Buddha to make his case for how to build understanding from one contemplation to the next. We should pay attention to his plan, his program, his order, and his subject matter, not decide that every passage is not about what it says, but is all about a generalization about dhammas, over and over again. Otherwise it's not Buddhism - it's "overlay-your-own-philosophy-ism" and enjoy reading your own message in the Buddha's words. > > =============== > > J: I don't think the idea of a progression works. It does not, for example, account for the breathing section being at the beginning or the Cemetery Contemplations being at the end. It depends on the transitions. I am not implying that everything is meant to be done at once, or on the same day or something like that. Some things do lead progressively, such as the progressively degenerated images of the corpse contemplation at different stages of decline of the corpse. Others may be new sections that represent distinct contemplations. If one had time and understanding to do so, it might be worthwhile to go through it to see what connects to what, and what stands independently. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = #113250 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Jan 27, 2011 10:42 pm Subject: Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Reflection on corpses epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (112991) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon. > > ... > > > > > > =============== > > > > [6] "Furthermore, as if he were to see a corpse cast away in a charnel ground — one day, two days, three days dead — bloated, livid, & festering, he applies it to this very body, 'This body, too: Such is its nature, such is its future, such its unavoidable fate'... > > > > =============== > > > > > > J: The commentary to this passage gives the following: > > > > > > "This has been stated: By the existence of these three: life [ayu], warmth [usma], consciousness [viññanam], this body can endure to stand, to walk, and do other things; by the separation of these three however this body is indeed a thing like that corpse, is possessed of the nature of corruption, is going to become like that, will become swollen, blue and festering and cannot escape the state of being like that, cannot transcend the condition of swelling up, become blue and festering." > > > > > > To my reading, the terms life [ayu], warmth [usma], consciousness [viññanam], are references to dhammas. > > > > Well you can translate as you wish, and the commentators can too. It seems to me that here the commentator echoes the Buddha in his own preferred language. However, there is no doubt about the Buddha's point: we are to give up the illusion of immortality which we all adopt to enjoy our lives, and see that our body is impermanent and corruptible and that it will enjoy the same fate as a corpse. By contemplating this, not casually, but seriously, we take away the illusion of sameness, solidity and incorruptibility of the body and self. > > =============== > > J: If you read these sections as simply a disquisition on the mortality of beings, I think you are doing the Buddha an injustice ;-)). His message was much more profound than that. I find the Buddha's variety of subjects and textures in his teaching that allows a thorough review and contemplation of the nature of every aspect of living that we take for granted to be anything but superficial. While I think the momentary analysis of dhammas is indeed profound, repeating it as a general principle as some fall into the habit of doing, rather than contemplating the actual details one is able to experience at the given time, and dismissing all of the teachings that shed light on the life that we, whether we like it or not, really care about, such as separation, sickness and death, is the real injustice to the Buddha. He knew what he was doing, and he had more for us to think about than what you or I may think is the most profound of the teachings. I find it somewhat bothersome when we dismiss the parts of the teachings that we have decided are not that useful or are not the real teachings, and go for the part we think is most important. If the Buddha spoke about it, it may be worth considering. > > =============== > I am not going to give up the Buddha's message for one that is more abstract and philosophical, however meaningful it may be for one who is as advanced as the commentator, and who can sit back and dissect the Buddha's words into more precise sub-categories. That was not the Buddha's intent, and so it is not mine either. > > =============== > > J: The question of just what *is* the Buddha's message is one we are all engaged in. That is only a problem if one refuses to read what he actually said without engaging in a removed interpretation. He spoke quite clearly about a lot of things. > The problem is that the suttas were pretty much geared to persons of far greater understanding that we have, so the true message is not readily apparent to us. I don't agree with that, and I consider it a smokescreen to keep from contemplating the Buddha's full and actual range of teachings. Some things he said were terse and subtle, but an awful lot was obvious. Sometimes we may decide his teachings were difficult to understand when they are not in order to avoid following them. > > =============== > > > J: Are you saying that before the Buddha's enlightenment nobody had realised the inevitability of death and the dissolution of the body (the 'long arc of our fate')? > > > > > > I think there must be more to it than this. > > > > I really love this argument whenever it arises, that to be a valid philosophy or a useful path, that it has to be something that no one has ever thought of before. I am sorry to say that even the idea of momentary arising and falling phenomena was known to Hindu philosophy for centuries prior to Buddhism. None of it, in and of itself, is original, I think, except for the specific ideas of anatta and the path out of suffering. What is most original to Buddha are his specific methods for developing insight and panna, particularly his meditation methods. :-) > > =============== > > J: You seem to be suggesting that insight and panna were known before the Buddha's time, but not the specific methods (i.e., meditation methods) taught by the Buddha. This is not the case. > > In the suttas it is stated that the Four Noble Truths were newly discovered by the Buddha -- see the Buddha's first sermon (the Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta, SN 56:011) and the various 'Gradual Teaching' (ānupubbī-kathā) passages as quoted by Nina recently. > > I also understand that the teaching on dhammas and their characteristics is unique to the Buddha. > > The teaching on the Four Noble Truths includes the teaching on satipatthana and dependent origination. That which was not original and that the Buddha included in his program was not said just for a recap. He considered it an integral part of the program. To say "He must have meant more than that" is the wrong kind of dismissal of his message in my opinion. The things that he reviewed which we think we already know are often taken at an intellectual level, but Buddha wanted us to contemplate them deeply. That is different than just seeing the sentence and saying "We already knew that!" > > =============== > > > > In any case, the way that he instructed people to contemplate their lives was uniquely designed to confront them with the illusions we construct through rationalization and conceptualization of life - but starting with the level of the feeling of immortality, sameness, identity and other factors that are conventional, as well as the more philosophical analysis of the breakdown of absolute reality. The latter is for those who are ready for a refined analysis. Those who are still living life as interested persons, as committed worldlings, need a message that is closer to home, and they did get it. It's been written down in sutta, and the Buddha apparently thought it was a significant message or he would have said "don't waste your time inventorying the kidneys and the bile and phlegm. When you taste the phlegm and feel the bile, and when someone punches you in the kidney, those are all mere conceptual constructs. Instead let's talk about the rupas of movement and hardness that are really taking place, because that is where enlightenment lies. Strangely, in most suttas he didn't say that, but talked about the realities of life for worldlings. The more consistent microscopic analysis is saved for the Abhidhamma. > > =============== > > J: I think you'll find that in most if not all suttas the teaching went beyond what you call the realities of life for worldlings. In some, the reference to dhammas/the teaching at the level of satipatthana is a somewhat oblique one, but that would be because that was all the then listeners required in order to 'get it'. That is one interpretation, and one that does not surprise me as it supports your way of looking at things. I like to give weight to the words that are said in the way they were said, rather than weighting them myself. If Buddha says "Right understanding leads" then I have to accept it; and if Buddha says "Our own body will wind up just like this corpse" then I accept that in the light in which it is said, not translate it into dhammas immediately. I may expect that somewhere along the line, but not in that particular teaching. > > =============== > > > J: If there is not first the correct intellectual basis there will never be the direct discernment of dhammas by panna. > > > > If, as you think, there are really separate worlds of dhammas and concepts and the two never meet, you may be right that we must have an understanding that leads us to ignore the things we perceive in everyday life in order to wait for a different universe to appear. > > =============== > > J: Nobody is suggesting that things perceived in everyday life should be ignored. A real straw man, that one ;-)) Please explain to me how that is a straw man. If every time the Buddha says "Old age, sickness and death" you say "He is really talking about dhammas" that is not a straw man; one is ignoring everyday life as we know it. Taking every element that you consider conceptual and replacing it with a dhamma is indeed denying the teachings on everyday life for worldlings. We don't perceive momentary dhammas, and if you substitute theoretical correct understanding of dhammas - a separate world as you say - for what we do experience, you are denying the teachings on everyday life and what we do experience as worldlings. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #113251 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Jan 27, 2011 10:47 pm Subject: Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Reflection on corpses epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hi Jon, RobertE, all, > > > What do we do when the suttas clearly talk about contemplations that would be considered "conceptual" ? Should we ignore those kinds of contemplations? If so, why? > > For me, the gross type of contemplation outlined in Satipatthana and MN28 regarding gross impermanence of the Body (especially compared to Earth that lasts billions of years) seem to be more effective than about rupas that arise, age, and die billion of times per second. > > I can definitely see the drawbacks of attaching to the body that can be healthy and young today but old and sick tomorrow... But regarding radical impermanence, I don't see how it can really affect the person causing dispassion and fading away of lust. > > IMHO the impermanence (anicca) doesn't seem to be what later became called "momentariness" (khanikavada). Latter doesn't seem to bring the same amount of dispassion as the former. And ultimately what the contemplations should do is to grow more and more dispassion and revulsion causing the fetters to fade away. I agree. I think the momentary dhamma insight is a higher stage of perception. I think it allows for a wise seeing of anicca and anatta in action. But I don't think that contemplating that from our standpoint now is that helpful since it is only theoretical. I agree that contemplating our lives as we know them from a Buddhist standpoint can start to cause detachment, whereas theoretical musings may not. I think investigating the nature of dhammas and conditions can lead to a greater understanding of reality over time, but it is parallel to looking at the elements of our lives as we know them and starting to see them with insight and detachment. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #113252 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Modes of Materiality nilovg Dear Rob E and Jon, Op 28-jan-2011, om 7:27 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > J: As regards the reference to contemplating the body in the body, > the commentary explains that 'in the body' means 'in the corporeal > group' i.e., in rupa-khandha. > > > ------- Ven. Dhammanando explained this once: see the body *as* the body, kaya kayena. The ablative form can denote: as. Thus see it as only body, not as anything else. See it as ruupa-khanda. ----- Nina. #113253 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: a correction of the Pali. nilovg Dear Rob E and Jon, To see the body as the body, the Pali should be: not kayena, but kaaye. Kaaye kaayaanupassii. Vedanaasu vedanaanupassii, citte cittaanupassii, dhammesu dhammaanupassii viharati. Nina. #113254 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jan 28, 2011 2:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What are 5 sense faculties (pasada-rupa)? + momentariness nilovg Hi Howard, Op 27-jan-2011, om 16:55 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > N: Yes. But ruupa does not fall away as rapidly as citta, although it > is still extremely fast. > ------------------------------------------------ > H: A rupa is extremely fast as compared to what? The duration of > macroscopic, conceptual objects like cars, trees, and park benches? > (If that is > what you mean, it makes sense to me.) -------- N: We are talking about ultimate realities, about naama and ruupa. As to cars etc, it seems that they stay. In reality they are composed of ruupas that arise and fall away very fast. This can only be seen with the eye of wisdom. This is the beginning: touch a car. What appears? Is there no hardness? This is a characteristic of ruupa that can be directly experienced, without having to name it hardness or car. When you touch it you may think of hardness or car, but through bodysense just hardness is experienced. This is the beginning of knowing what ruupa is. What do you think? Nina. #113255 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jan 28, 2011 3:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: notes from Bangkok with A.Sujin 3b nilovg Dear Rob E, Op 28-jan-2011, om 7:11 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > I remember the sutta that talks about "crossing the flood" and Ken > H. and I had a fairly turbulent discussion about the commentary > because it seemed far off to me from what seemed obvious to me in > the sutta's message. I had a similar conversation recently with Jon > regarding the commentary for the body contemplation in the > satipatthana sutta. > > Those might be two good examples. -------- N: I did not study all these messages thoroughly. But just now you wrote to Jon: R: N: Perhaps the main problem lies in what you write here. You think of theoretical when it is not. In the suttas we find many messages in conventional language and this level of teaching is certainly useful, it is adapted to different levels of understanding of the listeners. When we read more carefully, we also see a reference to awareness of realities. Sometimes at the end of a sutta. Like discourses about dukkha, at the end it is said: in short, the five khandhas are dukkha. These are naama and ruupa, and since they are impermanent, they are not a refuge, they are dukkha. Not theoretical at all. That is why the commentaries often speak about vipassanaa. Understanding the reality now. This leads to detachment. Thinking about impermanence may help to a certain extent, but it cannot eradicate wrong view, it cannot effectively lead to detachment. Without a beginning understanding of the reality appearing now, and a beginning awareness of it, without naming it, it is really difficult to get to the deep meaning of the suttas. Commentaries help. And something else also helps: cross references throughout the suttas. This is also very useful. ------- Nina. #113256 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jan 28, 2011 3:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sotapanna nilovg Dear Vince, Op 26-jan-2011, om 16:18 heeft Vince het volgende geschreven: > > you wrote: > >> N: He still has ignorance. Wrong view is not the same as ignorance. >> Ignorance arises with each kind of akusala. He still has akusala >> cittas and thus ignorance. But he has no wrong view about them, he >> does not take anger for 'my anger'. > > oh, ok.. If I understand you right, the problem would be of > attachment due to > these kinds of akusala. Then the sotapanna would be not aware of > what happens in > the present moment despite having knowledge of the nature of > phenomena. So it > seems to be much more a problem of old habits and trends, and in > that case the > growing of understanding is what causes detachment. ------ N: The sotaapanna has still akusala cittas and at such moments there is no sati. Old habits and trends, yes, we all have accumulated a great deal of akusala. There are the latent tendencies, lying dormant in each citta, and these go on from citta to citta. They are akusala that have not been eradicated yet and they can cause the arising of akusala citta. The growing of understanding conditions more detachment. ------- > V: Can we understand "detachment" as the result of a citta in > company of panna?. > Any detachment experience would be that action in different > degrees, even when > the result is not nibbana? ------ N: Detachment is the cetasika alobha and it arises with each kusala citta, also those that are not accompanied by pa~n~naa. As pa~n~naa develops there will be more detachment. For the non-ariyan, understanding of naama and ruupa leads to detachment from the idea of self. There are many degrees of it, and only the arahat has detachment from all objects. --------- > V: So the wrong view depends closely from non-eradicated fetters, > from attachments. > While Ignorance depends of not knowing the nature of phenomena. ------ N: Wrong view is a kind of clinging, one cling to a distorted view of realities. For instance, one takes for permanent what is impermanent, one takes for happiness what is dukkha, one takes for self what is non-self. Whereas ignorance is not knowing the nature of phenomena. Ignorance is like darkness, it does not know anything. Wrong view and ignorance are different akusala cetasikas. --------- > V: Therefore, in > the case of a sotapanna, the problem would be the attachment causing a > manifestation of ignorance, despite the ignorance was eradicated. ------ N: No, only the arahat has eradicated ignorance. When attachment arises there is also ignorance with that akusala citta. At that moment ignorance does not see the danger of attachment. Just at that moment and then it's gone. -------- > V: I think that our deluded knowledge also is knowledge at all and > it also works > to calm our anguish. I wonder if the attachment is not just towards > a type of > knowledge (truth/false) but to an old way to escape of our constant > dukhha. ------- > N: We have to keep in mind that ignorance is the opposite of > pa~n~naa. People may falsely believe that by enjoying life with > attachment they are free from sorrow. That is a false belief. > Pleasant things can never stay and that is a form of dukkha. > The dukkha inherent in all conditioned phenomena is the fact that > they are impermanent and thus no refuge. That is the deepest > meaning of dukkha. ------- > V: >> When there are conditions for pa~n~naa it arises and it can arise >> in whatever >> situation, even when he is in a crowd of people, or in very >> difficult >> situations. The arising of pa~n~naa is not dependent on the >> situation he is >> in, but it depends on his accumulations, that is, former arisings of >> pa~n~naa. > > How to identify these conditions?. What impedes panna? ------ N: Not listening to true Dhamma, not considering the Dhamma, not applying the Dhamma impedes pa~n~naa. --------- > V: I wonder how attachment impedes the arising of panna, even we > are looking for > kusala or we are Dhamma focused. ------- N: We are clinging to a result soon, we are impatient. We may be looking for kusala with attachment to self: 'I' want this. We do not see that pa~n~naa has its own condiitons and arises in its own time. We want to make pa~n~naa arise, impossible. -------- > > V: Please, Can you explain where is the exact connection between > panna and > detachment in the present moment? ------ N: Very good question. An important point that cannot be emphasized enough. From the beginning we should understand that pa~n~naa is non-self, that nobody in the world can hasten its development. Intellectual understanding of the teachings grows when we listen and study. We should let phenomena take their own course in their own tempo. Not trying to do this or that in order to have more pa~n~naa. That is motivated by lobha. Pa~n~naa for whom? There is nobody who can possess it. It is good to remember that as soon as there is attachment to have more pa~n~naa it is counteractive. Thus, the fact that we are interested in the Dhamma and want to listen and study is conditioned, and these conditions stem from the past. It is not self who decides to develop understanding. It just occurs because of conditions. If we forget this, we may go the wrong way all along. As Kh Sujin often says: "the whole of the teachings are directed towards detachment. There should be detachment from the beginning". ------ Nina. #113257 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Modes of Materiality upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and Robert & Jon) - In a message dated 1/28/2011 4:34:59 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: Dear Rob E and Jon, Op 28-jan-2011, om 7:27 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > J: As regards the reference to contemplating the body in the body, > the commentary explains that 'in the body' means 'in the corporeal > group' i.e., in rupa-khandha. > > > ------- Ven. Dhammanando explained this once: see the body *as* the body, kaya kayena. The ablative form can denote: as. Thus see it as only body, not as anything else. See it as ruupa-khanda. ----- Nina. ================================== That is the way I've always understood the "see X in the X" parts of this sutta, namely avoiding conceptually smearing together X's and Y's and Z's. So, for example, bodily sensations and odors are not to be conflated, and sights and sounds are not to be confused with a conceptual-perceptual-con structive mix of such that we call "a truck we see and hear." At a much more difficult level of practice, tastes and odors are to be each seen in themselves, without the conceptual combining that is the everyday mode of functioning. Our usual mode of observing mixes mind-door with all the other doors via thinking. That is where we begin. That is where we are. At this beginner's level, what we think we understand is only barely understood, and the practice of cultivation of calm mindfulness and discernment is far deeper than any of us realize, I believe. Yet that is where we must begin, chained by thinking, but ever-so-slightly starting to loosen those chains. The contemplating of X in X is a central practice to begin the weakening of conceptuality's rule. Well before there is graduation to stages of direct seeing of seamlessness and emptiness and radical impermanence, the weakening of thinking's sovereignty must commence even now while it is dominant, and the weakening begins with the practice of contemplating X in X with a mentality that becomes increasingly calmed and clarified. To contemplate X in X is an extraordinary practice, subtle and of great difficulty and complexity, and one that requires going through a multitude of gradual stages. It is a practice that starts out very poorly and roughly, and it requires years & years, and even lifetimes (if not ages), of concerted work. But progress, gradual as it usually is, can visibly occur if the practice is taken seriously and not postponed. "Now is the hour" is an old song lyric giving the proper perspective, and a slogan borrowed from Judaism (pertaining to moral action in the original) is "If not now, when?" The Buddha, of course, spoke all the time of samvega - of the urgency of practice, pointing out that one should act as if one's hair were on fire, pointing out that death is a certainty, but the time of its occurrence is unknown, With metta, Howard The Wise Do Not Wait /Like massive boulders, mountains pressing against the sky, moving in from all sides, crushing the four directions, so aging and death come rolling over living beings: noble warriors, priests, merchants, workers, outcastes, & scavengers. They spare nothing. They trample everything. Here elephant troops can hold no ground, nor can chariots or infantry, nor can a battle of wits or wealth win out. So a wise person, seeing his own good, steadfast, secures confidence in the Buddha, Dhamma, & Sangha. One who practices the Dhamma in thought, word, & deed, receives praise here on earth and after death rejoices in heaven. / (From the Pabbatopama Sutta) #113258 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jan 28, 2011 2:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What are 5 sense faculties (pasada-rupa)? + momentariness upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 1/28/2011 5:52:37 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, Op 27-jan-2011, om 16:55 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > N: Yes. But ruupa does not fall away as rapidly as citta, although it > is still extremely fast. > ------------------------------------------------ > H: A rupa is extremely fast as compared to what? The duration of > macroscopic, conceptual objects like cars, trees, and park benches? > (If that is > what you mean, it makes sense to me.) -------- N: We are talking about ultimate realities, about naama and ruupa. As to cars etc, it seems that they stay. In reality they are composed of ruupas that arise and fall away very fast. This can only be seen with the eye of wisdom. -------------------------------------------- I have no disagreement with this. The question I raise, though, is "Relative to what objects of consciousness are rupas fast?" The only choice is the macroscopic concepts (like trees, rocks, cars, and buildings) that seem to last for a good while. --------------------------------------- This is the beginning: touch a car. What appears? Is there no hardness? This is a characteristic of ruupa that can be directly experienced, without having to name it hardness or car. When you touch it you may think of hardness or car, but through bodysense just hardness is experienced. This is the beginning of knowing what ruupa is. What do you think? -------------------------------------------- I have no problem with any of that. It just isn't what I'm talking about at the moment. A rupa is fast, you say. I ask "Fast as compared to what?" :-) -------------------------------------------- Nina. =============================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #113259 From: "epsteinrob" Date: Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:47 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Modes of Materiality epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob E and Jon, > Op 28-jan-2011, om 7:27 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > > > J: As regards the reference to contemplating the body in the body, > > the commentary explains that 'in the body' means 'in the corporeal > > group' i.e., in rupa-khandha. > > > > > ------- > Ven. Dhammanando explained this once: see the body *as* the body, > kaya kayena. The ablative form can denote: as. Thus see it as only > body, not as anything else. See it as ruupa-khanda. This is very helpful. If you reversed the "in-the-body" syntax you would have this same result: "In the body, contemplate (only) the body," ie, "See rupa as only rupa," and don't conceptualize what it is. This makes "the body in the body" similar to Buddha's pronouncement, "In seeing, only the seen." Thanks for that. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #113260 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:59 am Subject: [dsg] Re: notes from Bangkok with A.Sujin 3b epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob E, > Op 28-jan-2011, om 7:11 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > > > I remember the sutta that talks about "crossing the flood" and Ken > > H. and I had a fairly turbulent discussion about the commentary > > because it seemed far off to me from what seemed obvious to me in > > the sutta's message. I had a similar conversation recently with Jon > > regarding the commentary for the body contemplation in the > > satipatthana sutta. > > > > Those might be two good examples. > -------- > N: I did not study all these messages thoroughly. But just now you > wrote to Jon: > R: perception. I think it allows for a wise seeing of anicca and anatta > in action. But I don't think that contemplating that from our > standpoint now is that helpful since it is only theoretical. I agree > that contemplating our lives as we know them from a Buddhist > standpoint can start to cause detachment, whereas theoretical musings > may not.> > > N: Perhaps the main problem lies in what you write here. You think of > theoretical when it is not. In the suttas we find many messages in > conventional language and this level of teaching is certainly useful, > it is adapted to different levels of understanding of the listeners. > When we read more carefully, we also see a reference to awareness of > realities. Sometimes at the end of a sutta. Like discourses about > dukkha, at the end it is said: in short, the five khandhas are > dukkha. These are naama and ruupa, and since they are impermanent, > they are not a refuge, they are dukkha. > Not theoretical at all. That is why the commentaries often speak > about vipassanaa. Understanding the reality now. This leads to > detachment. Thinking about impermanence may help to a certain extent, > but it cannot eradicate wrong view, it cannot effectively lead to > detachment. > Without a beginning understanding of the reality appearing now, and a > beginning awareness of it, without naming it, it is really difficult > to get to the deep meaning of the suttas. I may not be totally clear in what I mean: I am not against contemplating the reality of dhammas and beginning to see how reality arises and is conditioned. I think that is important. What I am against is dismissing the other levels of understanding. We wind up taking the deep understanding, which for *us* is only conceptual until we experience it, and paying more attention to "right concepts" than to "current realities." My current reality right now is that I have a body, that I am identified with it and that I worry about what happens to me. So I don't think it's useful to think conceptually "Well I don't need to think about that because it's really only rupas that are impersonal." Not bad to think that, but not as a rationalization to push away the real attachment and fears that arise. Instead I think it would be good to look at both - what is the reality, even though I can't see it right now - I agree with that - but also to apply the Buddha's teaching to what is real to my senses and emotions now and look at the aging of the body, the fear of losing loved ones, etc. and practice detachment for those conventional perceptions and thoughts as well. In doing so I can also look more closely at what they are composed of. I can look at the whole picture. What I don't think is helpful is when we try to dismiss those things which worldlings really care about with sentences like "Everyone knows that so why look into it? We all know that we are eventually going to get sick and die, so the Buddha really didn't have much of importance to say about that." It is dismissive of the Buddha's conventional teachings, even though, I agree, that at key points in the suttas he would sometimes switch levels and say "Well you know in reality it is all just kandhas." So I think he would do both and connect them together, not separate them into "two different worlds" where there is only false concepts in one world, and only momentary dhammas in the other world. I think our dual perception itself - how we construct and imagine the world to cause clinging and suffering - is an important part of the picture. Something like Buddha's corpse contemplations may work on two levels: first, we may see that our body as we know it really is going to die and dissipate and if we are faced with that reality we can have more detachment; second, we can begin to see that each perception that we have of the dissolution of the body is made up of many changes, many arising rupas and that the perception itself is momentary. So to me, instead of separating these two levels of understanding and detachment, I see them as part of a continuum with both important, and I see both levels as being connected. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #113261 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:02 pm Subject: Doubt Creates Hesitation! bhikkhu5 Friends: How to cure hesitant Doubt and Uncertainty! Noticing Doubt-&-Uncertainty (vicikicchâ ) emerge can make it fade away: Herein, Bhikkhus, when Doubt-&-Uncertainty is present in him, the bhikkhu notes & understands: "There is Doubt-&-Uncertainty in me", and when this Doubt-&-Uncertainty is absent, he similarly notices and understands: "Now no Doubt-&-Uncertainty is in me". He also fully understands how unarisen Doubt-&-Uncertainty arises. He also understands how to leave behind any arisen Doubt-&-Uncertainty, and he understands how left and eliminated Doubt-&-Uncertainty will not arise again in the future. MN 10 What is the feeding cause that makes Doubt-&-Uncertainty arise? There are doubtful, unclear, indeterminable, and inconclusive ambiguities! Often giving irrational and unwise attention to such matters, is the feeding cause of the arising of yet absent Doubt-&-Uncertainty, and the feeding cause of worsening and aggravation of Doubt-&-Uncertainty, that already emerged. SN 46:51 What is the starving cause that makes Doubt-&-Uncertainty cease? There are advantageous & detrimental states, blameable and blameless, average and excellent states, and dark and bright states, frequently giving rational and wise attention to these, is the starving cause for prevention of unarisen Doubt-&-Uncertainty, and the starving cause for the elimination of Doubt-&-Uncertainty, that has already appeared. SN 46:51 Some advantageous reflections regarding Doubt-&-Uncertainty: There are these 6 things, which help to throw out doubt: 1: The state of being learned in the Buddha-Dhamma. 2: Examining the Buddha, Dhamma, and Sangha. 3: Understanding the advantageousness of Moral Discipline. 4: Being decided and convinced about the 3 Jewels. 5: Sympathetic, clever and helpful friends, who knows directly. 6: Explaining talk and teachings that can dispel doubt. Doubt-&-Uncertainty is like a Desert: Doubt-&-Uncertainty is just as when a rich man travels through a desolate desert where there is no food and much danger. Freedom from Doubt-&-Uncertainty is like when he has crossed the desert, and gradually reaches safety near a village, a secure place, free from danger. There he is relieved. DN 2 So is it when doubts about one of the 8 objects of doubt has arisen. See # Doubting whether the Master really is a perfectly Enlightened One or not, one cannot become assured of it with confidence. Unconvinced one remains unable to attain to the paths and fruits of Nobility. Thus, as the traveller in the desert is uncertain whether robbers are there or not, he produces in his mind, again & again, a state of wavering & vacillation, a lack of decision, a state of anxiety, and thus he creates in himself an obstacle for reaching the safe ground of the Noble Ones (ariya-bhumi). In that way, is sceptical doubt like travelling in a barren and dry desert! #: They are, according to the Vibhanga: doubt in regard to the Buddha, the Dhamma, the Sangha, the (threefold) training, the past, the future, and the conditionality of dependently arisen phenomena. Doubt and uncertainty can only be indecisive about which action to choose and thus paralyzes the skeptic by hesitancy leaving the problem unsettled! Doubt can only be eliminated by examining and scrutinizing the object much. Once elderly yet undecided brahman Dhotaka asked the Buddha: I see here in the world of beings divine & human, good ones, who lives simply by possessing nothing. I thus bow for you All-around Eye. Please Sakyan, release me from my doubts! The Buddha answered: No one in this world, Dhotaka, can I ever release from doubting. But knowing the most excellent Dhamma, you will cross the raving ocean of vacillating uncertainty. Dhotaka now more confident: I admire, Great Seer, that peace supreme, all stilled, knowing which, living aware and detached, I'll go beyond the imprisoning entanglement of this world. Then I will teach you that peace even right here, not just hearsay words, understanding which, living aware and detached, you will go beyond the incarcerating entanglement of this world. Teach me as your friend, O best one, the Dhamma of detachment so that I may know directly, so that I, as unaffected as space, may live right here, at ease in peace, calmed, stilled and not dependent on anything... Whatever you are aware of, Dhotaka , above, below, across, or in between; know this as a chain to this world! Thus, do not create any craving for any form of being in existence, any form of new becoming or any non-becoming! Sutta Nipâta V 6 <...> Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samâhita _/\_ * <....> #113262 From: Vince Date: Fri Jan 28, 2011 3:34 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sotapanna cerovzt@... Dear Nina you wrote: >> V: Therefore, in the case of a sotapanna, the problem would be the attachment >> causing a manifestation of ignorance, despite the ignorance was eradicated. > ------ > N: No, only the arahat has eradicated ignorance. When attachment > arises there is also ignorance with that akusala citta. At that > moment ignorance does not see the danger of attachment. Just at that > moment and then it's gone. ok, I see. Then when somebody says "I have realized nibbana" or "I have eradicated ignorance", it would be delusion, because the eradication of ignorance only can exist in the present moment. Therefore, somebody can think he had a past experience of nibbana but it will be delusion because he forget what some Suttas says: "this is not me, not mine, not my self". However, also we check inside some Suttas about the memory of that event as a point of reference for the Dhamma practice. So, What can be the right way to manage such memory (nama) for the sotapanna? A sotapanna should discard it absolutely?. Or should he/she preserve that reference in some way? I believe it doesn't happen to arhant then my question is just about sotappana. >> V: Please, Can you explain where is the exact connection between >> panna and >> detachment in the present moment? > ------ > N: Very good question. An important point that cannot be emphasized > enough. From the beginning we should understand that pa~n~naa is non-self, > that nobody in the world can hasten its development. Intellectual > understanding of the teachings grows when we listen and study. We > should let phenomena take their own course in their own tempo. Not > trying to do this or that in order to have more pa~n~naa. That is > motivated by lobha. Pa~n~naa for whom? There is nobody who can > possess it. > It is good to remember that as soon as there is attachment to have > more pa~n~naa it is counteractive. I think what you explain here is probably the more important point and also more difficult for any person. It remembers when somebody falls to the sea ignoring how to swing. His own efforts to float are what exhaust him and sink him. However, we all know that sometimes there are waves really strong, and they makes impossible to preserve the point. In such moments the bhikkhu way seems to be easier and safer, although I ignore if all this crazy surfing has some added benefit. As you are a little older than me, What do you think about the two ways?. Or Maybe just we should flow with the life to anywhere we go? > It is not self who decides to develop understanding. It just occurs because > of conditions. If we forget this, we may go the wrong way all along. As Kh > Sujin often says: "the whole of the teachings are directed towards > detachment. There should be detachment from the beginning". yes. Thanks to remember it again, and for the rest of clear answers. Well, I wrote you it would be my question but you can see I have a pair more...:-) This is a very interesting and useful topic; much better to understand in a conversation than reading from books. At least to me. Thanks to keep it alive a little more time. best Vince, #113263 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jan 29, 2011 6:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Modes of Materiality nilovg Hi Howard, Op 28-jan-2011, om 15:46 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > > ================================== > H: That is the way I've always understood the "see X in the X" > parts of > this sutta, namely avoiding conceptually smearing together X's and > Y's and > Z's. So, for example, bodily sensations and odors are not to be > conflated, > and sights and sounds are not to be confused with a conceptual- > perceptual-con > structive mix of such that we call "a truck we see and hear." ------ N: Good. We come to see the difference between the world of concepts and the world of paramattha dhammas. Before hearing the dhamma we had no idea that there are different doorways through which different objects are experienced, one at a time. ------- > H: At a much > more difficult level of practice, tastes and odors are to be each > seen in > themselves, without the conceptual combining that is the everyday > mode of > functioning. Our usual mode of observing mixes mind-door with all > the other > doors via thinking. ------- N: Yes, we are inclined to mix all the doorways. -------- > H: That is where we begin. That is where we are. At this > beginner's level, what we think we understand is only barely > understood, and > the practice of cultivation of calm mindfulness and discernment is > far deeper > than any of us realize, I believe. Yet that is where we must begin, > chained by thinking, but ever-so-slightly starting to loosen those > chains. ------ N: Thinking has conditions for its arising, no one can prevent that. But when the reality is thinking, this can be known as just a dhamma. We do not try to loosen those chains, there is nobody there who could. Whatever arises is conditioned and can be object of mindfulness. ------- Nina. > > #113264 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jan 29, 2011 6:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What are 5 sense faculties (pasada-rupa)? + momentariness nilovg Op 28-jan-2011, om 16:02 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I have no disagreement with this. The question I raise, though, is > "Relative to what objects of consciousness are rupas fast?" The > only choice > is the macroscopic concepts (like trees, rocks, cars, and > buildings) that > seem to last for a good while. > --------------------------------------- > > N: This is the beginning: touch a car. What appears? Is there no > hardness? ... > -------------------------------------------- > H: I have no problem with any of that. It just isn't what I'm talking > about at the moment. A rupa is fast, you say. I ask "Fast as > compared to > what?" :-) > ----------------- N: Here we have the famous apples and oranges :-)) It is fast, but we cannot make comparisons. If we wonder about that it is thinking that does not lead anywhere. It distracts from the goal of the teachings: detachment. When we just understand: it appears and disappears immediately, it will help to understand anattaa, beyond control. Trees or cars are concepts that do not have the characteristics of impermanence, dukkha and anattaa. Only naama and ruupa have these three general characteristics. ------- Nina. #113265 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: notes from Bangkok with A.Sujin 3b nilovg Dear Rob E, Op 28-jan-2011, om 19:59 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > > What I don't think is helpful is when we try to dismiss those > things which worldlings really care about with sentences like > "Everyone knows that so why look into it? We all know that we are > eventually going to get sick and die, so the Buddha really didn't > have much of importance to say about that." It is dismissive of the > Buddha's conventional teachings, even though, I agree, that at key > points in the suttas he would sometimes switch levels and say "Well > you know in reality it is all just kandhas." So I think he would do > both and connect them together, not separate them into "two > different worlds" where there is only false concepts in one world, > and only momentary dhammas in the other world. I think our dual > perception itself - how we construct and imagine the world to cause > clinging and suffering - is an important part of the picture. ------- N: Yes, the Buddha had two different ways of teaching: in the conventional way and by way of ultimate realities. Some people needed the conventional way whereas others could do without that. The conventional way could prepare the listeners for the deeper teaching of the four noble Truths. ------- > > R: Something like Buddha's corpse contemplations may work on two > levels: first, we may see that our body as we know it really is > going to die and dissipate and if we are faced with that reality we > can have more detachment; second, we can begin to see that each > perception that we have of the dissolution of the body is made up > of many changes, many arising rupas and that the perception itself > is momentary. So to me, instead of separating these two levels of > understanding and detachment, I see them as part of a continuum > with both important, and I see both levels as being connected. ----- N: I would rather say, different ways of teaching, but both of these are valuable. It depends on conditions what level is relevant of this or that person. If we are faced with a corpse it is not sure that by just thinking there will be more detachment. Direct awareness and understanding of realities one at a time leads to detachment from the idea of self. We have to remember that the first goal is detachment from the idea of self. When that has been eradicated there will very, very gradually be detachment from other objects. ------- Nina. #113266 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jan 29, 2011 2:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Modes of Materiality upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 1/29/2011 9:43:43 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, Op 28-jan-2011, om 15:46 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > > ================================== > H: That is the way I've always understood the "see X in the X" > parts of > this sutta, namely avoiding conceptually smearing together X's and > Y's and > Z's. So, for example, bodily sensations and odors are not to be > conflated, > and sights and sounds are not to be confused with a conceptual- > perceptual-con > structive mix of such that we call "a truck we see and hear." ------ N: Good. We come to see the difference between the world of concepts and the world of paramattha dhammas. Before hearing the dhamma we had no idea that there are different doorways through which different objects are experienced, one at a time. --------------------------------------------- Better than hearing about it is coming to directly observe this. ------------------------------------------ ------- > H: At a much > more difficult level of practice, tastes and odors are to be each > seen in > themselves, without the conceptual combining that is the everyday > mode of > functioning. Our usual mode of observing mixes mind-door with all > the other > doors via thinking. ------- N: Yes, we are inclined to mix all the doorways. -------- > H: That is where we begin. That is where we are. At this > beginner's level, what we think we understand is only barely > understood, and > the practice of cultivation of calm mindfulness and discernment is > far deeper > than any of us realize, I believe. Yet that is where we must begin, > chained by thinking, but ever-so-slightly starting to loosen those > chains. ------ N: Thinking has conditions for its arising, no one can prevent that. --------------------------------------------- If by "no one can prevent that" you mean that volitional actions cannot accomplish it, and that were true, then we would be lost! --------------------------------------------- But when the reality is thinking, this can be known as just a dhamma. We do not try to loosen those chains, there is nobody there who could. Whatever arises is conditioned and can be object of mindfulness. ------------------------------------------- Nina, there is no self/core-of-being to loosen those chains, but there are intentional steps of right effort, contemplation, listening and contemplating, and more that can be taken - a number of intentional, internal activities urged by the Buddha and quite doable - that can and do calm and clarify the mind and loosen the conceptual chains. I am quite convinced of this on the basis of the Buddha's teachings and my own practice that you are mistaken on this particular issue. How many times has the Buddha not taught "This you can do. If you could not do this, I would not teach it!"??? --------------------------------------------- ------- Nina. =========================== With metta, Howard Do what is Skillful, Follow the Holy Life! /Just as a dewdrop on the tip of a blade of grass quickly vanishes with the rising of the sun and does not stay long, in the same way, brahmans, the life of human beings is like a dewdrop — limited, trifling, of much stress & many despairs. One should touch this [truth] like a sage, do what is skillful, follow the holy life. For one who is born there is no freedom from death. Just as when the rain-devas send rain in fat drops, and a bubble on the water quickly vanishes and does not stay long, in the same way, brahmans, the life of human beings is like a water bubble — limited, trifling, of much stress & many despairs. One should touch this [truth] like a sage, do what is skillful, follow the holy life. For one who is born there is no freedom from death. Just as a line drawn in the water with a stick quickly vanishes and does not stay long, in the same way, brahmans, the life of human beings is like a line drawn in the water with a stick — limited, trifling, of much stress & many despairs. One should touch this [truth] like a sage, do what is skillful, follow the holy life. For one who is born there is no freedom from death. Just as a river flowing down from the mountains, going far, its current swift, carrying everything with it, so that there is not a moment, an instant, a second where it stands still, but instead it goes & rushes & flows, in the same way, brahmans, the life of human beings is like a river flowing down from the mountains — limited, trifling, of much stress & many despairs. One should touch this [truth] like a sage, do what is skillful, follow the holy life. For one who is born there is no freedom from death./ (From the Arakenanusasani Sutta) #113267 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jan 29, 2011 2:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What are 5 sense faculties (pasada-rupa)? + momentariness upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 1/29/2011 9:52:19 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: Op 28-jan-2011, om 16:02 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I have no disagreement with this. The question I raise, though, is > "Relative to what objects of consciousness are rupas fast?" The > only choice > is the macroscopic concepts (like trees, rocks, cars, and > buildings) that > seem to last for a good while. > --------------------------------------- > > N: This is the beginning: touch a car. What appears? Is there no > hardness? ... > -------------------------------------------- > H: I have no problem with any of that. It just isn't what I'm talking > about at the moment. A rupa is fast, you say. I ask "Fast as > compared to > what?" :-) > ----------------- N: Here we have the famous apples and oranges :-)) It is fast, but we cannot make comparisons. If we wonder about that it is thinking that does not lead anywhere. It distracts from the goal of the teachings: detachment. ----------------------------------------------- No, Nina. 'Fast' is always by comparison, else it is meaningless. There is no point in meaningless statements. If it is not possible to say what rupas are faster than, then to say they are fast is to use words without meaning. I'm sorry, but this is so. ----------------------------------------------- When we just understand: it appears and disappears immediately, it will help to understand anattaa, beyond control. ----------------------------------------------- Are you saying there is no duration? If no, then what makes them fast any more than slow? Speed is ALWAYS by comparison. We can say that rupas are slower than namas. But what are they faster than? If there is nothing they are faster than, why call them fast? Avoiding an issue doesn't eliminate it. ---------------------------------------------- Trees or cars are concepts that do not have the characteristics of impermanence, dukkha and anattaa. Only naama and ruupa have these three general characteristics. ----------------------------------------------- Do some people live longer than others? Do some plants last longer than others. Do mountains last longer than lightning flashes? These are not meaningless matters. Was it meaningless when the Buddha taught "Just as a dewdrop on the tip of a blade of grass quickly vanishes with the rising of the sun and does not stay long, in the same way, brahmans, the life of human beings is like a dewdrop — limited, trifling, of much stress & many despairs. One should touch this [truth] like a sage, do what is skillful, follow the holy life. For one who is born there is no freedom from death."? ============================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #113268 From: "colette" Date: Sat Jan 29, 2011 10:20 am Subject: [dsg] Re: What are 5 sense faculties (pasada-rupa)? + momentariness ksheri3 Hi Howard, "help me cope with this heavy load" George Harrison. Howard, that was one helluva response that merits a little recognition. "One should touch this [truth] like a sage, do what is skillful, follow the holy life. For one who is born there is no freedom from death."?" GOOD JOB. That alone, probably puts an end to a lot of contemplation. toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: <....> > > I have no disagreement with this. The question I raise, though, is > > "Relative to what objects of consciousness are rupas fast?" The > > only choice > > is the macroscopic concepts (like trees, rocks, cars, and > > buildings) that > > seem to last for a good while. <....> #113269 From: "Ken H" Date: Sat Jan 29, 2011 6:35 pm Subject: Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Modes of Materiality kenhowardau Hi Howard (and Nina), ---- <. . .> >> N: But when the reality is thinking, this can be known as just a dhamma. We do not try to loosen those chains, there is nobody there who could. Whatever arises is conditioned and can be object of mindfulness. >> > H: Nina, there is no self/core-of-being to loosen those chains, but there are intentional steps of right effort, contemplation, listening and contemplating, and more that can be taken - ---- KH: Nina was saying it was *not* a matter of trying or not trying. Those are factors of the various wrong paths. The right path is followed by rightly understanding a presently existing reality. -------------------- > H: a number of intentional, internal activities urged by the Buddha and quite doable - that can and do calm and clarify the mind and loosen the conceptual chains. I am quite convinced of this on the basis of the Buddha's teachings and my own practice that you are mistaken on this particular issue. How many times has the Buddha not taught "This you can do. If you could not do this, I would not teach it!"??? -------------------- KH: Every wrong version of the Buddha's teaching – and every wrong practice - involves the idea of a self who can, or can not, do something. Ken H #113270 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat Jan 29, 2011 3:54 pm Subject: Doubt & Uncertainty... bhikkhu5 Friends: Doubt and Uncertainty Stupefies the Mind! A Brahmin once asked the Blessed Buddha: Master Gotama, what is the cause of being unable to remember something that has been memorized over a long period? The blessed Buddha answered: "Brahmin, when mind is perplexed by doubt & uncertainty, undecided, baffled wavering and wobbling by doubt & uncertainty, and one does not understand any actual safe escape from this arisen states mental doubt & uncertainty, then one can neither see, nor ever understand any of what is advantageous, neither for oneself, nor for others, nor for both oneself and others! Then, consequently, what has been long memorized, cannot be remembered… Why is this neglect & amnesia so? Imagine a bucket of water that is muddy, unclear, cloudy, blurred and dark. If a man even with good eye-sight were to inspect the reflection of his own face in it, he would neither see, nor ever recognize it, as it really is! So too, brahmin, when mind is confused by doubt and uncertainty, baffled, bewildered & hesitating by doubt & uncertainty, on such occasions even things that have been long memorized, cannot recur to the mind, not to speak of those texts, events and important information, that have not been memorized at all…" On how to prevent Skeptical Doubt & Uncertainty (Vicikicchâ ): Systematic Attention to scrutinizing investigation, examination & probing: 1: What is advantageous and what is detrimental here? 2: What is blameable and what is blameless in this situation? 3: What is ordinary and what is excellent in this particular case? 4: What is on the bright side and what is on the dark side in this aspect? Doubt, Uncertainty, Hesitation & Vexation leads to Frustrating Perplexity! Doubt stupefies action since decision to choose any alternative is blocked. <...> Vexation, Hesitation, Confusion and Painful Perplexity... Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikâya. Book [V:123-4] section 46: The Links. 55: To Sangarava... Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samâhita _/\_ * <...> #113271 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jan 30, 2011 12:37 am Subject: Techno-dhamma discussion 4 with Pt sarahprocter... Dear Friends, Pt kindly came over to visit us for another techno-dhamma discussion yesterday afternoon. It seems that whenever he tries to make the trip, the railway line is under maintenance and he gets diverted by a very slow bus before catching the ferry. So, we've given up waiting for him for lunch and in any case his New Year's resolution seems to be "no chocolate, no cake, nothing healthy...no lunch at all". So that makes the catering easy! Actually, I think he's just a very considerate person. When I was sick, he even offered to come over and shop and cook if we hand any other visitors. He hadn't had time for his meditation in the morning, so we were looking out for withdrawal symptoms, but strangely, he seemed to survive, even thrive!:-) (Take note, Alex!) For most of the afternoon we sat where he is most comfortable - at the dining room table (which has never yet been used as a dining room table), discussing dhamma away from the distracting views of torquoise sea, beautiful surf waves (Ken H!) and golden sands. As usual, we ended up surrounded by screw drivers, wires and, a new addition - cassettes from the 70s of dhamma discussions. While we went through Pt's dhamma-list, he meticulously took a couple of the cassettes to pieces to try and repair them so that they can be converted and digitized like all the others. He and Jon also were having another go at re-loading windows 7 to try and get my "bad-kamma" computer to print. I'd cut some fruit, but I was the only one able to eat it! Anyway, we are all expert multi-taskers here, especially Pt. He was probably trying to squeeze in some of his lost meditation sitting in between the techno work and the discussion for all I know! - Split brain, lack of coordination betweent the 2 hemispheres, different kinds of dementia (he has a lot of experience in his work at present) - one citta at a time regardless. - A sense door process with up to 17 cittas experiencing visible object. Only seeing consciousness sees it. The other cittas have different functions. Also, only seeing consciousness arises at eye-base. The other cittas in the process arise at the heart-base, haddaya vatthu. However, all the cittas in this sense-door process experience the visible object through the eye-door and it is for this reason that when it comes to the ayatanas: - for seeing consciousness, there is the coming together of the inner ayatana of eye-base, the outer ayatana of visible object, the inner ayatana of seeing-consciousness (manayatana) and the other ayatana of 7 cetasikas (dhammayatana) - all 'meeting' together. - for other cittas in the process, although heart-base is the base of arising, the eye-base has not fallen away and is still included. So there is the coming together of eye-base, visible object, the respective citta, the cetasikas and the subtle rupa of heart-base. I mentioned how I very rarely see a correct summary on the ayatanas in any Buddhist dictionary. We were recently kindly given a set of Buddhist Encycolopedias from Sri Lanka. The entry under ayatanas runs for pages, but in my view is not very accurate. It's a very complex topic and we have to review what is said in the Dhammasangani and other Abhi texts. See more under "Ayatanas" in U.P. - Kalapas of rupas. We discussed how rupas arise in groups but only one, say visible object, appears at anytime, depending on kamma. Pt has many questions about this topic, partly because of his scientific background. When we think in terms of molecules and scientific reasoning, we can never understand what is meant, however. The understanding only comes about by knowing the object appearing. "But!", he said many times..... But, who knows there are rupas arising in kalapas in what we take for the wall, when not experienced? But, if seeing sees visible object now, how does this correlate to the minute element in the dhatu in the wall? I'll let him elaborate on his questions. For me, what is important is the understanding now of the thinking, the doubt, the visible object or other reality appearing. The reasoning will never work it out. "But...!" - Conventional objects into rupas. I think I was focussed on my peach-meditation while Jon and Pt discussed this! - The arahat's kiriya cittas. What is the joy with nature referred to in the Theri-theragatha verses? Perhaps Pt can give some examples. It certainly is not like the joy we feel when we listen to music or walking by a waterfall, the joy of lobha in our cases. For the arahat, it can only be the joy of right understanding, the joy of having relinquished all attachment, the joy of sobhana cittas. We discussed how at a moment of hearing or seeing, there is only neutral feeling, so it is not the joy of vipaka cittas at such moments(pleasant feeling only with bodily feeling). There may be the joy with the phalasamapatti cittas - experiencing nibbana again and again for those who became enlightened with jhana cittas as base. - And eventually, it was time for the nitty-gritty qus about practice while serious work on reparing of the cassette tape was under way:-) Direction to the breath as object of samatha, meditation, focussing. When there is and isn't mindfulness in samatha, mindfulness of breath...or not? Past experiences, being aware of the thinking and focussing even thought the initial "direction" must be akusala. Simply, we can't know now what the cittas were in the past and they've all gone. Pt wondered if we could relate to/understand his experiences, but, does it matter? The past experiences - whether kusala or akusala, jhana or serious wrong view, are all unimportant, just different namas and rupas and completely gone. The path is about "letting go", detachment, understanding of the thinking, concern, doubt, whatever appears now. A recurring theme....always the same topic and point as Pt might say. It was time to re-heat the kebab which Pt didn't eat on arrival. Jon, in the last stages of his flu-recovery, was wilting and Pt needed to make his long-trek home. At least, a beautiful sunny evening, quite different from the stormy weather when he first visited made his ferry-ride back, fearing the shark-infested waters on the open seas (j/k):-) I'm half-thinking of suggesting Pt moves in here....such a pleasure and so very helpful to have around! Pt, perhaps you'd at least consider this area when you have to make your next move... Pt, this is just my quick summary. Pls add your own elaborations/corrections and remind me if there's anything I need to check more thoroughly- now I have all the texts around me! Metta Sarah ===== #113272 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jan 30, 2011 1:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Techno-dhamma discussion 4 with Pt nilovg Dear Sarah, Thank you for your interesting report of the discussions with pt. Op 30-jan-2011, om 9:37 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: Split brain, lack of coordination betweent the 2 hemispheres, different kinds of dementia (he has a lot of experience in his work at present) - one citta at a time regardless. ------ N: Just becoming somewhat curious, what is pt's work? ---------- > S: for other cittas in the process, although heart-base is the base > of arising, the eye-base has not fallen away and is still included. > So there is the coming together of eye-base, visible object, the > respective citta, the cetasikas and the subtle rupa of heart-base. ------- N: Yes, when summing up all the aayatanas at the different moments it becomes complicated. Just a remark about the eybase. Can we just say: eyesense has not fallen away yet? I think that when the heartbase is base, the eyesense cannot be base at the same time. ------- Nina. #113273 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jan 30, 2011 2:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What are 5 sense faculties (pasada-rupa)? + momentariness nilovg Hi Howard Op 29-jan-2011, om 16:20 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > > ----------------------------------------------- > Are you saying there is no duration? If no, then what makes them fast > any more than slow? Speed is ALWAYS by comparison. We can say that > rupas > are slower than namas. But what are they faster than? If there is > nothing > they are faster than, why call them fast? Avoiding an issue doesn't > eliminate > it. > ---------------------------------------------- > N: In the context of logical reasoning, you certainly have a point. Let us first speak about the fastness of citta. There is a sutta where the Buddha said: nothing is as quick to change as citta. Thus, it is beyond imagination. It cannot be compared with anything. 'Nothing is as quick'. I tried to find this sutta with the Yahoo search function, but I could not. In an old post you said that you were familiar with this sutta. The Buddha used similes to express this fastness, such as the simile of the monkey who grasps one branch and lets go of another. As to ruupa, seventeen ruupas have the same duration as one citta. Thus still very fast! We cannot express this by way of mathematical terms. But pa~n~naa when developed can shoot from far, very fast and accurately. Only pa~n~naa can know how fast naama and ruupa arise and fall away. Pa~n~naa has to be extremely fast. > ----------------------------------------------- > H: Do some people live longer than others? Do some plants last longer > than others. Do mountains last longer than lightning flashes? ------- N: Here you use similes, speaking in figurative language. This is not wrong, but here we are in the world of conventional terms, not in the world of paramattha dhammas. ------- Nina. #113274 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Jan 30, 2011 1:51 pm Subject: Re: Techno-dhamma discussion - meditation truth_aerator Dear Sarah, all, >S:He hadn't had time for his meditation in the morning, so we were >looking out for withdrawal symptoms, but strangely, he seemed to >survive, even thrive!:-) (Take note, Alex!) Well, it seems to me that meditation is better than doing something akusala. IMHO, it also allows to temporary suppress the hindrances or defilements so that right view that one has read previously could do its job and path be developed. Even if samatha meditation was with wrong view (if such is even possible), nevertheless it would suppress the hindrances, and right view that one heard previously could do its job when hindrances are knocked out, and correct, if any, wrong views held to attain samatha. IMHO. With metta, Alex #113275 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jan 30, 2011 9:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Techno-dhamma discussion - meditation upasaka_howard Hi, Alex (and Sarah) - In a message dated 1/30/2011 4:51:20 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Dear Sarah, all, >S:He hadn't had time for his meditation in the morning, so we were >looking out for withdrawal symptoms, but strangely, he seemed to >survive, even thrive!:-) (Take note, Alex!) Well, it seems to me that meditation is better than doing something akusala. IMHO, it also allows to temporary suppress the hindrances or defilements so that right view that one has read previously could do its job and path be developed. Even if samatha meditation was with wrong view (if such is even possible), nevertheless it would suppress the hindrances, and right view that one heard previously could do its job when hindrances are knocked out, and correct, if any, wrong views held to attain samatha. IMHO. With metta, Alex ====================================== Not having "withdrawal symptoms" only indicates not being hooked. I do not meditate on occasional days, and, I suffer no obvious ill effects. Mental cultivation isn't a one-shot deal, nor are salutary effects lost so easily. Sarah, do you find that you need Abhidhamma-study fixes? ;-) Engaging in useful activities in a way that doesn't pervert them is to the good, is it not? With metta, Howard P. S. Sarah, I know that what you wrote was with tongue in cheek. (Yet not fully so, I believe!) "Abandon what is unskillful, monks. It is possible to abandon what is unskillful. If it were not possible to abandon what is unskillful, I would not say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' But because it is possible to abandon what is unskillful, I say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' If this abandoning of what is unskillful were conducive to harm and pain, I would not say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' But because this abandoning of what is unskillful is conducive to benefit and pleasure, I say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' "Develop what is skillful, monks. It is possible to develop what is skillful. If it were not possible to develop what is skillful, I would not say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' But because it is possible to develop what is skillful, I say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' If this development of what is skillful were conducive to harm and pain, I would not say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' But because this development of what is skillful is conducive to benefit and pleasure, I say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.'" — _AN 2.19_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an02/an02.019.than.html) #113276 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Jan 30, 2011 2:59 pm Subject: Re: notes from Bangkok with A.Sujin 3b epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > ------- > N: Yes, the Buddha had two different ways of teaching: in the > conventional way and by way of ultimate realities. Some people needed > the conventional way whereas others could do without that. The > conventional way could prepare the listeners for the deeper teaching > of the four noble Truths. That sounds pretty good to me. I see the two levels of teaching as more of a continuum, but I understand why you see them as separate. I still think that the conventional teaching is valuable in its own right. I don't have the gnostic view that only the ultimate understanding of reality has any value. I see the path in terms of grades of understanding and a gradual understanding and gradual detachment. I think the commentarial view is also gradual, but the gradual aspect comes from pariyatti or correct view prior to direct seeing, whereas I see the conventional understanding as giving rise to ane extent of detachment that is genuine and being part of the gradual development towards complete understanding. I couldn't find a particular shirt that I like a lot and it seemed to be missing. I got upset about it, not only for the sake of that shirt, but because it made it seem that things were out of control and anything can disappear at any time. Of course that is true. My wife just had a car accident, and we are just "lucky" that she wasn't hurt, but the car was destroyed. It's quite a shock to realize how easily we could have heard much worse news. So while worrying about the shirt and looking all around, I was aware of attachment, clinging, fear and other things arising and part of my mind could see that all of this was happening and causing the suffering. In other words, it's not the shirt that's the problem but attachment. So to some little extent, I could step back and partially detach from this. Meanwhile observing all the "stuff" that is coming up, namas and images, lessens the intensity of it. Part of the mind even laughs that one cares so much about a shirt, and understands that the shirt is impermanent and will go eventually anyway, as will "oneself." I see this kind of process, this kind of awareness coming from Buddhism, to be quite helpful. It gives a different perspective towards one's own reactions. Ultimately, to see that there is no shirt, but only namas, rupas, concepts being grasped at by citta, might give a more definite release, but this is good also and one thing leads to another. Understanding I think increases a little bit, even from this kind of conventional understanding. > ------- > > > > R: Something like Buddha's corpse contemplations may work on two > > levels: first, we may see that our body as we know it really is > > going to die and dissipate and if we are faced with that reality we > > can have more detachment; second, we can begin to see that each > > perception that we have of the dissolution of the body is made up > > of many changes, many arising rupas and that the perception itself > > is momentary. So to me, instead of separating these two levels of > > understanding and detachment, I see them as part of a continuum > > with both important, and I see both levels as being connected. > ----- > N: I would rather say, different ways of teaching, but both of these > are valuable. It depends on conditions what level is relevant of this > or that person. If we are faced with a corpse it is not sure that by > just thinking there will be more detachment. Direct awareness and > understanding of realities one at a time leads to detachment from the > idea of self. We have to remember that the first goal is detachment > from the idea of self. When that has been eradicated there will very, > very gradually be detachment from other objects. Maybe you can say a little bit more abut this. How does the idea of self arise and how does detachment from self-concept come about? Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #113277 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Jan 30, 2011 3:05 pm Subject: Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Modes of Materiality epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > KH: Every wrong version of the Buddha's teaching – and every wrong practice - involves the idea of a self who can, or can not, do something. Good to know! How do you know that your view is the right view? Has it been verified by a direct teaching of a scripture or arahant? What's your source? Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #113278 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Jan 30, 2011 3:17 pm Subject: Re: Techno-dhamma discussion 4 with Pt epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear Friends, > > Pt kindly came over to visit us for another techno-dhamma discussion yesterday afternoon. ... > > He hadn't had time for his meditation in the morning, so we were looking out for withdrawal symptoms, but strangely, he seemed to survive, even thrive!:-) (Take note, Alex!) Hmf. ;-( :-) > For most of the afternoon we sat where he is most comfortable - at the dining room table (which has never yet been used as a dining room table), discussing dhamma away from the distracting views of torquoise sea, beautiful surf waves (Ken H!) and golden sands. As usual, we ended up surrounded by screw drivers, wires and, a new addition - cassettes from the 70s of dhamma discussions. While we went through Pt's dhamma-list, he meticulously took a couple of the cassettes to pieces to try and repair them so that they can be converted and digitized like all the others. He and Jon also were having another go at re-loading windows 7 to try and get my "bad-kamma" computer to print. We have one of those too. Quick OT review of recent computer kamma and car kamma: Computer: 1. Wife's computer suddenly breaks down completely. 2. Can't back up files as it threatens to degrade hard drive. 3. I buy adapter which arrives with no instructions. 4. I figure out "by feel" how to remove her hard drive and attach to adapter. I magically succeed in downloading her important files. 5. I put hard drive back in and manage to seal it back up. 6. We buy new computer and send the old one back for warranty payout [still in process.] Car: 1. Wife can't get home from work in terrible snowstorm, slipping on all uphill roads. Finally car is stuck in snow drift far from home. No road service, all roads jammed. 2. Wife walks for miles towards home, taken in along the way by a couple who have no electricity but have working fireplace. She sits by fire, then takes off to walk again. 3. I manage to drive my other car partway up in her direction on the icy road, and pick her up. We make it back home. 4. The next day we drive up to her car, shovel it out and manage to get both cars back safe, parked near our condo. 5. A few days later, she is on her way to pick up our daughter at dance class in the same car, tries to make a left turn and is smashed by a fast-moving car. 6. My wife is fine, the car is destroyed. This is the second car destroyed while making a left turn across a highway in the past 5 years. I know that is a long way of saying "me too," but computers [and cars I guess for us] seem to have a lot of kamma, don't they? :-) > I'm half-thinking of suggesting Pt moves in here....such a pleasure and so very helpful to have around! Pt, perhaps you'd at least consider this area when you have to make your next move... I'd like to meet Pt some day - he seems awfully nice; and I can imagine having fun dissecting computers and things. Oh well, maybe when my wife retires we will get to travel around and see some of our faraway friends. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #113279 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Jan 30, 2011 3:25 pm Subject: Re: Techno-dhamma discussion - meditation epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Dear Sarah, all, > > >S:He hadn't had time for his meditation in the morning, so we were >looking out for withdrawal symptoms, but strangely, he seemed to >survive, even thrive!:-) (Take note, Alex!) > > Well, it seems to me that meditation is better than doing something akusala. IMHO, it also allows to temporary suppress the hindrances or defilements so that right view that one has read previously could do its job and path be developed. Even if samatha meditation was with wrong view (if such is even possible), nevertheless it would suppress the hindrances, and right view that one heard previously could do its job when hindrances are knocked out, and correct, if any, wrong views held to attain samatha. I think it is a little strange for you and for me, as well as for Howard and some others, to see meditation treated with suspicion and by some [Ken H. comes to mind] with derision. I tend to think that unless one is holding their breath and generating wrong-view thoughts a mile a minute that meditation tends to be helpful rather than a source of more delusion. To use a yoga metaphor, it is really 'standing meditation on its head' to see "right conceptualization" as breeding "right view" and heading towards direct seeing, while considering meditation to be based on "self-concept" and breeding more "wrong view." Usually one thinks of meditation as a chance to drop concepts and pay attention to what is appearing through the senses and observe what is occurring in the mind with more directness and less distraction, leading towards more gradual samatha and vipassana - exactly what the Abhidhamma would like us to do. But for some reason meditation is seen here as a willful and unwholesome shortcut for achieving what should take many lifetimes. I'm willing to take a chance and sit as the Buddha instructed rather than spend all my time thinking. There's no reason why we can't study the teachings and practice meditation in the same lifetime. [I was tempted to say, 'in the same breath.'] Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #113280 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Jan 30, 2011 3:34 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Techno-dhamma discussion - meditation epsteinrob Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > Not having "withdrawal symptoms" [from meditation] only indicates not being hooked. I do > not meditate on occasional days, and, I suffer no obvious ill effects. > Mental cultivation isn't a one-shot deal, nor are salutary effects lost so > easily. You know as well as I do, Howard, that meditation is a dangerous and addictive drug, just as the Buddha warned, and that even a moment away from meditation can cause dangerous seizures once one is addicted. That is why the Buddha often reminded the monks to avoid meditation at all costs, and if possible, not to breathe at all, as one might inadvertently pay mindful attention to the breath with many consequent akusala results. It may take lifetimes to reverse the ill effects of meditation, but I'm too addicted and I can't stop! ;-) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #113281 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Jan 30, 2011 3:42 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: What are 5 sense faculties (pasada-rupa)? + momentariness epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > N: Here we have the famous apples and oranges :-)) > It is fast, but we cannot make comparisons. If we wonder about that > it is thinking that does not lead anywhere. It distracts from the > goal of the teachings: detachment. > When we just understand: it appears and disappears immediately, it > will help to understand anattaa, beyond control. > Trees or cars are concepts that do not have the characteristics of > impermanence, dukkha and anattaa. Only naama and ruupa have these > three general characteristics. This brings up my continued interest in what I consider to be the conventional teaching of the Buddha. Sure, ultimately there is no "whole car" as there is no "whole chariot," but according to the Buddha the chariot breaks down into smaller and smaller units which can never be finally defined, rather than it being a concept replaced by a totally different view of reality. As I see it, the car over time displays a "cumulative" view of what is happening on the microscopic level of dhammas. We see the car as a whole by putting together a lot of rupas and namas in our mental image and thought. But there is a reason why over time we see the car that was shiny and new age and finally break down. There is something actually happening on the level of the rupas that we do not observe directly that causes this result, so in the cumulative conventional view we are able to observe the results of anicca and anatta - change and dissolution, lack of control - even though we cannot directly observe the momentary process of anicca and anatta as an arahant can. By deriving the understanding of anicca and anatta from what we see of ordinary object-self relations, we can gradually get a more refined view and approach the actual dhammas that make up our conventional lives. Even though I *think* I already know the car will get old and break down, I live with my nice new car as if this will not happen and cling to its newness and niceness. Then when it gets the first big scratch I am terribly upset, because somehow I did not expect this to happen. To study conventionally and know that all things are impermanent on the level of cherished objects and images, is a good place to start even as one approaches the reality of momentariness and fleeting arising and dissolution of dhammas. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = #113282 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jan 30, 2011 11:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Techno-dhamma discussion - meditation upasaka_howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 1/30/2011 6:34:57 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, epsteinrob@... writes: Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > Not having "withdrawal symptoms" [from meditation] only indicates not being hooked. I do > not meditate on occasional days, and, I suffer no obvious ill effects. > Mental cultivation isn't a one-shot deal, nor are salutary effects lost so > easily. You know as well as I do, Howard, that meditation is a dangerous and addictive drug, just as the Buddha warned, and that even a moment away from meditation can cause dangerous seizures once one is addicted. That is why the Buddha often reminded the monks to avoid meditation at all costs, and if possible, not to breathe at all, as one might inadvertently pay mindful attention to the breath with many consequent akusala results. It may take lifetimes to reverse the ill effects of meditation, but I'm too addicted and I can't stop! ;-) Best, Robert E. ============================ I found myself smiling broadly while reading this until I came to "and if possible, not to breathe at all," at which point I laughed out loud!! ;-)) With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #113283 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Jan 30, 2011 8:18 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: What are 5 sense faculties (pasada-rupa)? + momentariness truth_aerator Hello Robert E, Nina, all, >R:This brings up my continued interest in what I consider to be the >conventional teaching of the Buddha. Sure, ultimately there is no >"whole car" as there is no "whole chariot," but according to the >Buddha the chariot breaks down into smaller and smaller units which >can never be finally defined, rather than it being a concept >replaced by a totally different view of reality. Right. But the car as an assemblage of parts (or whole is sum of its parts) still exists if parts exist. An assemblage called "car" has a different function than assemblage of parts for some other technological machine. Different functions require different causes. If parts exists, then the assemblage of parts (a whole) does exist as well - and can be distinguished from a different whole . I am not sure how beneficial for worldlings is the teaching of cars parts appearing, wearing down and passing away billions of times per second. But the gross impermanence plus hard work to maintain the car, that can be the source of contemplation and dispassion. A car, especially luxurious one, gives a lot of hassle and things to worry about. One has to work hard to earn the money, one has to be cautions not to scratch it, and it also can be an object that thieves might want to take. Ultimately this possession can posses the "owner". Craving for brand new car, just leads to more stress and more complications. IMHO. With metta, Alex #113284 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jan 30, 2011 8:29 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Techno-dhamma discussion 4 with Pt sarahprocter... Dear Nina & Pt, More on the ayatanas: ---------- >> S: for other cittas in the process, although heart-base is the base > of arising, the eye-base has not fallen away and is still included. > So there is the coming together of eye-base, visible object, the > respective citta, the cetasikas and the subtle rupa of heart-base. ------- >N: Yes, when summing up all the aayatanas at the different moments it becomes complicated. Just a remark about the eybase. Can we just say: eyesense has not fallen away yet? I think that when the heartbase is base, the eyesense cannot be base at the same time. ------- S: At the moment of seeing consciousness, eye-base is the only base (vatthu) for that citta to arise. When the other cittas in the eye-door process arise, heart-base is the only vatthu for those cittas to arise. However, when these other cittas in the process arise, the eye-sense/eye-base, the pasada rupa has not yet fallen away and remains the doorway and a conditioning factor for those cittas to arise. Therefore, at these moments when cittas other than seeing consciousness arise in the eye-door process, there is the meeting of the 4 ayatanas of: 1) cakkhayatana (the pasada rupa of eye-sense, 2) rupayatana (the visible object) 3) manayatana (the citta), 4)dhammayatana (the cetasikas) See under "Classification of the Bases" in the Sammohavinodanii, #222: "For only the eye-base is the door of arising, and only the visible-data base is the object of the consciousness group which is included in a cognitive series (viithi) of eye-consciousness." So in the eye-door process, as I understand: A)There are 3 bhavanga cittas. At these moments there are only 2 ayatanas meeting: 1) manayatana(bhavanga citta) and 2) dhammayatana (the cetasikas which accompany the bhavanga citta and the subtle rupa, heart-base, haddaya-vatthu, as base). B)There is 1 adverting consciousness citta (cakkhu dvaravajjana citta). At this moment there are 4 ayatanas meeting: 1) cakkhayatana (eye-sense), 2) rupayatana (visible object), 3) manayatana (the citta), 4) dhammayatana (the cetasikas accommpanying the citta and the heart-base). C) There is 1 seeing consciousness citta (cakkhu vinnana citta). At this moment there are 4 ayatanas meeting: 1) cakkhayatana (eye-sense which is door and base), 2) rupayatana (visible object), 3) manayatana (the citta), 4) dhammayatana (the cetasikas accommpanying the citta). D) The rest of the vithi cittas in the process(cittas 6 -17). At all these moments there are 4 ayatanas meeting: 1) cakkhayatana (eye-sense), 2) rupayatana (visible object), 3) manayatana (the citta), 4) dhammayatana (the cetasikas accommpanying the citta and the heart-base). For these cittas, the visible object has not yet fallen away and similarly, the eye-base, the pasada rupa, has also not fallen away, so it is a condition, a paccaya for the entire process starting with they eye-door adverting consciousness. Without the eye-base, none of these cittas starting with the adverting consciousness can arise and perform their various functions. (As I recall, at the moment of the 3 bhavangas, the visible object and the eye-base have already arisen, but the bhavanga citta has its own object 9a concept or past dhamma), so visible object and eye-base are not ayatanas at these moments.) Thanks for the chance to revise my understanding in this complicated area as discussed at the weekend with Pt. Metta Sarah ======== #113285 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jan 30, 2011 10:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Techno-dhamma discussion 4 with Pt nilovg Dear Sarah, Op 31-jan-2011, om 5:29 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > Thanks for the chance to revise my understanding in this > complicated area as discussed at the weekend with Pt. ------- N: Thank you for the details. For some people it is difficult that aayatana and vatthu are translated as base. Do not throw the old cassettes, Gabi is very happy with these. She can also hear on her radio MP3, perhaps Lodewijk's Perfections maybe good for her. ------ Nina. #113286 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jan 30, 2011 11:26 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sotapanna nilovg Dear Vince, Op 29-jan-2011, om 0:34 heeft Vince het volgende geschreven: > Then when somebody says "I have realized nibbana" or "I have > eradicated ignorance", it would be delusion, because the > eradication of > ignorance only can exist in the present moment. ------ N:At the moment of enlightenment the maggacitta of the arahat eradicates ignorance, but at that moment ignorance could not arise together with the maggacitta. It is the latent tendency of ignorance accumulated in the citta that is eradicated. ------ > V: Therefore, somebody can think he > had a past experience of nibbana but it will be delusion because he > forget what > some Suttas says: "this is not me, not mine, not my self". > However, also we check inside some Suttas about the memory of that > event as a > point of reference for the Dhamma practice. > So, What can be the right way to manage such memory (nama) for the > sotapanna? > A sotapanna should discard it absolutely?. Or should he/she > preserve that > reference in some way? ------- N: It is not a matter of managing, discarding or preserving memories. Whatever has conditions to arise will arise. Memory is only a kind of naama. > --------- >> Quote N: It is good to remember that as soon as there is >> attachment to have >> more pa~n~naa it is counteractive. > > V: I think what you explain here is probably the more important > point and also more > difficult for any person. ------ N: Sure, it is difficult because we have accumulated such an amount of attachment. -------- > V: It remembers when somebody falls to the sea ignoring > how to swing. ... In such moments the bhikkhu way seems to > be easier and safer, although I ignore if all this crazy surfing > has some added > benefit. As you are a little older than me, What do you think about > the two ways?. > Or Maybe just we should flow with the life to anywhere we go? ------ N: With right understanding, that is the point. Flow with the life with right understanding of the reality occurring now. No matter what it is: pleasant or unpleasant, kusala or akusala. This is for layman and bhikkhu. When one has true accumulations for becoming a bhikkhu one will lead the life of a bhikkhu which is excellent. But both bhikkhu and layman can develop right understanding of naama and ruupa, each in their own life. --------- Nina. #113287 From: "colette" Date: Sun Jan 30, 2011 11:09 pm Subject: Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Modes of Materiality ksheri3 Hi Nina, Howard, et al, Nina writes: Whatever arises is conditioned and can be object of mindfulness. colette: is it possible, according to Buddhist dogma, to CHANGE CONDITIONING? I'm suggesting that MINDFULNESS focuses the mind and consciousness. CONDITIONING exists in the mind and consciousness and is made manifest through the body consciousnesses. I believe that there is a way to CHANGE the conditioning AFTER IT HAS BEEN COGNIZED. Is there any sutta or other dogma that points to this ability? toodles, colette #113288 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jan 30, 2011 11:43 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Techno-dhamma discussion 4 with Pt sarahprocter... Dear Nina, (Btw, I'd better let Pt say more about his work if he feels inclined to do so.) --- On Mon, 31/1/11, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Thanks for the chance to revise my understanding in this > complicated area as discussed at the weekend with Pt. ------- N: Thank you for the details. For some people it is difficult that aayatana and vatthu are translated as base. ... S: Yes, I think this is confusing too. As you say, better to refer to eye-sense than to eye-base when vatthu is not being referred to. However, as "bases" is used in almost all the translations for ayatanas, we'd better understand what is meant. For a translation of ayatana, nothing is very good. ... >Do not throw the old cassettes, ... S: No, we keep them because sometimes we come across problems with the conversions and have to re-check. Lots of fiddly work, but worth the effort. Metta Sarah ======= #113289 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Jan 31, 2011 12:57 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Modes of Materiality nilovg Hi Howard, Op 29-jan-2011, om 16:08 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven > ------ > N: Thinking has conditions for its arising, no one can prevent that. > --------------------------------------------- > H: If by "no one can prevent that" you mean that volitional actions > cannot accomplish it, and that were true, then we would be lost! > --------------------------------------------- > N: It is so fast, it has already arisen before one realises it. ---------- > H Quote N: > But when the reality is thinking, this can be known as just a dhamma. > We do not try to loosen those chains, there is nobody there who > could. Whatever arises is conditioned and can be object of > mindfulness. > ------------------------------------------- > H: Nina, there is no self/core-of-being to loosen those chains, but > there > are intentional steps of right effort, contemplation, listening and > contemplating, and more that can be taken - ------- N: I do not deny this, but they all arise because of conditions, they are just dhammas. And, right effort is only right effort of the eightfold Path when it accompanies right understanding. Thus right effort is conditioned. ------ > H:a number of intentional, internal activities urged by the Buddha > and quite doable - that can and do calm andclarify the mind and > loosen the conceptual chains. I am quite convinced of this on the > basis of the Buddha's teachings and my own practice that you are > mistaken on this particular issue. How many times has the Buddha > not taught "This you can do. If you could not do this, I would not > teach it!"??? > --------------------------------------------- > > N: Yes, I know these suttas, they are very impressive. There are > activities and these are conditioned naamas. The sutta is a > reminder not to become dishearted. ------ Nina. #113290 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Jan 31, 2011 1:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: notes from Bangkok with A.Sujin 3b nilovg Dear Rob E, Op 30-jan-2011, om 23:59 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > Quote N: If we are faced with a corpse it is not sure that by > > just thinking there will be more detachment. Direct awareness and > > understanding of realities one at a time leads to detachment from > the > > idea of self. We have to remember that the first goal is detachment > > from the idea of self. When that has been eradicated there will > very, > > very gradually be detachment from other objects. > > Maybe you can say a little bit more abut this. How does the idea of > self arise and how does detachment from self-concept come about? -------- N: The latent tendencies of ignorance and wrong view have been accumulated for aeons. They condition the arising of clinging to the idea of self time and again, from our youth. I am seeing, I am thinking, I am attached, 'I' all the time. Then, through hearing and studying the Dhamma we learn that these ideas are false, not according to the truth. We learn what realities are. All these phenomena we were used to taking for self are just dhammas arising because of conditions. Studying and considering are not enough. We have to verify the truth right at this moment. What is seeing, can we make it arise? What is mindfulness, can we make it arise? By investigating the present moment and being aware of it understanding develops, until there is no more doubt that whatever arises does so not because of a self who controls, but because of its own conditions. This will eventually lead to detachment. ****** Nina. #113291 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Jan 31, 2011 1:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What are 5 sense faculties (pasada-rupa)? + momentariness nilovg Dear Rob E, I was sorry to hear about Mel's car accident. It must have been a shock. Op 31-jan-2011, om 0:42 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > There is something actually happening on the level of the rupas > that we do not observe directly that causes this result, so in the > cumulative conventional view we are able to observe the results of > anicca and anatta - change and dissolution, lack of control - even > though we cannot directly observe the momentary process of anicca > and anatta as an arahant can. -------- N: A sotaapanna, and even before, when stages of insight are being realised. ------ > R: By deriving the understanding of anicca and anatta from what we > see of ordinary object-self relations, we can gradually get a more > refined view and approach the actual dhammas that make up our > conventional lives. ------- N: The question is: how. You gave the example of a car and its parts. I like to change this into a body and its parts. I heard this morning on a recording the following from Kh Sujin. We cling so much to our whole body which seems to exist. There are ruupas all over the body and they seem to be there all the time. Only one ruupa appears at a time, such as hardness. All the other ruupas that we do not notice arise and fall away very fast and it is sa~n~naa that remembers them as our body. Thus, they are not there, only in our memory they seem to exist. First we understand this on the level of thinking, but in being mindful of just one ruupa that appears, there will be a clearer understanding and also more detachment. ------- Nina. #113292 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Jan 31, 2011 1:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Modes of Materiality nilovg Dear Colette, Op 31-jan-2011, om 8:09 heeft colette het volgende geschreven: > Nina writes: > Whatever arises is conditioned and can be object of mindfulness. > > colette: is it possible, according to Buddhist dogma, to CHANGE > CONDITIONING? > > Is there any sutta or other dogma that points to this ability? > > > ---------- N: There can be a change o conditions for better or for worse. By listening and considering the Dhamma conditions are being built up for the growth of right understanding of realities. But even listening and considering are conditioned, even the change of conditions is conditioned. We cannot escape conditions. All the suttas point to the change of conditions by the development of right understanding. Take the sutta Howard referred to: one can do it, if it were not possible I would not tell you to do it. ------ Nina. #113293 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:59 am Subject: [dsg] Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 3. nilovg Dear Han and friends, Ch 4. no 3. Recapitulation: The path does not eradicate past, future or present defilements. The defilements that arose in the past have already ceased, thus, they are not present at the moment the path- consciousness arises. As to the defilements that will arise in the future, these have not yet arisen. As to presently arising defilements, it is impossible that these could arise together with the magga-citta. However, the path eradicates latent tendencies. When the magga-citta, path-consciousness, has eradicated latent tendencies there are no more conditions for the arising of akusala, since there are no germs of it in the form of latent tendencies. That is why it is said that when someone eradicates latent tendencies he actually eradicates akusala of past, future and present. ---------- The “Dispeller of Delusionâ€, the commentary to the “Book of Analysisâ€, Ch 8, on the four Right Efforts, Suttanta division, explains about the eradication of defilements by the Noble eightfold Path. We read: “ Arisen (upanna) is fourfold: 1.arisen as actually occurring (vattamaanuppanna.m) 2.arisen as experienced and gone (bhutvaa vigatuppanna.m) 3.arisen having got an opportunity (okaasakatuppanna.m) 4. arisen having obtained a plane (bhuumiladdhuppanna.m). Herein, (1) those defilements which are existent, being possessed of arising and so on [1], are ‘arisen as actually occurring’. (2) When kamma has been accumulated by impulsion [N:javana], the [kamma-] result which has ceased after experiencing the essential nature of the object is ‘gone away having experienced’, and kamma which has arisen and ceased is ‘gone away having been’; both are counted as ‘arisen as experienced and gone’. (3) Profitable or unprofitable kamma inhibits the result of other kamma and makes the opportunity for its own result. When such an opportunity is thus made, the result which arises, from the [time of the] making of the opportunity, is counted as arisen; this is called ‘ arisen having got an opportunity’. (4) But the five aggregates are called the plane of insight. These are divided into past, etc. But the defilements inhering in these are not to be said to be past, future or present; inhering in the past aggregates, they are unabandoned. Inhering in the future aggregates and in the present aggregates, they are also unabandoned. This is called ‘ arisen having obtained a plane’. Hence the ancients said: ‘The defilements which are unabolished in this or that plane are counted as arisen having obtained a plane’. ‘Arisen’ is again fourfold thus: (5) arisen as behaviour (samudaacaaruppanna.m), (6) arisen because an object has been taken up (aaramma.naadhigahituppanna.m), (7) arisen through non-suppression (avikkhambhituppanna.m), (8) arisen through non-abolition (asamugghaatituppanna.m). -------- Herein, (5) that existing now is what is called ‘arisen as behaviourâ€. (6) After the eyes have been opened once, when an object has been grasped as a sign, it cannot be said that the defilements will not arise at any moment whenever [the object is] remembered (anussaritakkha.ne). Why? Because the object has been taken up. Like what? Just as it cannot be said that milk will not issue from a place on a milk tree which has been repeatedly struck by a hatchet. Thus this is called ‘ arisen because an object has been taken up’. (7) But when the defilements are not suppressed by an attainment, it is not to be said that they will not arise in that situation. Why? Because of non-suppression. Like what? Like it cannot be said that if one were to strike a milk tree with a hatchet, milk would not issue from that very spot. Thus this is called ‘ arisen through non- suppression’. (8) But the idea that it is not to be said that defilements which are not abolished by the path will not arise in one even if reborn in the summit of existence, should be elaborated in the same way. This is called ‘arisen through non-abolition’. Among these (varieties of) ‘arisen’, that is to say, (1) ‘arisen as actually occurring’, (2) arisen as experienced and gone’, (3) ‘arisen having got an opportunity’ and (5) ‘arisen as behaviour’, are not to be annihilated by the path; but the four kinds of ‘arisen’, that is to say, (4) ‘arisen having obtained a plane’, (6) ‘ arisen because an object has been taken up’, (7) ‘ arisen through non-suppression’ and (8) ‘ arisen through non-abolition’, are to be annihilated by the path. For the path, on arising abandons these defilements. The defilements which it abandons are not to be said to be past, future or present.†------- Footnote: This refers to the three moments of citta, that are arising, presence and cessation. *************** Pali text of mahaasakuludaayisuttava.n.nanaa (identical to the Dispeller of Delusion): UppannÄnaṃ pÄpakÄnanti ettha pana catubbidhaṃ uppannaṃ vattamÄnuppannaṃ bhutvÄvigatuppannaṃ, okÄsakatuppannaṃ, bhÅ«miladdhuppannanti. Tattha ye kilesÄ vijjamÄnÄ uppÄdÄdisamaá¹…gino, idaṃ vattamÄnuppannaṃ nÄma. Kamme pana javite Ärammaṇarasaṃ anubhavitvÄ niruddhavipÄko bhutvÄ vigataṃ nÄma. Kammaṃ uppajjitvÄ niruddhaṃ bhavitvÄ vigataṃ nÄma. Tadubhayampi bhutvÄvigatuppannanti saá¹…khaṃ gacchati. KusalÄkusalaṃ kammaṃ aññassa kammassa vipÄkaṃ paá¹­ibÄhitvÄ attano vipÄkassa okÄsaṃ karoti, evaṃ kate okÄse vipÄko uppajjamÄno okÄsakaraṇato paá¹­á¹­hÄya uppannoti saá¹…khaṃ gacchati. Idaṃ okÄsakatuppannaṃ nÄma. PañcakkhandhÄ pana vipassanÄya bhÅ«mi nÄma. Te atÄ«tÄdibhedÄ honti. Tesu anusayitakilesÄ pana atÄ«tÄ vÄ anÄgatÄ vÄ paccuppannÄ vÄti na vattabbÄ. AtÄ«takhandhesu anusayitÄpi hi appahÄ«nÄva honti, anÄgatakhandhesu, paccuppannakhandhesu anusayitÄpi appahÄ«nÄva honti. Idaṃ bhÅ«miladdhuppannaṃ nÄma. TenÄhu porÄá¹‡Ä â€“ ‘‘tÄsu tÄsu bhÅ«mÄ«su asamugghÄtitakilesÄ bhÅ«miladdhuppannÄti saá¹…khaṃ gacchantī’’ti. Aparampi catubbidhaṃ uppannaṃ samudÄcÄruppannaṃ, ÄrammaṇÄdhigahituppannaṃ, avikkhambhituppannaṃ asamugghÄtituppannanti. Tattha sampati vattamÄnaṃyeva samudÄcÄruppannaṃ nÄma. Sakiṃ cakkhÅ«ni ummÄ«letvÄ Ärammaṇe nimitte gahite anussaritÄnussaritakkhaṇe kilesÄ nuppajjissantÄ«ti na vattabbÄ. KasmÄ? Ä€rammaṇassa adhigahitattÄ. YathÄ kiṃ? YathÄ khÄ«rarukkhassa kuá¹­hÄriyÄ ÄhatÄhataá¹­á¹­hÄne khÄ«raṃ na nikkhamissatÄ«ti na vattabbaṃ, evaṃ. Idaṃ ÄrammaṇÄdhigahituppannaṃ nÄma. SamÄpattiyÄ avikkhambhitÄ kilesÄ pana imasmiṃ nÄma á¹­hÄne nuppajjissantÄ«ti na vattabbÄ. KasmÄ? AvikkhambhitattÄ. YathÄ kiṃ? YathÄ sace khÄ«rarukkhe kuá¹­hÄriyÄ Ähaneyyuṃ, imasmiṃ nÄma á¹­hÄne khÄ«raṃ na nikkhameyyÄti na vattabbaṃ, evaṃ. Idaṃ avikkhambhituppannaṃ nÄma. Maggena asamugghÄtitakilesÄ pana bhavagge nibbattassÄpi uppajjantÄ«ti purimanayeneva vitthÄretabbaṃ. Idaṃ asamugghÄtituppannaṃ nÄma. Imesu uppannesu vattamÄnuppannaṃ bhutvÄvigatuppannaṃ okÄsakatuppannaṃ samudÄcÄruppannanti catubbidhaṃ uppannaṃ na maggavajjhaṃ, bhÅ«miladdhuppannaṃ ÄrammaṇÄdhigahituppannaṃ avikkhambhituppannaṃ asamugghÄtituppannanti catubbidhaṃ maggavajjhaṃ. Maggo hi uppajjamÄno ete kilese pajahati. So ye kilese pajahati, te atÄ«tÄ vÄ anÄgatÄ vÄ paccuppannÄ vÄti na vattabbÄ. ******************************** Nina. #113294 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Jan 31, 2011 7:07 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Techno-dhamma discussion - meditation epsteinrob Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Robert - > > In a message dated 1/30/2011 6:34:57 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, > epsteinrob@... writes: > > Hi Howard. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@ wrote: > > > Not having "withdrawal symptoms" [from meditation] only indicates > not being hooked. I do > > not meditate on occasional days, and, I suffer no obvious ill effects. > > Mental cultivation isn't a one-shot deal, nor are salutary effects lost > so > > easily. > > You know as well as I do, Howard, that meditation is a dangerous and > addictive drug, just as the Buddha warned, and that even a moment away from > meditation can cause dangerous seizures once one is addicted. That is why the > Buddha often reminded the monks to avoid meditation at all costs, and if > possible, not to breathe at all, as one might inadvertently pay mindful > attention to the breath with many consequent akusala results. It may take > lifetimes to reverse the ill effects of meditation, but I'm too addicted and I > can't stop! > > ;-) > > Best, > Robert E. > > ============================ > I found myself smiling broadly while reading this until I came to "and > if possible, not to breathe at all," at which point I laughed out loud!! > ;-)) :-) I have achieved non-breathing for a few moments at a time due to my intense meditation regimen, and am still working on it, but so far I can not keep it up continuously. Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - - - #113295 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jan 31, 2011 2:23 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Techno-dhamma discussion - meditation upasaka_howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 1/31/2011 10:07:44 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, epsteinrob@... writes: I have achieved non-breathing for a few moments at a time due to my intense meditation regimen, and am still working on it, but so far I can not keep it up continuously. =============================== You're just falling into that "no control" trap! Keep trying, man - you can do it!! ;-)) With breathless metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #113296 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Jan 31, 2011 7:31 am Subject: [dsg] Re: What are 5 sense faculties (pasada-rupa)? + momentariness epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello Robert E, Nina, all, > > >R:This brings up my continued interest in what I consider to be the >conventional teaching of the Buddha. Sure, ultimately there is no >"whole car" as there is no "whole chariot," but according to the >Buddha the chariot breaks down into smaller and smaller units which >can never be finally defined, rather than it being a concept >replaced by a totally different view of reality. > > Right. But the car as an assemblage of parts (or whole is sum of its parts) still exists if parts exist. > > An assemblage called "car" has a different function than assemblage of parts for some other technological machine. Different functions require different causes. > > If parts exists, then the assemblage of parts (a whole) does exist as well - and can be distinguished from a different whole . I think there are a couple of different things to distinguish here. I think it is right to say that the car exists in the sense that the physical parts do coordinate to perform a certain function and they do perform that function in coordination. In that sense there is certainly a car. We experience and use it all the time. In the same sense, there is a body. We get up, we walk around, we eat, we talk. There is no doubt that we can experience these things taking place. However, I think there is a distinction within this reality that is worth making and is what most people would mean by calling the car or the body "a concept" rather than "a reality." It is not that these parts do not come together or that this function does not take place, but that there is no existent entity that is inherently a car or body. That is just a way of defining all the phenomena that takes place. Why don't we define our physical units in terms of two bodies instead of one and call each body a half? In some ways we do this, we say that we are a "married couple" and when we talk in that way we define the unit as a "marriage" and there are "two people/bodies in it." You can't have a marriage without two people, it's just a definition. Yet there are certain functions the married couple performs that a "single person" can't do, like have a "couples date." These things really do come into account for certain occasions. Likewise if I am a tire specialist I may see tires all day and not think in terms of whole cars but in terms of different types of wheels and axles. So my unit is not a "car," but a wheel-axle arrangement and how it works. That is another definition of an entity that is suited to my intention and task. In that sense there is no final unit-boundary at "car" or "wheel" or "body" or "kidney" for a kidney specialist who looks at a body and sees a pair of kidneys first and foremost. They are all "realities" that we experience, but they are conventionally arranged and defined realities that shift in consciousness depending on the frame of reference. If I break my leg, I am all about my leg for a while. So in that sense these real conventional entities and realities that we use and experience are definitional or conceptual units within a broader or smaller frame of reference that is suited to the involvement of the moment. On another level, we can put all our tasks and definitions aside and say, what does the car ultimately come down to? And we can break it down into parts, then the parts into smaller parts and find, as the Buddha said, that like a banana tree, there is no core or substance to car or any of its parts. At the core of the car and all its parts is emptiness and non-entity, and the structure or conventional reality is built up around this emptiness through construction in the physical world, and concept in the mental world. It is worth looking at this level so we understand that our meanings are man-made and however useful our machines and bodies may be, they ultimately come down to nothing and are not worth holding onto. That ultimate level is not for driving the car or brushing the teeth, it is only for seeing what things are really made of and letting go of attachment. Again a different purpose and a different set of definitions. But for Buddhism, that is the final type of contemplation, to let go of wholes, parts and all our definitions of what they mean. However, I totally agree with what you say below, which I would consider the conventional teaching, and I will make a comment about it below. > I am not sure how beneficial for worldlings is the teaching of cars parts appearing, wearing down and passing away billions of times per second. But the gross impermanence plus hard work to maintain the car, that can be the source of contemplation and dispassion. > > A car, especially luxurious one, gives a lot of hassle and things to worry about. One has to work hard to earn the money, one has to be cautions not to scratch it, and it also can be an object that thieves might want to take. Ultimately this possession can posses the "owner". > > Craving for brand new car, just leads to more stress and more complications. This is the part of the conventional teaching that I think is very useful and I think it is part of what Buddha was teaching with the simile of the chariot. On a practical level, detachment and letting go have to do with what we hold onto and cherish in our ordinary world. Seeing the worry, suffering and inconvenience which comes along with wanting and even getting luxurious delicate items is a good example of why it is just causing more dependence and suffering to have your world based on possessions and maintaining them. If one contemplates this I think it can lead to letting go and less suffering. On an even more immediate "conventional" level one can contemplate the troubles with one's own body and not identify with it so strongly. Getting sick, wanting to do desired activities and resisting aging and slowing down create more forms of suffering. To realize that one can't control sickness and aging and *actively adjust* one's thoughts and lifestyle to accommodate the truth of the body, I think is a very helpful aspect of Buddhism, and I think it fits together very nicely with other aspects. For instance, if one accepts one's own body getting older and less active in some ways, one then can combine this with mudita and metta to be happy not only about one's own circumstance through acceptance, but also enjoy seeing the young people run around and go through their more active and enjoyable period with the body. One can be happy when someone else is successful even if one has not done everything they wanted in their life and through acceptance and detachment enjoy one's own activities within their current constraints. There is a lot to do with this prior to the realization of ultimate reality that is very helpful and I believe is a big part of the path. There is a book I just heard about written by a person who got very ill and used Buddhist teachings to reconstruct a happy life based on limited mobility, acceptance and mudita. This woman was full of suffering and unhappiness when she first got sick and lost her mobility, but by working with metta, mudita and other Buddhist teachings she changed her mental orientation and eliminated the "second arrow" in her illness. It is called: "How to Be Sick: A Buddhist-Inspired Guide for the Chronically Ill and Their Caregivers," by Toni Berhard. I know that a number of us are dealing with chronic illnesses and spouses who are ill, and I think this might be a good exploration of the conventional teaching of the Buddha, so useful for all of us while we are working on pariyatti for the long haul. Here is the link for US Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/How-Sick-Buddhist-Inspired-Chronically-Caregivers/dp/08617\ 16264/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1296487590&sr=1-1 I'm sure you can find it on UK Amazon and others as well. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #113297 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Jan 31, 2011 9:32 am Subject: [dsg] Re: notes from Bangkok with A.Sujin 3b epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: Rob. E.: > > Maybe you can say a little bit more abut this. How does the idea of > > self arise and how does detachment from self-concept come about? > -------- > N: The latent tendencies of ignorance and wrong view have been > accumulated for aeons. They condition the arising of clinging to the > idea of self time and again, from our youth. I am seeing, I am > thinking, I am attached, 'I' all the time. Then, through hearing and > studying the Dhamma we learn that these ideas are false, not > according to the truth. We learn what realities are. All these > phenomena we were used to taking for self are just dhammas arising > because of conditions. Studying and considering are not enough. We > have to verify the truth right at this moment. What is seeing, can we > make it arise? What is mindfulness, can we make it arise? By > investigating the present moment and being aware of it understanding > develops, until there is no more doubt that whatever arises does so > not because of a self who controls, but because of its own > conditions. This will eventually lead to detachment. Thank you, that's a very nice rundown. Self concept comes up in "I" this, "I" that and "I" the other. We don't realize that we are saying "I" to all these things that we don't actually control, and it is just a conceptual add-on. The investigation that you suggest to see if we can make seeing arise, or mindfulness arise, is a good one. I tried it on seeing, and I got a message in my sarcastic mind: "Welcome to the seeing which is already in progress." Seeing happens as soon as the eyes open, I don't have to make a decision to 'turn it on.' It's a good example of something that we obviously don't control, but we say "I" see this and "I" see that. Thanks, that is very helpful. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #113299 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Jan 31, 2011 12:26 pm Subject: concepts, ultimates & conditions truth_aerator Hello RobertE, All, >Robert E: First, thank you for your post #113296 If I understand you correctly, you seem to suggest that ultimate are what ultimately analysis reduces to one phenomena. I agree. I'd also add that, ultimates do not require mental theorizing. Theory, proofs, etc, require at least two things - so they cannot be totally irreducible. Here we have an interesting question: What about conditionality (such as 24 conditions)? Is conditionality ultimate or is it conceptual? There is no single material or mental piece called "condition XYZ" In fact, conditioning seems to require at least two phenomena, "cause and effect", and generally much more. Wouldn't this make condition be a conceptual reality? It also seems that certain amount of thinking is required to be able to have a concept of "conditionality" or "cause and effect.". I've heard that animals do not have knowledge of "causes and effect" sufficiently developed. Being conceptual reality, does it make it any less relevant? With metta, Alex #113300 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Jan 31, 2011 2:18 pm Subject: Re: What are 5 sense faculties (pasada-rupa)? + momentariness epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob E, > I was sorry to hear about Mel's car accident. It must have been a shock. Thank you, Nina. Yes, a shock, but strangely harmless - except for the car. The car was destroyed, but Melanie didn't even feel a shake from the impact. It was strange. We were on our way to have dinner to celebrate my parents' birthdays. We went to the accident and packed up the things from Melanie's car and then were able to drive away with her. So everyone was in the other car - Melanie, myself, my daughter and my mom and Dad. So we drove back to our neighborhood and went to dinner! Despite the shock, and of course we are upset, we decided to make the best of it and had a nice evening. > Op 31-jan-2011, om 0:42 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > > > There is something actually happening on the level of the rupas > > that we do not observe directly that causes this result, so in the > > cumulative conventional view we are able to observe the results of > > anicca and anatta - change and dissolution, lack of control - even > > though we cannot directly observe the momentary process of anicca > > and anatta as an arahant can. > -------- > N: A sotaapanna, and even before, when stages of insight are being > realised. Something to look forward to...eventually... > ------ > > R: By deriving the understanding of anicca and anatta from what we > > see of ordinary object-self relations, we can gradually get a more > > refined view and approach the actual dhammas that make up our > > conventional lives. > ------- > N: The question is: how. You gave the example of a car and its parts. > I like to change this into a body and its parts. > I heard this morning on a recording the following from Kh Sujin. We > cling so much to our whole body which seems to exist. There are > ruupas all over the body and they seem to be there all the time. Only > one ruupa appears at a time, such as hardness. All the other ruupas > that we do not notice arise and fall away very fast and it is > sa~n~naa that remembers them as our body. Thus, they are not there, > only in our memory they seem to exist. > First we understand this on the level of thinking, but in being > mindful of just one ruupa that appears, there will be a clearer > understanding and also more detachment. Thanks for the description. I do pay attention in line with my current abilities [or lack of abilities] to see what is being experienced in the moment. Even a little bit of this let's you understand that you are not experiencing a "whole" at any given time, but only aspects of experience. It is good to know. Even with the car accident and the physical shock that stays with you for a while, I thought to myself - 'that's how it goes; everything is gone in a moment, and it's over.' I now recall what KS said to Sarah when she was sick, and got better, about how it was "all gone now" and not worth reflecting over. Everything happens in an instant. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #113301 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Jan 31, 2011 2:26 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Modes of Materiality epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Colette, > Op 31-jan-2011, om 8:09 heeft colette het volgende geschreven: > > Nina writes: > > Whatever arises is conditioned and can be object of mindfulness. > > > > colette: is it possible, according to Buddhist dogma, to CHANGE > > CONDITIONING? > > > > Is there any sutta or other dogma that points to this ability? > > > > > > ---------- > N: There can be a change o conditions for better or for worse. By > listening and considering the Dhamma conditions are being built up > for the growth of right understanding of realities. But even > listening and considering are conditioned, even the change of > conditions is conditioned. We cannot escape conditions. > All the suttas point to the change of conditions by the development > of right understanding. Take the sutta Howard referred to: one can do > it, if it were not possible I would not tell you to do it. Conditionality is really the bottom line of Buddhism, isn't it? I remember a zen story along these lines. A monk had to spend a number of lifetimes reincarnated as a fox because he held onto the wrong view that one who is enlightened is free from conditions. This wrong view amounted to a self-view that he couldn't drop. In one lifetime he finally got the correct answer from one of the teachers, and when he understood it he was free. I think the teacher said something like "One who is enlightened does not fight against conditions" or "does not resist conditions." In any case, the answer had to do with knowing and accepting conditions, rather than being somehow immune to conditions. Even Buddha complained about his body getting old, and getting ready to "trade in" this body, which had become "like an old cart." I don't remember the sutta number, but I love that sutta. We're all human, even if enlightened. The enlightened knows the unconditioned and is thus mentally free, but is still subject to conditionality as long as he exists. I remember another story of Buddha having to stop on the side of the road to rest in his later years, walking from one town to another. It reminds me that there's no escape from conditions, but that is okay. I should keep track of those special suttas. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #113302 From: "Ken H" Date: Mon Jan 31, 2011 2:38 pm Subject: Re: Techno-dhamma discussion - meditation kenhowardau Hi Robert E and Howard, ---- <. . .> > RE: You know as well as I do, Howard, that meditation is a dangerous and addictive drug, just as the Buddha warned, and that even a moment away from meditation can cause dangerous seizures once one is addicted. ---------- KH: Belief in the efficacy of rite and ritual will certainly result to all sorts of unpleasant vipakka. However, no one can say exactly which vipakka has been caused by which kamma. Conventionally speaking, a doctor may be able to tell you, "This seizure, has been caused by your unnatural mental activities," but no one can say that in the ultimate sense. Most of our unpleasant feelings were conditioned in long-ago previous lifetimes. ---------------------- > RE: That is why the Buddha often reminded the monks to avoid meditation at all costs, and if possible, not to breathe at all, ---------------------- I'm sure he didn't tell them to stop breathing. However, some monks - when they truly understood the consequences of their wrong views - were known to vomit blood and die. It's a serious business, not to be taken lightly. ------------------------------ > RE: as one might inadvertently pay mindful attention to the breath with many consequent akusala results. It may take lifetimes to reverse the ill effects of meditation, but I'm too addicted and I can't stop! ------------------------------- It's true the Buddha did not teach religious rites and rituals, and any claim that he did teach them is horribly wrong. But what can we do about our deeds and misdeeds? We are what we are. Ultimately, we are just one conditioned citta following after another! :-) Ken H #113303 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Jan 31, 2011 3:22 pm Subject: Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 truth_aerator Hi KenH, all, >KH: It's true the Buddha did not teach religious rites and rituals, >and any claim that he did teach them is horribly wrong. What about Silabbata sutta? "when — by following a life of precept & practice, a life, a holy life that is followed as of essential worth — one's unskillful mental qualities decline while one's skillful mental qualities increase: that sort of precept & practice, life, holy life that is followed as of essential worth is fruitful." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.078.than.html With metta, Alex #113304 From: han tun Date: Mon Jan 31, 2011 3:49 pm Subject: Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 3. hantun1 Dear Nina, [Nina] Recapitulation: The path does not eradicate past, future or present defilements. The defilements that arose in the past have already ceased, thus, they are not present at the moment the path-consciousness arises. As to the defilements that will arise in the future, these have not yet arisen. As to presently arising defilements, it is impossible that these could arise together with the magga-citta. However, the path eradicates latent tendencies. When the magga-citta, path-consciousness, has eradicated latent tendencies there are no more conditions for the arising of akusala, since there are no germs of it in the form of latent tendencies. That is why it is said that when someone eradicates latent tendencies he actually eradicates akusala of past, future and present. [Han] Very clear explanation. Thank you very much. As regards the extracts from The “Dispeller of Delusionâ€, the commentary to the “Book of Analysis†I will study it and if there is any question I will come back to you. Respectfully, Han #113305 From: "colette" Date: Mon Jan 31, 2011 4:12 pm Subject: Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Modes of Materiality ksheri3 Hi Robert, Walk with me through this, will you. Lets do this step by step as the "conditioning" arises. > Conditionality is really the bottom line of Buddhism, isn't it? colette: I'll question that! You rest the entire premise of Buddhist philosophy THEN on CAUSE & CONDITION and I don't believe the Buddha would take such a polarized, extreme, position i.e. Nargarjuna's Middle Way. ---------------------- This wrong view amounted to a self-view that he couldn't drop. colette: my interpretation, the monk, THEN had no concept of ANATTA or could not/would not accept the position of ANATTA as being viable. ---------------------- In one lifetime he finally got the correct answer from one of the teachers, colette: something EXTERIOR was handed to him: his understanding came from some "OTHER" PLACE (this substantiates SPACE and actual place of existance, wow, very anti-thetical of LONGDE and SEMSDE) but this is only an example you are using/applying. ---------------------- and when he understood it he was free. colette: his ATTACHMENT TO and subsistance on THE WHEEL OF SAMSARA exists. He, the monk, did not possess FREEDOM on his own. Freedom did not exist, for the monk, until AFTER he possessed this concept, this understanding, this agreement to and with the dogma. Like it is said of Buddha Nature, his freedom was not WITHIN himself; it could not be accessed WITHOUT subscription to the dogma/dependence on the dogma. SELF FULLFILLING PROPHECY the story, as an example, is equally effective as Tibetan Dough Ball Divination, correct? -------------------------- I think the teacher said something like "One who is enlightened does not fight against conditions" or "does not resist conditions." colette: this is my interpretation now. This is how I interpret what you repeat as the story saying. You have the right to forget the story and not remember it correctly. This is just my interpretation. What does "fighting against condition" mean? RESISTANCE. NON-ACCEPTANCE. REFUSAL??? refusal may be stretching it a bit. Resistance will have to be the best term I can apply. Okay, there is this FORCE pulling or pushing in a certain direction which we can say is THE CONDITION and the monk is fighting against that characteristic of PHYSICS, force i.e. momentum. An object at rest will tend to remain at rest and an object in motion will tend to remain in motion. The monk must be static, not in motion, possessing a STILLNESS or Samadhi in meditation. SUCHNESS ONLY EXISTS WITHIN STILLNESS, the calm of mindfulness and focus. Once stillness is TRANSFORMED into motion THEN DEPENDENCE EXISTS DUE TO THE HEAT GENERATED BY THE RESISTANCE TO THE MOTION see flying and the force of DRAG on the object flying. Suchness does not exist in motion. and therefore is immune to ENLIGHTENMENT. But you also modify the statement by giving me an option thru "does not resist conditions". Hmmmm, I ponder my theory of Karma having the main characteristic of ELECTROMAGNETISM implying that RESISTANCE to the conditions means how much "voltage" the "suchness" can support in it's conductivity. MAYBE, then, the enligthenment is "resultant" from the "conditions" subjected upon the monk PERFORMING THE COGNITION. To fight against the "conditions" which are existant, "resist", is to fight against the hallucinatory EXTERIOR world see Mara, goddess of ILLUSION. FIGHTING, however, takes energy, HEAT (Tummo) heat is resultant from DRAG see the "skin" of the SR-72 after it flies a mission. Drag results from MOTION, "SUCHNESS" DOES NOT EXIST IN RUPA IN MOTION. IS IT POSSIBLE FOR THE MANTRA "Go Along To Get Along" a way to define STAGNATION? see "POLITBURO". A monk or the monk remaining in meditation while IGNORING the CONDITIONS THEN has the ability to achieve enlightenment. ----------------------------------- In any case, the answer had to do with knowing and accepting conditions, rather than being somehow immune to conditions. > colette: isn't that nothing more than COGNITION, "to know" the conditions? An Act, a Behavior, "to know"? Please be reminded that this is the roughest and most spontaneous example of a process that I'm applying to/in FORMLESSNESS. Feel free to question me on this since in my "learned behavior" interaction with others and/or my environment (mind-body-spirit, human-planet-universe) helps me to cognize and PURIFY my ability to make sense of the Asian philosophy I'm dealing with. Thanx for the opportunity to play. toodles, colette > > Conditionality is really the bottom line of Buddhism, isn't it? I remember a zen story along these lines. A monk had to spend a number of lifetimes reincarnated as a fox because he held onto the wrong view that one who is enlightened is free from conditions. This wrong view amounted to a self-view that he couldn't drop. In one lifetime he finally got the correct answer from one of the teachers, and when he understood it he was free. I think the teacher said something like "One who is enlightened does not fight against conditions" or "does not resist conditions." In any case, the answer had to do with knowing and accepting conditions, rather than being somehow immune to conditions. > > Even Buddha complained about his body getting old, and getting ready to "trade in" this body, which had become "like an old cart." I don't remember the sutta number, but I love that sutta. We're all human, even if enlightened. The enlightened knows the unconditioned and is thus mentally free, but is still subject to conditionality as long as he exists. I remember another story of Buddha having to stop on the side of the road to rest in his later years, walking from one town to another. It reminds me that there's no escape from conditions, but that is okay. I should keep track of those special suttas. > > Best, > Robert E. #113306 From: han tun Date: Mon Jan 31, 2011 5:22 pm Subject: Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 3. hantun1 Dear Nina, Thank you very much for The “Dispeller of Delusionâ€, the commentary to the “Book of Analysisâ€, Ch 8, on the four Right Efforts, Suttanta division. I have the Pali Text of Ch 8. Sammappadhaanavibha"ngo, 1. Suttantabhaajaniiya.m. In the opening paragraph, four statements are made: 390. Cattaaro sammappadhaanaa idha bhikkhu (1) anuppannaana.m paapakaana.m akusalaana.m dhammaana.m anuppaadaaya chanda.m janeti vaayamati viiriya.m aarabhati citta.m pagga.nhaati padahati, (2) uppannaana.m paapakaana.m akusalaana.m dhammaana.m pahaanaaya chanda.m janeti vaayamati viiriya.m aarabhati citta.m pagga.nhaati padahati, (3) anuppannaana.m kusalaana.m dhammaana.m uppaadaaya chanda.m janeti vaayamati viiriya.m aarabhati citta.m pagga.nhaati padahati, (4) uppannaana.m kusalaana.m dhammaana.m .thitiyaa asammosaaya bhiyyobhaavaaya vepullaaya bhaavanaaya paaripuuriyaa chanda.m janeti vaayamati viiriya.m aarabhati citta.m pagga.nhaati padahati. -------- Then the following four questions with the explanation follow: (1) 391. Katha~nca bhikkhu anuppannaana.m paapakaana.m akusalaana.m dhammaana.m anuppaadaaya chanda.m janeti vaayamati viiriya.m aarabhati citta.m pagga.nhaati padahati? [detail explanation follows] (2) 397. Katha~nca bhikkhu uppannaana.m paapakaana.m akusalaana.m dhammaana.m pahaanaaya chanda.m janeti vaayamati viiriya.m aarabhati citta.m pagga.nhaati padahati? [detail explanation follows] (3) 403. Katha~nca bhikkhu anuppannaana.m kusalaana.m dhammaana.m uppaadaaya chanda.m janeti vaayamati viiriya.m aarabhati citta.m pagga.nhaati padahati? [detail explanation follows] (4) 405. Katha~nca bhikkhu uppannaana.m kusalaana.m dhammaana.m .thitiyaa asammosaaya bhiyyobhaavaaya vepullaaya bhaavanaaya paaripuuriyaa chanda.m janeti vaayamati viiriya.m aarabhati citta.m pagga.nhaati padahati? [detail explanation follows] -------- I think the Commentary is on Number two. Am I correct? Respectfully, Han #113307 From: "Ken H" Date: Mon Jan 31, 2011 9:22 pm Subject: Re: Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hi KenH, all, > > >KH: It's true the Buddha did not teach religious rites and rituals, >and any claim that he did teach them is horribly wrong. > > What about Silabbata sutta? > > "when — by following a life of precept & practice, a life, a holy life that is followed as of essential worth — one's unskillful mental qualities decline while one's skillful mental qualities increase: that sort of precept & practice, life, holy life that is followed as of essential worth is fruitful." > ------------------ Hi Alex, I agree there are many instances in the texts where a person, or an activity, is praised. And, for sure, some people should be listened to and some activities should be practised. However, that has to be understood in the context of anatta, where there are actually no people and no activities and where there is absolutely no control over listening or practising. If you are *not* understanding the Buddha's words in the context of anatta, you are missing the whole point. The Buddha would never have bothered to teach if everyone was going to understand him in an ordinary run-of-the-mill way. Ken H #113308 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Jan 31, 2011 9:40 pm Subject: Re: concepts, ultimates & conditions epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello RobertE, All, > > >Robert E: > > First, thank you for your post #113296 > > If I understand you correctly, you seem to suggest that ultimate are what ultimately analysis reduces to one phenomena. I agree. Well, I'd say one phenomenon at a time, if that's what you mean. This is dhamma theory, though I am not totally convinced. My common sense understanding which could be wrong is that we take in many different phenomena at the same time but can only focus on one at a time, so it may come down to the same thing. I don't see cittas as being individual separate acts that cannot happen at the same time, but I will leave that be for now. I think it is convenient to look at them that way. I do think that when we look at things mindfully they start to break down into more and more distinctive moments, so maybe the ultimate is totally one thing at a time. > I'd also add that, ultimates do not require mental theorizing. Theory, proofs, etc, require at least two things - so they cannot be totally irreducible. I don't quite understand the one thing/two thing distinction. Maybe you can explain that a little bit more. > Here we have an interesting question: What about conditionality (such as 24 conditions)? Is conditionality ultimate or is it conceptual? > > There is no single material or mental piece called "condition XYZ" If you subscribe to dhamma theory, then you see only one condition occurring at a time, I think. Or they arise in very specific coordinations. I'm not aware enough to know if the 24 conditions are theory or fact, but I do think they provide a useful explanation for certain processes. > In fact, conditioning seems to require at least two phenomena, > "cause and effect", and generally much more. Wouldn't this make condition be a conceptual reality? It also seems that certain amount of thinking is required to be able to have a concept of "conditionality" or "cause and effect.". I've heard that animals do not have knowledge of "causes and effect" sufficiently developed. > > Being conceptual reality, does it make it any less relevant? Well, there is a difference between the conceptual reality of "thinking about conditions," and the reality of the conditions themselves. If the 24 conditions actually exist, their existence is not dependent on whether or not we understand them or are able to think about them. Whether they are concepts that have been created to explain phenomena, or the recorded perceptions of arahants who were able to actually see them in action, is something I don't have any access to. What I can see is that conceptually the explanation makes sense and so it is a workable explanation. Whether it is useful to creating detachment by seeing an objective process of arising phenomena we will see. I am too much of a beginner in Abhidhamma to have a good judgment on this. But I think you are right that you can see conditions in life or from moment to moment without labeling them and have some understanding of how conditions cause phenomena to arise. But I also feel that as I hear more about the five kandhas, conditions and perception and how the different factors of experience arise together, it does give me a certain amount of detachment to contemplate those processes. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #113309 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Jan 31, 2011 9:42 pm Subject: Re: Techno-dhamma discussion - meditation epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > It's true the Buddha did not teach religious rites and rituals, and any claim that he did teach them is horribly wrong. But what can we do about our deeds and misdeeds? We are what we are. Ultimately, we are just one conditioned citta following after another! :-) Yes, and some conditioned cittas are incredibly stubborn. :-) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #113310 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Jan 31, 2011 9:48 pm Subject: Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Modes of Materiality epsteinrob Hi Colette. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "colette" wrote: > > Hi Robert, > > Walk with me through this, will you. Lets do this step by step as the "conditioning" arises. > > > Conditionality is really the bottom line of Buddhism, isn't it? > > colette: I'll question that! You rest the entire premise of Buddhist philosophy THEN on CAUSE & CONDITION and I don't believe the Buddha would take such a polarized, extreme, position i.e. Nargarjuna's Middle Way. > ---------------------- > > This wrong view amounted to a self-view that he couldn't drop. > > colette: my interpretation, the monk, THEN had no concept of ANATTA or could not/would not accept the position of ANATTA as being viable. > ---------------------- > In one lifetime he finally got the correct answer from one of the teachers, > > colette: something EXTERIOR was handed to him: his understanding came from some "OTHER" PLACE (this substantiates SPACE and actual place of existance, wow, very anti-thetical of LONGDE and SEMSDE) but this is only an example you are using/applying. > ---------------------- > and when he understood it he was free. > > colette: his ATTACHMENT TO and subsistance on THE WHEEL OF SAMSARA exists. He, the monk, did not possess FREEDOM on his own. Freedom did not exist, for the monk, until AFTER he possessed this concept, this understanding, this agreement to and with the dogma. Like it is said of Buddha Nature, his freedom was not WITHIN himself; it could not be accessed WITHOUT subscription to the dogma/dependence on the dogma. > > SELF FULLFILLING PROPHECY the story, as an example, is equally effective as Tibetan Dough Ball Divination, correct? > -------------------------- > I think the teacher said something like "One who is enlightened does not fight against conditions" or "does not resist conditions." > > colette: this is my interpretation now. This is how I interpret what you repeat as the story saying. You have the right to forget the story and not remember it correctly. This is just my interpretation. > > What does "fighting against condition" mean? RESISTANCE. NON-ACCEPTANCE. REFUSAL??? refusal may be stretching it a bit. Resistance will have to be the best term I can apply. Okay, there is this FORCE pulling or pushing in a certain direction which we can say is THE CONDITION and the monk is fighting against that characteristic of PHYSICS, force i.e. momentum. An object at rest will tend to remain at rest and an object in motion will tend to remain in motion. The monk must be static, not in motion, possessing a STILLNESS or Samadhi in meditation. SUCHNESS ONLY EXISTS WITHIN STILLNESS, the calm of mindfulness and focus. Once stillness is TRANSFORMED into motion THEN DEPENDENCE EXISTS DUE TO THE HEAT GENERATED BY THE RESISTANCE TO THE MOTION see flying and the force of DRAG on the object flying. Suchness does not exist in motion. and therefore is immune to ENLIGHTENMENT. > > But you also modify the statement by giving me an option thru "does not resist conditions". Hmmmm, I ponder my theory of Karma having the main characteristic of ELECTROMAGNETISM implying that RESISTANCE to the conditions means how much "voltage" the "suchness" can support in it's conductivity. MAYBE, then, the enligthenment is "resultant" from the "conditions" subjected upon the monk PERFORMING THE COGNITION. To fight against the "conditions" which are existant, "resist", is to fight against the hallucinatory EXTERIOR world see Mara, goddess of ILLUSION. FIGHTING, however, takes energy, HEAT (Tummo) heat is resultant from DRAG see the "skin" of the SR-72 after it flies a mission. Drag results from MOTION, "SUCHNESS" DOES NOT EXIST IN RUPA IN MOTION. > > IS IT POSSIBLE FOR THE MANTRA "Go Along To Get Along" a way to define STAGNATION? see "POLITBURO". A monk or the monk remaining in meditation while IGNORING the CONDITIONS THEN has the ability to achieve enlightenment. > ----------------------------------- > In any case, the answer had to do with knowing and accepting conditions, rather than being somehow immune to conditions. > > > colette: isn't that nothing more than COGNITION, "to know" the conditions? An Act, a Behavior, "to know"? > > Please be reminded that this is the roughest and most spontaneous example of a process that I'm applying to/in FORMLESSNESS. Feel free to question me on this since in my "learned behavior" interaction with others and/or my environment (mind-body-spirit, human-planet-universe) helps me to cognize and PURIFY my ability to make sense of the Asian philosophy I'm dealing with. I think the bottom line on this, is, as you say, that to deny conditionality is to deny anatta and preserve the illusion that the self can control events. If one is using enlightenment to escape conditions, that is just more self-view trying to gain control through enlightenment. That's not enlightenment at all, which is total letting go of changing anything. The enlightened can teach how to let go, but they don't have a personal agenda or a desire to escape. The middle way is between forcing things to happen and being totally passive. I would say the enlightened is neither, but just available as conditions warrant. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #113311 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Jan 31, 2011 10:23 pm Subject: Rich is Faith! bhikkhu5 Friends: Faith is the Seed, Hand, & Wealth of Beings! What is real Richness? Bhikkhus, when a Noble Disciple possesses 4 things, then he is said to be rich, with much wealth and prosperous property. What four? Here, Bhikkhus, a Noble Disciple possesses the faith of confirmed confidence in the Supreme Buddha ... in the Perfect Dhamma ... and in the Noble Sangha.... He possesses the moral purity that is praised by the Noble Ones, unbroken ... unspotted ... untorn ... pure ... intact ... leading to absorbed concentration.... Any Noble Disciple, who possesses these 4 things is indeed really quite rich, with much heavy wealth and a lush and vast property.... SN V 402 Buddha to the Ploughman: Faith is my seed, simplicity the rain, Understanding my yoke and plough, Modesty is pole, and mind is the strap, Awareness is my ploughshare & goad! Sn 77 Suffering is the cause of Faith... Elated Joy is the effect of Faith... Entrance is the function of Faith... Trusting is the characteristic of Faith... Decisiveness is the manifestation of Faith... Faith is the Hand, that lifts one out of Suffering... Faith is the Seed, that makes one grow much good Future... Faith is the Real Wealth, since it produces the best Advantage... Vism XIV 140 How does Faith save one from pain? When one has faith in the Tathagata, Unshakable and quite well established, And good behaviour built on morality, Liked by the Noble Ones and praised! When one has confidence in the Sangha, And a view straight and clear! Then they say, that one is not poor, That one's life is not wasted... Therefore should any intelligent person, aware of the Buddha-Dhamma, be devoted to the fine faith & moral purity, which gives confirmed conviction in this safe saving Dhamma. SN V 405 Alavaka once asked the Blessed Buddha: What wealth here is best for any man? What well practiced brings happiness? What is the sweetest of all the flavours? How lived, is this life best? The Buddha: Faith is the best wealth here for any human! Dhamma well practiced brings happiness! Nothing is sweeter than truth. A wise life lived in understanding is best... Alavaka: How does one cross the flood of ills? How is the ocean of existence crossed? How is all suffering stilled? How is one purified? The Buddha: By Faith is the flood of evil crossed! By attention is this existence crossed! By effort is all suffering stilled! By wisdom one is finally purified! Sn 182-184 <...> Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samâhita _/\_ * <...> #113312 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue Feb 1, 2011 1:43 am Subject: Re: Techno-dhamma discussion - meditation kenhowardau Hi Robert E. >> KH: Ultimately, we are just one conditioned citta following after another! > RE: Yes, and some conditioned cittas are incredibly stubborn. :-) ------------- KH: I don't know which ones you could be thinking of. :-) But dhammas are all that exist. And that's wonderful to know. I wouldn't want it any other way. Ken H #113313 From: Vince Date: Tue Feb 1, 2011 6:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sotapanna cerovzt@... Dear Nina you wrote: > N:At the moment of enlightenment the maggacitta of the arahat > eradicates ignorance, but at that moment ignorance could not arise > together with the maggacitta. It is the latent tendency of ignorance > accumulated in the citta that is eradicated. [..] > N: With right understanding, that is the point. Flow with the life > with right understanding of the reality occurring now. No matter what > it is: pleasant or unpleasant, kusala or akusala. This is for layman > and bhikkhu. When one has true accumulations for becoming a bhikkhu > one will lead the life of a bhikkhu which is excellent. But both > bhikkhu and layman can develop right understanding of naama and > ruupa, each in their own life. thanks Nina for all the comments in this thread. Very helpful :) Vince. #113314 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Feb 1, 2011 10:58 am Subject: Re: concepts, ultimates & conditions truth_aerator Hello RobertE, Nina, all, >RE: I don't quite understand the one thing/two thing distinction. >Maybe you can explain that a little bit more. What I've meant to say was that it appears to me that ultimate are non reducible phenomenon that can be cognized without imagination. Mirage exists as visible object + mental interpretation, but its contents are not real. But seeing and thinking does exist. Another example: Seeing car can be analyzed as seeing color + conceptualizing (making shapes out of colors + idea of "the XYZ car"). As I understand it, seeing color cannot be further reduced to smaller "seeing color", and it doesn't require conceptualizing to see colors. Even without any thinking, it can be possible to see colors (provided that all appropriate organs and objects do interact and function properly). What is known through multiple senses can be reduced to individual senses + the mind that glues sense data into one whole to make sense out of experiences. Furthermore, animals "see colors" even though they may not have enough intelligence or imagination. But animals cannot comprehend complex things, and here what it seems to be a key point between ultimate and conceptual reality. Ultimate reality doesn't need mental interpretation, while conceptual reality is mental interpretation. The problem with the above is that conditionality seems to require a lot of conceptualization from appearing phenomenon. It requires induction, deduction, reasoning, proofs, making sure to avoid wrong kinds of induction based on correlation (just because B follows A, it doesn't mean that A causes B), just because there can be correlation between A and B, it doesn't mean that one causes the other. Maybe this is why I've heard that animals have very limited understanding of cause-effect, so cause-effect is not given in experience. They don't have enough highly developed faculties to understand the order and structure of phenomena. IMHO, With metta, Alex #113315 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Feb 1, 2011 4:45 pm Subject: Re: Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > > > Hi KenH, all, > > > > >KH: It's true the Buddha did not teach religious rites and rituals, >and any claim that he did teach them is horribly wrong. > > > > What about Silabbata sutta? > > > > "when — by following a life of precept & practice, a life, a holy life that is followed as of essential worth — one's unskillful mental qualities decline while one's skillful mental qualities increase: that sort of precept & practice, life, holy life that is followed as of essential worth is fruitful." > > > ------------------ > > Hi Alex, > > I agree there are many instances in the texts where a person, or an activity, is praised. And, for sure, some people should be listened to and some activities should be practised. > > However, that has to be understood in the context of anatta, where there are actually no people and no activities and where there is absolutely no control over listening or practising. > > If you are *not* understanding the Buddha's words in the context of anatta, you are missing the whole point. The Buddha would never have bothered to teach if everyone was going to understand him in an ordinary run-of-the-mill way. Then why did he bother to teach in the run-of-the-mill way to those whom he would not have bothered to teach, in a way he would not want anyone to understand, according to your view? Hm? Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #113316 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Feb 1, 2011 4:49 pm Subject: Re: Techno-dhamma discussion - meditation epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > > > Hi Robert E. > > >> KH: Ultimately, we are just one conditioned citta > following after another! > > > RE: Yes, and some conditioned cittas are incredibly stubborn. :-) > ------------- > > KH: I don't know which ones you could be thinking of. :-) > > But dhammas are all that exist. And that's wonderful to know. I wouldn't want it any other way. Well I have to admire your enthusiasm. "hooked on dhammas" Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = #113317 From: "sarah" Date: Tue Feb 1, 2011 11:26 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: A Sotapanna sarahprocter... Dear Vince, I'm so sorry I didn't reply sooner. I'm very glad to read your continued interest and probing questions. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Vince wrote: > > S: Panna has to clearly understand the characteristics of particular dhammas > > as appearing. For example, sound is clearly understood as sound, hearing as > > hearing and so on. "Knowledge of the difference between nama and rupa" means > > clearly understanding the particular dhammas when they appear, clearly > > understanding that, sound, for example, doesn't expderience anything at all, > > but that hearing does. Furthermore, each sound, each moment of hearing is > > different and they are also different from any other dhammas. ... V:> this is something that still I cannot agree at all. This is repeated topic here. > However, one can find how different people explain the sotapanna adding his own > views. Just a search on internet and one can find many of them: > > "A sotapanna is one who has attained sotapatti magga and sotapatti-phala. He (or > she) can enjoy the peace of Nibbana whenever he wishes by developing the > ecstatic absorption corresponding to sotapatti-phala samapatti." > - M.Tin Mon .... S: This is only for those who attained enlightenment based on jhana, i.e with mundane jhana arising immediately before the enlightenment process. .... > > " real sotapanna would not kill even a flea or a bug, not to say a human being. > This fact must be remembered once and for all." > - M .Sayadaw .... S: True. However, the main point is the degree of wisdom which has been developed in order to attain enlightenment and eradicated the very gross kilesa (defilements), such as the intention to kill. ... V:> and you says about sotapanna: > "Panna has to clearly understand the characteristics of particular dhammas as > appearing. [...] "Knowledge of the difference between nama and rupa" means > clearly understanding the particular dhammas when they appear" > > The fact is that inside Suttas, we don't find the sotapanna defined in these > terms. ... S: I think we do, but I agree it's made clearer in the Abhidhamma and commentaries. In the suttas, we always read about knowing the all - the eye and visible object and seeing and so on. We have to read carefully. ... V:>A Sotapanna never appears as somebody able to enjoy Nibbana when he wish > neither able to distinguish nama and rupa at any time. On the contrary, a > sotapanna appears as somebody who reach nibbana but later he can wait even 6 > more lives to actualize his progress. Meanwhile the sotapanna obviously can > kill bugs, and he or she would not be able to enjoy nibbana neither to > distinguish the Dhamma characteristics. ... S: I'm sorry, I don't follow this. We can consider the development of understanding now. When there's understanding of realities at this moment, is there any inclination to harm bugs in any way at all? We don't have to think about "enjoying nibbana". This isn't the aim of the path. ... > V: > Note that nobody is born knowing the difference between nama and rupa neither > enjoying nibbana at his will. Even the Buddha himself didn't know all these > things before become a Buddha. Siddharta didn't know about nama and rupa, ... S: That's why Siddharta hadn't become enlightened. It was impossible for the bodhisatta (or anyone else) to become enlightened, to even attain the first stage of insight, without clearly understanding the difference between nama and rupa, between seeing and visible object in daily life. ... V:> neither we can say that he did not kill even a bug before become a Buddha. > However, we know he was a sotapanna in former lifes. ... S: I don't think we do know this. I wouldn't agree with it, but I'm not sure it's useful to discuss. I think it's more useful to discuss the realities, the dhammas, which can be known now. ... > V:> In the same way, after the truth is unveiled, it doesn't mean the sotapanna is > able to sustain these things in an automatic way, because he is not an arhant or > a Buddha. ... S: Nothing is "sustained", no conditioned dhammas last at all. However, no more wrong view or doubt for the sotapanna, no more breaking of precepts. ... > V:> What scriptures shows about the sotappana is this: a sotapanna is somebody who > has eradicated the three fetters, akkaya-ditthi, vicikiccha and silabbataparamasa. ... S: Yes ... <...> V:> To find histories of sotapanna, agami or sadakagami showing no understanding > of nama and rupa in front some dhamma, just one can look any of the hundred > dialogues of Buddha with his bhikkhus to clarify their doubts. > > How can we explain these questions under the requeriment fro sotapanna of the > understanding of nama and rupa at any time? > > How do you (or other people) see this point?. ... S: It doesn't matter what words or what language is used in different suttas - not everything could be repeated in every text. However, the Teachings taken as a whole make it very clear that all dhammas, the "All", namas and rupas have to be understood clearly. Without beginning to understand what nama is now, what rupa is now, there will never be an eradication of the idea of atta, self, and there will never be an appreciation of the Buddha's teachings which are all about dhammas as anatta. I appreciate that we may see this point differently and I look forward to your further comments. Metta Sarah ====== #113318 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Feb 2, 2011 12:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sotapanna nilovg Dear Vince, Op 1-feb-2011, om 15:32 heeft Vince het volgende geschreven: > thanks Nina for all the comments in this thread. Very helpful :) ------- N: You are welcome :-) I also found your questions helpful, they helped me to consider more. Nina. #113319 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Feb 2, 2011 12:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: concepts, ultimates & conditions nilovg Dear Alex, Op 1-feb-2011, om 19:58 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > The problem with the above is that conditionality seems to require > a lot of conceptualization from appearing phenomenon. It requires > induction, deduction, reasoning, proofs, making sure to avoid wrong > kinds of induction based on correlation (just because B follows A, > it doesn't mean that A causes B), just because there can be > correlation between A and B, it doesn't mean that one causes the > other. ------- N: What you say about seeing and conceptualizing is correct. There is seeing and the thinking of what is seen brings a lot of dukkha. The question is now: can conditionality be directly known, without thinking? This is a question that may arise when one hears about the second stage of tender insight. The answer is yes, but first the first stage of tender insight has to be realised: knowing naama as naama and ruupa as ruupa. For example, seeing arises and we know through intellectual understanding that there cannot be seeing without visible object and eyesense. Through insight it can be directly known that seeing is a conditioned naama. No need to think, because sati is aware and pa~n~naa knows. But this could not be known without being familiar with different characteristics of naama and ruupa. Another example. We learn about the indriyas, the faculties of the five senses which condition the five sense-cognitions by way of faculty-condition, indriya paccaya. An indriya is a leader, but in its own field. The indriya of eyesense is a leader in the field of seeing. The indriya of eyesense can remind us to be aware when seeing. We may be forgetful when seeing, but if there is not awareness the state of sotaapanna cannot be reached, Kh Sujin said, as I heard on a recording this morning. She also said: if there is no sati now we cannot understand the function of indriya. She showed how the development of satipa.t.thaana is necessary in order to understand conditions. If we only read about these we shall not really understand them. It is necessary that there is satipa.t.thaana in order to understand the anattaness of conditioned realities. If there are no indriyas, ruupas do not appear. At this moment sound may appear. It could not appear without the indriya of earsense. Thus, to return to your question: without awareness and right understanding of the reality appearing now, there cannot be direct understanding of the way realities are conditioned. ------ Nina. #113320 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Feb 2, 2011 1:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 3. nilovg Dear Han, thank you for all the Pali. You have an interesting question. Op 1-feb-2011, om 2:22 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > I think the Commentary is on Number two. Am I correct? ------- N: For those who do not know Pali I repeat the four right efforts: The 4 right efforts (samma-padhÄna), forming the 6th stage of the 8- fold Path (i.e. sammÄ-vÄyÄma, s. magga) are: (1) the effort to avoid (saṃvara-padhÄna), (2) to overcome (pahÄna-padhÄna), (3) to develop (bhÄvanÄ-padhÄna), (4) to maintain (anurakkhaṇa- padhÄna), i.e. (1) the effort to avoid unwholesome (akusala) states, such as evil thoughts, etc. (2) to overcome unwholesome states, (3) to develop wholesome (kusala) states, such as the 7 elements of enlightenment (bojjhaá¹…ga, q.v.), (4) to maintain the wholesome states. ------- N: I find it difficult to separate the four right efforts, they are connected. At the moment of magga-citta all four are being fulfilled. The defilements that are being eradicated have no more conditions to arise again, thus there is avoidance already. There is avoidance and eradication. Also at that moment there is development and maintaining of kusala. (For the arahat there is no more kusala after the magga- citta, but mahaakiriya instead) The part of the commentary dealt with stated: The defilements which it abandons are not to be said to be past, future or present.†On the other had, seeing it from a different aspect: it abandons the defilements that are past, futre and present, because there are no more conditions for their arising. This is covered by the first right effort. Thus I would say here specifically the first and second right effort are dealt with. ------ I find the 8 meanings of upanna rather difficult and I wonder whether the Burmese books have some addiitonal info. Nina. #113321 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Feb 2, 2011 1:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What are 5 sense faculties (pasada-rupa)? + momentariness nilovg Dear Rob E, Op 31-jan-2011, om 23:18 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > Even with the car accident and the physical shock that stays with > you for a while, I thought to myself - 'that's how it goes; > everything is gone in a moment, and it's over.' I now recall what > KS said to Sarah when she was sick, and got better, about how it > was "all gone now" and not worth reflecting over. Everything > happens in an instant. -------- N: Very good way of applying the Dhamma. It also shows a point you like to stress: how the sutta in conventional way can remind us of realities and can lead to awareness of the reality now. We heard about some very bad wheather coming up to the States. Ice rain, etc. I hope you stock your fridge and stay home. Nina. #113322 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Feb 2, 2011 1:51 am Subject: Re: pain sarahprocter... Dear Alex & all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > >S: Even at such times of pain and health problems or >semi->consciousness, there can be awareness and understanding, Alex. > A:> You are right. I do a lot of contemplation and investigation, since standard samatha-like practice doesn't go well with constant illness (either too much discomfort makes me restless or I get drowsy and loose the sort of sharp awareness needed). .... S: What about calm or samatha now as we discuss Dhamma together or help others during the day? Anytime, then there's no thought of "my practice", "my problems". Yes, I made the joke which everyone picked up about Pt thriving without his meditation practice (actually, it was his joke when he arrived). As Howard realised it was a bit more than a joke. Seriously, why not try a week or two without your sitting practice and see if your health problems are any better? You may be surprised. ... > >S: We read about many followers who developed insight when bitten by a >snake, on their death-beds, wracked with pain and so on. At any >moment of understanding of a reality, there is tranquility. We don't >need to go looking for another tranquility. > > > > Do you take some exercise, some walking for example, in the fresh >air? Even the bhikkhus needed their walking exercise to keep their >bodies strong. > A:> I do exercise and take a lot of different things. But it doesn't work. > Hopefully health wise anicca will prevail for the better... .... S: Of course, the best medicine is the Path, but this doesn't mean that kamma won't bring its results when the time is right. Talking of which, I got stung by a blue-bottle jelly-fish on my face yesterday which felt like a cross between a violent slap on the face and a wisdom tooth extraction for most the day. Still just dhammas, still just as many opportunities for awareness, understanding and calm. The vipaka are just the briefest moments of seeing, hearing and body consciousness (in this case accompanied by very unpleasant feeling). All the real problems like in the thinking with lobha, dosa and moha whilst dwelling on a long story of jelly-fish and "poor me"! Now is always the time for peace, calm and detachment. Metta Sarah ======= #113323 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Feb 2, 2011 2:10 am Subject: Re: Discussions in Bangkok with K.Sujin, Jan 2011(7) sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, Firstly, sorry to hear about the car accident and I'm so glad your wife is fine. I was impressed that you were all able to calmly carry on with your dinner arrangements. It reminds me of the Jataka in which the family continued with their tasks as usual after the son died. More later when I catch up to that post. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > ...More tomorrow, plus some Chinese herbs, so that'll soon shock my system back to recovery mode. > >R: That is nice you know about the herbs. Any special recommendations? I am confined pretty much to ginseng, dong quai for my wife, and some other basic things. ... S: Actually, I haven't checked the ingredients. Time for my nightly brew now. ...> > > S: When your friends feel like they're dying and are full of self-pity, to just calmly and smilingly say "it's gone" takes real confidence in present moment understanding and detachment. Not many friends will appreciate it either! > R:> Well that is a good point. I was being a little glib, but I really did think it was a great moment. When things are at their most dramatic, especially when it's about the immediate past, to say "It's gone" cuts through everything. Yes, if someone is committed to their story of what is happening, that can seem pretty harsh and may not be appreciated at all. I wouldn't say it to someone who wouldn't get the context, that's for sure. They would just be hurt. But for KS to say that to you or Nina, I'd say - wow, very skillful. ... S: I appreciate that. Same with the car crash - it's gone, no use dwelling on the horrors. (I'll have to discuss this more with Phil when I have a chance!) But, you know we do keep finding things in common. We haven't had a car for 25yrs now - I was in a couple of nasty crashes when I was young, but all gone. When we have time to look into it, we plan on getting bikes here in Manly. ... > It really does remind me of zen. They are constantly reminding the monks that the moment is happening now and not to get lost in concept. That may be something that is at least somewhat in common. I remember one story where a monk says "Did you see that bird?" > The zen master says: "Where is it now?" > The monk says: "It has flown away." > The zen master gives him a pinch or whatever and says: > "When has it ever flown away?", meaning that the monk is holding onto a concept/memory of the bird and there's nothing there now. > > Likewise, the master is asked, "What is the meaning of enlightenment" or something like that, and he answers: "A pound of flax." > > Those answers are redirecting the monks back to "What's happening now." ... S: Thx for mentioning these examples and explaining them to me. Yes, good present emphasis, even if there isn't the same emphasis on understanding the actual present dhammas. I think most people can benefit from having the present moment, present realities stressed. ... > > Anyway it's an interesting little harmony in disparate schools. ... S: Yes. ... > > S: And you know what? I'm sure you'll find that those little insects just stop being so annoying. Gently wiping them aside in a friendly manner or moving out of the way is so much simpler than the alternatives. They just want to live healthily too! > > Indeed. I won't try to offer them nutritional advice though. I'm not ready for that yet! ... S: Not sure they are either:) Save the green tea! ... > > S: Yes, just like us, flying around wildly in lobha, dosa and moha, trying to avoid trouble. Just like us....a condition for metta and karuna! > R:> Yes. It actually made me sad when I thought about them being stuck in this enclosed place and probably not even knowing it. What options do they have? And when you think about your own perspective, you are most likely in a box as well... Anyway, sadness = near enemy of compassion...? Somebody slap me! Okay, I feel better now. :-) ... S: You got it:-) You really are a witty guy, Rob! And we thought the one you wrote to Alex about the dangers of meditation was hilarious. We might not have ever seen it if Howard hadn't kindly replied on-list:-) Keep them rolling - after my jelly-fish slap yesterday, the posts were just the tonic! Metta Sarah ======= #113324 From: han tun Date: Wed Feb 2, 2011 2:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 3. hantun1 Dear Nina, [Nina]: I find it difficult to separate the four right efforts, they are connected. At the moment of magga-citta all four are being fulfilled. The defilements that are being eradicated have no more conditions to arise again, thus there is avoidance already. There is avoidance and eradication. Also at that moment there is development and maintaining of kusala. (For the arahat there is no more kusala after the magga-citta, but mahaakiriya instead) The part of the commentary dealt with stated: The defilements which it abandons are not to be said to be past, future or present.†On the other had, seeing it from a different aspect: it abandons the defilements that are past, futre and present, because there are no more conditions for their arising. This is covered by the first right effort. Thus I would say here specifically the first and second right effort are dealt with. ------ [Han]: Thank you very much for the above clarification. It is excellent and I really appreciate it. ========== [Nina]: I find the 8 meanings of upanna rather difficult and I wonder whether the Burmese books have some addiitonal info. [Han] I also find them difficult. Sammohavinodanii atthakathaa in Burmese in two volumes should be available in Rangoon. I will ask my friends to send me later if they can find them in the book-stores. At the moment I do have them. So I cannot say anything more now. Respectfully, Han #113325 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Feb 2, 2011 2:33 am Subject: Re: On Accumulations. sarahprocter... Hi Alex & all, Just checking on #105445 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > In Therigatha there is a story of a nun (which attained Arhatship under Buddha Gotama) who 7 lives back, in city of Erakaccha was a wealthy goldsmith. 7) Being rich youth he slept with someone's wife. 6) He was reborn and cooked in hell. 5) He was reborn as a monkey who got castrated, 4) then as one-eyed lame she-goat. 3)Then castrated calf, then 2) as hermaphrodite. In the last life he was reborn as slave-girl in difficult situation. Eventually she became nun and an Arhat. Isidasi Therigatha (group of 40 verses) > > No mention of long path of accumulations of being reborn as a monk or a nun, or even lay disciple. While the good accumulations had been there, I mean you have to have lots of good accumulations to be reborn as a 3-rooted human, meet a Buddha and become an Arahat. .... In this case she performed lots of merit under the previous Buddha. See Connie's detailed posts on her, beginning with #80080: Part 1 of 21 15. Cattaaliisanipaato 1. Isidaasiitheriigaathaava.n.nanaa XV. The Section of the Group of Forty [Verses] 1. The commentary on the verses of Therii Isidaasii <...> In the section of forty [verses], the verses beginning In the city named for a flower are Therii Isidaasii's. She too did meritorious deed[s] under previous Buddha, living in the state of a man*, and having accumulated good deeds in various lives, in her seventh existence before her final existence, because of an inclination to bad conduct committed the act of adultery. Having died, she was born in hell. When she died there, she was conceived as a hermaphrodite in the womb of a servant girl. <...> When she died there, she was born as the daughter of a certain poor cart driver. When she came of age, Giridaasa, the son of a certain caravan leader, made her his weife and brought her to his home. And his [first] wife was virtuous and of good character. Overcome by envy of her, she made her husband hate* her [the first wife]. *Veddesana-kamma.m akaasi. This may mean: "she performed an incantation to excite hatred in her husband for her" (cf. MW sv vi-dvesha[-karman]). <...> She lived out her life span there, and after she died, in this Buddha era, she was reborn in Ujjenii as the daughter of a merchant who was wealthy and honoured for his qualities of practising morality and [being from a good] family and a [good] region, etc. When she came of age, her mother and father gave her to a certain merchant's son who was her equal with regard to family, good looks, age, and wealth. She lived in his house for a month and was dutiful to her husband. Then due to the power of her [former] deeds, her husband became displeased with her and threw her out of the house. All this is to be understood in the text [of the verses]. >Then because of the fact that one husband after the other was led to being displeased with her, a profound stirring arose in her. After her father gave his permission, she went forth in the presence of Therii Jinadattaa*. She devoted herself to the gaining of insight, and in a very short time she gained the state of Arahatship together with the [four] discriminations. And she spent her time in the happiness of the fruition state and the happiness of quenching. *KRN says, "The name Jinadattaa suggests that the nun was a Jain" (EV II p157, ad v 428). ... S: Your message is a year old, so I'm sure Jon discussed all the points. I'd just put it aside to check the story for my own interest, thx:-) Metta Sarah ===== #113326 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Feb 2, 2011 3:26 am Subject: Re: Discussions in Bangkok with K.Sujin, Jan 2011(2) sarahprocter... Hi Rob, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > S: :-) I was impressed when I read your quotes on the ayatanas after some of your research. > >R: Unfortunately, that translation of ayatana as "base" confused me for the rest of my responses. I'll have to do some more research. I think I was referencing the "bases" rather than ayatanas, so I'm confused again... ... S: Did this post help: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/113284 you might like to read it and ask further questions. Yes, as Nina and I both agreed, "bases" is a confusing translation of ayatanas. Maybe just think of dhammas that "connect" or "meet" together and not try to translate it. .... > > As I looked into ayatana to try to clarify a little better, I got even more confused. In Wikipedia they say that ayatana can be translated as sense base, sense organ, or sense sphere. This seems to reiterate the idea of ayatana as "base." ... S: Yes, these are also confusing translations - even more so. For example, citta (consciousness) is an ayatana that always "meets" other dhammas. This is true whether it is seeing consciousness, thinking or jhana citta. I wouldn't describe these as any of the above. ... >Looks like I need a primer in sense bases, sense objects, inner and outer ayatanas, gross and subtle rupas and how they all fit together in the basic plan of things. Is there any way to structurally lay this out in simple terms? ... S: a)Sense bases: eye-sense, ear-sense etc. b) sense objects: visible object, sound, smell, taste, tangible objects c)inner ayatanas: sense bases, cittas d)outer ayatanas: sense objects, cetasikas, subtle rupas, nibbana e) gross rupas: the sense-bases and sense-objects f) subtle rupas: all other rupas At this moment, one citta arises and experiences an object. At a moment of seeing, there is the "meeting" at such a time of the citta, the object, the eye-sense and the cetasikas. A fine, miraculous balancing act for an instant only. Perhaps you can look at the other message I referred to above and at this and then mention anything else. I think the important point is, as usual, the understanding of the dhamma appearing now. The theory should help, not hinder this. .... > > I am sure there is material in Useful Posts, but I would appreciate a source that gives the basic structure of the above elements without a lot of additional material. Once I get the idea, I'll be able to get into more detail again. ... S: I think there are some clear messages on this topic in UP - I'm a bit too busy to check. Also, I think two basic reference texts would be useful to you: 1) Nina's "Abhidhamma in Daily Life" 2) Compendium Manual of Abhidhamma, Bodhi's edited "Abhidhammattha Sangaha" But there you'll have a lot of additional material:-) Anyway, we can keep discussing. It's always helpful for me as well. Just expect slow replies to continue. My mother arrives tomorrow from UK, so a trip to the airport (by ferry and train). Jon departs Sat....all go! Metta Sarah ====== #113327 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Feb 2, 2011 3:47 am Subject: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) jonoabb Hi Robert E (112992) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > ... > > J: To my understanding, dhammas are not the 'constituent elements' of conventional objects/experiences. So it would not be possible by analyzing objects/experiences to come to understand anything about dhammas.. > > Yes, I think this view is a very esoteric one that is not even suggested by the Buddha. I think it must come almost completely by way of the commentaries and sub-commentaries. As I learn a little more about them, it seems that the commentators had a radical agenda that was gnostic in nature, and removed from the gradual middle way that Buddha described in so many suttas. > =============== J: Well, this is a very crucial issue. It would help if you could give some sutta passages exemplifying what you refer to as "the gradual middle way that Buddha described in so many suttas". I think you'll find, when you come to look at the Buddha's actual words, that what you understand to be the middle way is actually an interpretation of those words. > =============== I have heard even the plain words of the Visudhimagga twisted into a pretzel to mean something other than what they say. If Buddhaghosa says "seek out a teacher," it is interpreted to mean "don't seek a teacher but discern arising dhammas." > =============== J: No, nobody has interpreted Buddhaghosa as saying that ;-)) What I do say though is that the need to have, or the advantage of having, a (properly qualified) teacher as mentioned by Buddhaghosa applies, and is intended to apply, to the person who has already developed samatha to the stage where the difference between kusala and akusala is clearly known as and when they occur (and I think that for most of us that time is some way off yet). The Vism does not purport to describe/specify the development of samatha at more beginning levels. > =============== If Buddhaghosa says "count the breaths" it is said to be a coincidental description of one who happened to be counting the breaths, and he is being instructed to "discern arising dhammas." > =============== J: ;;-)). It must be exasperating having to read my posts ;-)) On my reading of the Vism passage (from memory now), counting the breaths is not being given as a way of inducing the consciousness to become kusala, but rather is ascribed to those with persistent and steady kusala already developed. Do you see such an interpretation as being in any way inconsistent with the Vism passage in question? > =============== > If we look at the Abhidhamma and the instructions discussed on this list as a way of seeing life more clearly and in more detail, I think it is very valuable. To see the conditioning factors that create arising dhammas and kamma is extremely valuable as a way of understanding what happens in life. > > But when you take it away from that and say "life as we know it is a meaningless illusion showing us nothing - Buddhism is about a completely separate world of little dhammas that have nothing to do with the worldling's life" - it loses all integrity and no longer references what the Buddha said or instructed about how to be liberated from *this* world of suffering, not some other one that is made up and never seen, and only exists for us in books. > =============== J: It would not be correct, for obvious reasons I think, to say the world of dhammas has nothing to do with the worldling's life. After all, dhammas are very much 'of samsara'. But it can I think be said that the world of dhammas is a different world to the world of concepts (people, things and ideas), since it's a world that becomes apparent only to developed panna. The position as I see it is as follows. At the moment of seeing a computer monitor, the arising dhammas include (among others) seeing consciousness, visible object and mental processing (including memory). But that visible object is the visible data currently being experienced by seeing consciousness (rather than the visible object of/belonging to a computer monitor in particular), in the same way that the object of hearing consciousness at the time of a conventional live conversation is audible data in general rather than a particular person's voice or individual words. Words do not break down into audible object; words are mental constructs formed up from the hearing of audible data. Similarly, a computer monitor does not break down into visible object. > =============== > The difference in our understanding is that you think the 5 kandhas do not occur in life, but occur in an alternate universe that is described in commentaries. I see the 5 kandhas as being a practical breakdown of our very existence in this moment. > =============== J: No, I do not see the 5 khandhas as occurring in an alternate universe; they are very much part of samsara. In fact, to my understanding of the teachings, the 5 khandhas are the only things that can truly be said to be *occurring* now. The rest, that is to say, the world as conventionally perceived, is the product of mental construction (not that there's anything 'wrong' with that). > =============== When we see that the body, thought and perception break down to momentary experiences of physicality, thought-acts and moments of contact-vedana-proliferation, I understand that my life is a mechanism of kamma and conditions, not the life of a self that controls existence, or thoughts and possessions that can belong to self. That is the Buddha's message and it actually helps worldlings to move towards liberation. > =============== J: But the question is whether reflection of that kind can constitute (mundane) path-moments leading eventually to enlightenment. To my understanding, only the direct experience of dhammas as they truly are can amount to such moments. > =============== It is not an erudite, removed, separate world that one has to wait to see, but one that can be engaged now, with tools to engage it now, and open up the possibility of liberation in this lifetime. The kandhas describe *this* reality, how we move, act and think, not a universe in another realm. This is samsara, and it is this samsara that we need to wake up to truly see. > =============== J: The dhammas (khandhas, dhatus, ayatanas, etc.) are of samsara and it is dhammas that need to be seen as they truly are. > =============== > I continue to be educated by you and the others through your commitment, scholarship, and understanding. But I'm afraid we may never apply this great knowledge in the same way - aiming towards different universes and all that. > =============== J: Hoping I've managed to explain that it's not a question of you and I 'aiming towards different universes'. So there's hope of agreement yet! ;-)) > =============== Still I appreciate all that you know and your fellowship. > =============== J: And the same on my part. It's great (and a real challenge) talking with you. Jon Messages 113297 - 113327 of 113330 * Hi, Lisa o Profile o Updates o Account Info o You are signed in as:nichiconn * Sign Out * Help Preview Mail w/ Toolbar * Yahoo! * Mail * My Yahoo! * News * Finance * Sports Yahoo! Groups Search Web Search Yahoo! 1. Drag the "Y!" and drop it onto the "Home" icon. 2. Select "Yes" from the pop up window. 3. Nothing, you're done. If this didn't work for you see detailed instructions Close this window nichiconn · nichicon@hotmail.com | Group Member - Edit Membership Start a Group | My Groups dhammastudygroup · Dhamma Study Group (DSG) * Home * Messages * Post * Files * Photos * Links * Groups Labs (Beta) * Applications Yahoo! Groups Tips Did you know... Message search is now enhanced, find messages faster. Take it for a spin. Best of Y! Groups Check them out and nominate your group. Click here for the latest updates on Groups Message search Messages Messages Help Message # Search: Advanced Start Topic Messages 113328 - 113357 of 113383 Oldest | < Older | Newer > | Newest Messages: Show Message Summaries (Group by Topic) Sort by Date ^ #113328 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Feb 2, 2011 3:53 am Subject: Re: How can killiing or stealing not be a conventional deed? jonoabb Hi Robert E (112993) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > ... > > J: Of course we don't ignore teachings that are couched in terms of deeds and actions to be engaged in or avoided. But we understand them in terms of the teaching on dhammas, that is to say, that part of the teaching that is unique to a Buddha. > > In your opinion. The Buddha seemed to think that everything he said was worth hearing. I would not be so selective. > =============== J: Yes, everything spoken by the Buddha was worth hearing, and everything that was spoken was directed towards the development of the path. But the fact remains that kusala of the kinds described by the Buddha as dana, sila and samatha bhavana was known outside the dispensation of a Buddha; it is the teaching on the 4 Noble Truths, including vipassana bhavana (the 4th Noble Truth) that is unique to a Buddha -- see the 'Gradual Teaching' texts discussed recently. > =============== > Since Buddha put so much importance on keeping good company and avoiding evil acts, how can we say that he did not ultimately regard those as crucial to the path? > > > =============== > > > > J: 'Avoiding' and evil act with akusala would be itself an evil act and hence not an avoiding at all. > > Don't understand this statement. Can you explain? > =============== J: Another typo, I'm afraid. Should have read "'Avoiding' an evil act ...". The meaning is this: the avoiding of an evil deed may be done with kusala or with akusala mind states, or with a mixture of both. Insofar as an avoiding is done with akusala mindstates, it is itself an akusala (i.e., 'evil') deed. Jon #113329 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Feb 2, 2011 3:55 am Subject: Re: Discussions in Bangkok with K.Sujin, Jan 2011(7) sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, #113078 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Qu about the opening stanzas in the Anapanasati sutta and breath. > > KS: What appears now? Can that which does not appear be the object of right understanding? > R:> What about pariyatti, or in the case of nimitta? One can regard it correctly, even if not present, no? ... S: Pariyatti refers to the understanding of present dhammas. If we think about other objects, it's just speculation, surely? .... > > Why did Buddha teach these large groups mindfulness of breathing, quite apart from what they may have been experiencing at a given moment? ... S: Because for many of these bhikkhus, samatha with breath as object had already been highly developed. Again, the Buddha was teaching about the understanding of present dhammas at such times. In the Satipatthana Sutta, it's made very clear - any dhamma, any posture, any time. ... <...> > > - killing (#112892) > > When there is the intention to kill but someone is prevented from carrying out the act - maybe a wounding, for example. The intention is the same, but the act, the kamma-patha is not complete yet. It cannot produce rebirth, but can bring its results after rebirth. > > I wonder what kamma-patha consists of, if it is not action per se. ... S: It is the completed course of action consisting of many moments of intention which condition particular rupas which we refer to as actions. ... >>...It depends on the moment whether there is trying to have understanding, whether there is silabbataparamasa. > > ***** > R:> Understandable. I guess it's good to remember that one can't try not to try or try not to want to understand either, but just see the trying and wanting for what they are. ... S: I like the way you pick up on all the points. I think one can try not to try or try not to want to understand too - further examples of attachment and possibly silabbataparamasa too. ... R:> If we managed to have a dsg convention and get everyone to converge someday, that would be great too. ... S: Yes, would love to meet up with some of you guys in the States! Metta Sarah ======= #113330 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Feb 2, 2011 3:57 am Subject: [dsg] Re: A lovely dream about Kaeng Krajan! jonoabb Hi KenO (Late again, but no new records established ;-)) (113008) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > > Dear Jon > ... > >> J: > >> This seems to be saying something like the following: "If a dead body is seen, > > > >>there is the reflecting on how one's own body is of the same nature as the > >>corpse now seen." > > > KO: nope, there are meditation techniques taught by the Buddha in the > Visudhamma. All these conceptual are used to understand dhamma, the same way > like feelings now is just a conventional understanding of feelings. Even in > commentaries in breathing meditation, there is a method to do it. The > commentaries of satipatthana makes it very clear that on the using breath to > reach jhanas then using jhanas as a basis to comptemplate dhamma. > =============== J: I think you'd agree that the understanding of dhammas can be developed independent of any attainment of jhana. So the suttas dealing with jhana need to be read with that in mind. They are given for the benefit of those who have already developed samatha to a high degree, to explain how satipatthana can be developed while the jhanas are also being attained. > =============== > KO: Agreed, it is dhamma that matters. Whatever meditation one pursues, > understanding of dhamma comes first and not the other way round of using > mediation to understand dhammas which many are doing now. Without comprehending > dhamma, there is no fruition to any dhamma meditation. It is a condition > written in the suttas as well. > =============== J: I'm glad to see that we agree on the fact that the understanding of dhammas must come first. As I see it, it's the development of this understanding that is the development of the path. There's no need for any 'practice' in addition. Jon #113331 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Feb 2, 2011 7:53 am Subject: Re: concepts, ultimates & conditions epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > The problem with the above is that conditionality seems to require a lot of conceptualization from appearing phenomenon. It requires induction, deduction, reasoning, proofs, making sure to avoid wrong kinds of induction based on correlation (just because B follows A, it doesn't mean that A causes B), just because there can be correlation between A and B, it doesn't mean that one causes the other. > Maybe this is why I've heard that animals have very limited understanding of cause-effect, so cause-effect is not given in experience. They don't have enough highly developed faculties to understand the order and structure of phenomena. I think there are two different points here. Either conditionality exists, or not. What we conceive in order to explain conditionality is a separate issue. So we have: 1. Conditionality - exists or not. 2. Our version of conditionality - correct or incorrect concept. Conditionality is observable. We see action-reaction all the time, so I think we can start with an affirmation of *some* form of conditionality being part of our universe, world and life. Starting from this affirmation of general conditionality, we can see that animals, though they cannot conceptualize and thus are free of any "wrong views" of reality as a whole, react to causes and conditions all the time, and do so even more directly than we may appear to. One dog barks - the other dog barks back. The dog smells the dog food - it smells bad ---> unpleasant vedana ----> the dog goes away and doesn't eat the food. No proliferations, just pure cause-effect reactions, ie, conditionality. Our reactions are more complicated. Sometimes we do things we don't want to do because we think about it and decide it's in our long-term interest. So we have reactions and then mitigating factors. We smell the food and it smells bad ---> negative vedana ----> proliferation about hurting the hostess's feelings ----> eat the food. Different from the dog, but still based on conditions, causes, tendencies and accumulations. When all the conditions for phenomena are listed with specific names - adverting this, determining that, we may think it's just a lot of explanatory concepts, and maybe those factors do or do not occur in reality, but something like them does occur. As K. Sujin has been reported as saying a number of times, it doesn't matter if you make sense of all the names and explanations, but whether you have a correct view of the process and can see it taking place. For me, this means watching conventional causes, effects, tendencies, accumulations and outcomes as I can understand them. I know that if I speak a certain way and with a certain tone of voice, I'm likely to start an argument, and if I approach someone with a different tone of voice and point of view, I may have a very pleasant conversation. That in itself is conditionality in action. And I personally believe that this is the first line of understanding in the Buddha's teaching on conditionality - whatever you spend your time on, whatever you develop in your mind, whatever you do, whoever you hang out with, whatever you take for common sense and reality as you know it, is going to come back to create the environment and series of events in which you will then have to live. So he spoke about "right speech" and "right action" and "right livelihood" not for an abstract moral purpose, but to create a wholesome environment for the development of the path. Whatever conditions get established, they lead to different types of outcomes. That's where I personally see the importance of conditions, tendencies, etc., in my life. I may not have all the concepts right, but I can see conditionality in action without them. Even a dog knows that if it gets hit with a newspaper it should do something different. I wonder if we get the message when we keep getting negative, akusala results from our tendencies and actions? Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = #113332 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Feb 2, 2011 10:34 am Subject: Re: wisdom and doing truth_aerator Hello Sarah, all, >S: What about calm or samatha now as we discuss Dhamma together or >help others during the day? Anytime, then there's no thought of "my >practice", "my problems". I agree that every moment of panna has some form of calm with it, while calm by itself doesn't have to always include wisdom. It is also true that wise teachers do teach against thinking or belief in "*my* meditation" or "my success/failure" at meditation. It seems to me that the key point of disagreement is on how to achieve panna. It is true that "when panna or sati arises it knows realities that appear now". But what causes -> panna or sati to arise which knows realities that appear now" ? Is the development same as the goal? or does a path brings to a goal? If the cause of wisdom is wisdom itself (x causes x), then there isn't anything else one can do to cause X, short of X. But the self caused loop is only caused by itself, and can't be made by other conditions. If the development leads to wisdom, then one doesn't have to start with perfect wisdom to have perfect wisdom. It gradually comes as a result of development. In order to reach the "non-doing", a lot of proper and wholesome doing is required before it is discarded like a raft on the other shore, after it has done its job. Buddha Himself has talked quite a bit about "*gradual* path" . I think that gradual does mean that it is not a case of worldling who didn't put in enough effort to suddenly become wise. A worldling becomes wise gradually, through long path of development. No "knight in shining armor" comes to save him. IMHO. With metta, Alex #113333 From: Ravi Doultani Date: Wed Feb 2, 2011 8:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: concepts, ultimates & conditions ravidoultani [Rob E] namastey i am agreeing with ur concept of budhism in mind opening words that u have said. but i want to diffrentiate between "belief in truth" and "truth in belief" which is gaming in our true virtual world always. we have noticed about stages of life but being alive we surpaas by surpass diffrent matter of time in our life we can not judge in matter of time at perticular stage of being. i want to say that param purush bhagwan is the "sat-shri-akal" purakh who is true and shri { believing of good} and akaal [with out time] and always with us when we do believe or not believe it is true that is my belief and it is my belief that is true so bole sonihaal ----- satshriakaal waaheguru ji ka khalsa waaheguru ji ki fateh From: Robert E <.....> >I think there are two different points here. Either conditionality exists, or not. What we conceive in order to explain conditionality is a separate issue. So we have: 1. Conditionality - exists or not. 2. Our version of conditionality - correct or incorrect concept. Conditionality is observable. We see action-reaction all the time, so I think we can start with an affirmation of *some* form of conditionality being part of our universe, world and life. Starting from this affirmation of general conditionality, we can see that animals, though they cannot conceptualize and thus are free of any "wrong views" of reality as a whole, react to causes and conditions all the time, and do so even more directly than we may appear to. One dog barks - the other dog barks back. The dog smells the dog food - it smells bad ---> unpleasant vedana ----> the dog goes away and doesn't eat the food. No proliferations, just pure cause-effect reactions, ie, conditionality. Our reactions are more complicated. Sometimes we do things we don't want to do because we think about it and decide it's in our long-term interest. So we have reactions and then mitigating factors. We smell the food and it smells bad ---> negative vedana ----> proliferation about hurting the hostess's feelings ----> eat the food. Different from the dog, but still based on conditions, causes, tendencies and accumulations. <....> #113334 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Feb 2, 2011 11:47 am Subject: Is conditionality observable? truth_aerator Hello RobertE, Nina, all, >RE: Conditionality is observable. We see action-reaction all the >time, so I think we can start with an affirmation of *some* form of >conditionality being part of our universe, world and life. As I understand it, what is observable without conceptualizing is: citta, cetasika and rupa if using paramattha classification. Other than the mind (cittas and cetasikas) the minimum of matter that is known is bare octad, and other material qualities do not seem to include conditionality within them. We see a string of events occurring one after another, and not only we make an extra-temporal whole out of its parts, we also make a whole out of pattern of events over time. Pattern of events (more than one event!), is defined as cause-effect or more briefly as "cause" or "effect" (any one of this words require the other). Earlier events are labeled causes for later sequence of events. However, there is no inherent marker in the event itself that tells us that it is cause or effect of something. Correlation doesn't have to imply causality, and neither does order of events (b can follow A, without being caused by A). While we may take for granted that "such and such an effect requires such and such cause", it does require a lot of induction, deduction or other logical tests to make sure that correlation between sequences of events is real and not simply seen so. So, does this make causality (and if not all causality, then which types) conceptual? If something requires analysis, does it make it conceptual? IMHO. With metta, Alex #113335 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Feb 2, 2011 12:13 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: What are 5 sense faculties (pasada-rupa)? + momentariness epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob E, > Op 31-jan-2011, om 23:18 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > > > Even with the car accident and the physical shock that stays with > > you for a while, I thought to myself - 'that's how it goes; > > everything is gone in a moment, and it's over.' I now recall what > > KS said to Sarah when she was sick, and got better, about how it > > was "all gone now" and not worth reflecting over. Everything > > happens in an instant. > -------- > N: Very good way of applying the Dhamma. It also shows a point you > like to stress: how the sutta in conventional way can remind us of > realities and can lead to awareness of the reality now. Thank you, Nina, for pointing that out. Yes, I can see that the conventional reality and how it happened all of a sudden reminded me of the momentariness of phenomena. There is a sense of sunya when that happens to, as if all the solid things in your life are really happening in empty space. It seems everything is connected very solidly, but at times like that they seem to be hanging by a thread. > We heard about some very bad wheather coming up to the States. Ice > rain, etc. I hope you stock your fridge and stay home. Thanks very much. I did have to cancel some evening activities several times in the last few weeks, because there has been freezing rain and ice at night, but we are doing fairly well. In the Midwest and Southern U.S. they are really having the worst weather right now - terrible snow that is a real challenge. Thanks for your thoughts! Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #113336 From: "Ken H" Date: Wed Feb 2, 2011 4:09 pm Subject: Re: Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 kenhowardau Hi Robert E, ---- <. . .> >> KH: The Buddha would never have bothered to teach if everyone was going to understand him in an ordinary run-of-the-mill way. > R: Then why did he bother to teach in the run-of-the-mill way to those whom he would not have bothered to teach, in a way he would not want anyone to understand, according to your view? ------------- KH: If I understand your question correctly, you are asking why, in my opinion, the Buddha taught some people a conventional path. My answer would be, he didn't. I seem to be pretty much alone with that answer. In previous conversations even the most hard-line of DSG's no-controllers have seemed to concede that the Buddha made exceptions for really dull-witted people. I can't see it that way. I reckon those dull-witted people would at least have been made aware that their conventional understandings of the teaching were not the real thing. Ken H #113337 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed Feb 2, 2011 3:02 pm Subject: The 8 Deliverances! bhikkhu5 Friends: The 8 Deliverances (Attha Vimokkha): The Blessed Buddha Once said: Bhikkhus: There are eight deliverances. Which are these? 1: Experiencing forms on own body, one visualizes these internal objects, as if they were external, outside of one, (e.g. an organ, bone, or tooth, etc). This is the 1st deliverance. 2: Experiencing external objects one perfectly visualizes these outer forms, as if they right in front of one's eyes. (e.g. a pond, a mountain, or a galaxy). This is the 2nd deliverance. 3: Experiencing any form, one visualizes these as perfectly stable & fixed images, and visually assured one thinks: Oohh This is exquisitely beautiful! This is the 3rd deliverance. 4: Through complete transcendence of experience of form, with the passing away, and silencing of all sensory reaction, without giving attention to any experience, any difference or any diversity whatsoever, entirely absorbed on only the infinitude of space, one enters & dwells immersed in the subtle sphere of infinite space... This is the 4th deliverance. 5: By transcending this infinitude of space, now singularly aware that also consciousness is infinite, one enters and dwells immersed in that infinitude of consciousness! This is the 5th deliverance. 6: By going beyond this infinitude of consciousness, now concentrating on voidness, one enters and dwells immersed in this empty, vacant, absent void of nothingness... This is the 6th deliverance. 7: By thoroughly leaving behind even this open vacuity of void nothingness, one enters, and dwells immersed in the exceedingly subtle & stilled state of neither-perception-nor-non-perception. This is the 7th deliverance. 8: By transcending even this subtle neither-perception-nor-non-perception, one reaches the ultimate ceasing of sense experience, ending all perception and ending all feeling! This is the final 8th deliverance... These 8 states, Bhikkhus, are the 8 kinds of mental deliverance... Unfolding Progressively Subtle Deliverance! <...> Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samâhita _/\_ * <...> #113338 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Feb 2, 2011 5:03 pm Subject: Re: Discussions in Bangkok with K.Sujin, Jan 2011(2) epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > S: > a)Sense bases: eye-sense, ear-sense etc. > b) sense objects: visible object, sound, smell, taste, tangible objects > c)inner ayatanas: sense bases, cittas > d)outer ayatanas: sense objects, cetasikas, subtle rupas, nibbana > e) gross rupas: the sense-bases and sense-objects > f) subtle rupas: all other rupas I will be looking over this list a bit, and also will check the other message you referenced. This seems a good place to start. If the 12 ayatanas are made up of the 6 faculties "(5 sense organs and the mind) and the 6 corresponding categories of objects" [Britannica] then basically the ayatanas pertain to the entire process of consciousness and perception; so they refer to all the elements of human experience? Would that be a fair summary? > Anyway, we can keep discussing. It's always helpful for me as well. Just expect slow replies to continue. My mother arrives tomorrow from UK, so a trip to the airport (by ferry and train). Jon departs Sat....all go! I understand. I will be a little slow too - between finishing my dreaded tax paperwork, arranging a new car for Melanie to replace the one that succumbed to car-ma, and bringing my Dad in for some medical treatments, I've had my hands full. But I can't stop my dsg addiction, so I will be around. :-) Thanks for your continued efforts to explain the ayatanas. It's getting a little less muddy. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #113339 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Feb 2, 2011 5:08 pm Subject: Re: Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 truth_aerator Hi KenH, RobertE, all, >KH: If I understand your question correctly, you are asking why, in >my opinion, the Buddha taught some people a conventional path. My >answer would be, he didn't. What about all the hundrends or thousands of suttas where the Buddha was talking about what you would call "conventional teaching"? What about even one of our favorite suttas, satipatthana sutta where it says how to develop mindfulness of breathing in a physically secluded place, sitting in cross-legged position while holding body erect, etc? What about teaching on decomposition stages of corpses? Is it conventional or ultimate teaching? What about 31 body part teaching found in Satipatthana? "[4]"Furthermore...just as if a sack with openings at both ends were full of various kinds of grain — wheat, rice, mung beans, kidney beans, sesame seeds, husked rice — and a man with good eyesight, pouring it out, were to reflect, 'This is wheat. This is rice. These are mung beans. These are kidney beans. These are sesame seeds. This is husked rice,' in the same way, monks, a monk reflects on this very body from the soles of the feet on up, from the crown of the head on down, surrounded by skin and full of various kinds of unclean things: 'In this body there are head hairs, body hairs, nails, teeth, skin, flesh, tendons, bones, bone marrow, kidneys, heart, liver, pleura, spleen, lungs, large intestines, small intestines, gorge, feces, bile, phlegm, pus, blood, sweat, fat, tears, skin-oil, saliva, mucus, fluid in the joints, urine.' "In this way he remains focused internally on the body in & of itself, or focused externally... unsustained by anything in the world. This is how a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.010.than.html >KH:I reckon those dull-witted people would at least have been made >aware that their conventional understandings of the teaching were >not the real thing. Is satipatthana like described above, "not the real thing"? With metta, Alex #113340 From: "fcckuan" Date: Wed Feb 2, 2011 6:12 pm Subject: more suttas in audio, it's about time fcckuan Hello Dhammastudygroup friends, I haven't been on this board in years. I've been working on a project the past few months of great interest to me. Putting together a library of audio suttas (excerpts, entire suttas, etc). There are already two projects that I'm aware of doing this (for entire suttas). Suttareadings.net is one of them, and Anandajoti reads several important suttas on his site. Suttareadings has not produced anything new since 2006. Anandajoti is producing great stuff, but he's only one person with limited time. Imagine if a group of people like myself interested in listening to more suttas (instead of putting strain on eyes that already read too much) got together and read some suttas ourselves. It's not that hard, and it doesn't have to be audio book quality. Just dhamma friends reading inspiring passages to each other. I realized recently that the smartphones similar to iphone and ipod touch have voice recorders that you use like you would conversing on the device in speakerphone, can produce sutta readings of very acceptable quality. A little bit of background hiss, but not enough to be distracting or detract from the joy of listening to a sutta being read. Here's are some mp3 samples I did today using my palm pre (very similar to iphone). https://sites.google.com/site/audiotipitaka/wiki/microphones/palm-pre It literally took just minutes to produce a usable mp3, put it up on the internet and listen to the results. Here's two more samples I did recently: A 10 minute excerpt from visuddhimagga: http://www.archive.org/details/AudioTipitakaMah-moggallnaBattlesTheRoyalNagaNand\ opananda&reCache=1 Mahā-Moggallāna battles the royal nāga Nandopananda And another reading I completed today, one of my favorite suttas for its awesome similes on the 5 hindrances, 4 jhanas, 6 abhinna: https://sites.google.com/site/audiotipitaka/home/dn/dn2/frank_k-recording-b-bodh\ i-translation-of-dn2 [DN 2] I did in 3 days, 30 min. of reading each day. If you have an iphone, ipod touch, android smartphone, blackberry, or a decent usb microphone for use with skype, we can organize some sutta, abhidhamma, vism. readings (each person does 10 or 15 min. per section), and we could assemble quite a nice collection of listening material. Don't worry about the audio processing or other tech stuff. If you have the recording device, are able to produce a sound file or movie file with it (or have a family member who can help you), email it to me then we can use it. If you're interested, you can drop me an email here: https://sites.google.com/site/audiotipitaka/connect (our group email is highlighted on that page) -Frank #113341 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Feb 2, 2011 8:18 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] more suttas in audio, it's about time sarahprocter... Hi Frank, Nice to hear from you after a long break! Where are you living now? Best wishes with the project! Metta Sarah --- On Thu, 3/2/11, fcckuan wrote: >I haven't been on this board in years. I've been working on a project the past few months of great interest to me. Putting together a library of audio suttas (excerpts, entire suttas, etc). <.....> #113342 From: Vince Date: Wed Feb 2, 2011 10:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sotapanna cerovzt@... Dear Sarah you wrote: > I'm so sorry I didn't reply sooner. I'm very glad to read your continued > interest and probing questions. also I enjoy to read your messages :). Forgive me if my messages can sound in some robotic style, still I need some dictionary help. > However, the main point is the degree of wisdom which has been developed in > order to attain enlightenment and eradicated the very gross kilesa > (defilements), such as the intention to kill. yes... At least to me, the real interest of talking about these stages (sotapanna, arahant...) is the development of wisdom and how attachment works. > S: I'm sorry, I don't follow this. We can consider the development of > understanding now. When there's understanding of realities at this moment, is > there any inclination to harm bugs in any way at all? We don't have to think > about "enjoying nibbana". This isn't the aim of the path. well, on my side the discussion was not the aim of the path but how attachment works regarding panna; from here the sotapanna example is useful. > S: Nothing is "sustained", no conditioned dhammas last at all. However, no > more wrong view or doubt for the sotapanna, no more breaking of precepts. here I don't agree... I think if no thing can be sustained then no thing can be missed. And if the sotapanna don't miss nothing then he is free of any type of dukkha, and in this case we talk about an arhant instead a sotapanna. While there is attachment the arising of wrong views is not fully eradicated. > S:.. Without beginning to understand what nama is > now, what rupa is now, there will never be an eradication of the idea of atta, > self, and there will never be an appreciation of the Buddha's teachings which > are all about dhammas as anatta. > I appreciate that we may see this point differently and I look forward to your > further comments. ...but in this point we agree! :) Point of discussion can be the dukkha of sotapanna. But just I used this stage to ask about the relation between wisdom and attachment. Because the sotapanna is somebody who had realized nibbana and still is under attachments. From here I thought it was useful to know more things about the relation between panna and attachment. I agree about the goal of the way and to be here the present moment. best, Vince. #113343 From: "Ken H" Date: Thu Feb 3, 2011 12:26 am Subject: Re: Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 kenhowardau Hi Alex, ---- > >KH: you are asking why, in >my opinion, the Buddha taught some people a conventional path. My >answer would be, he didn't. >> > A: What about all the hundrends or thousands of suttas where the Buddha was talking about what you would call "conventional teaching"? ---- KH: There are no such suttas. The Buddha did not believe in two worlds, a paramatta one and a conventional one. He only believed in a paramattha one. Therefore, it is not possible that any of his teachings could have been about conventional reality. He didn't believe in it. ---------- > A: Is satipatthana like described above, "not the real thing"? ---------- KH: The Buddha often used conventional terminology to describe the paramattha world. You shouldn't be misled by that. The satipatthana sutta was definitely not about conventional things. Ken H #113344 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Feb 3, 2011 2:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: pain nilovg Dear Sarah, Op 2-feb-2011, om 10:51 heeft sarah het volgende geschreven: > All the real problems like in the thinking with lobha, dosa and > moha whilst dwelling on a long story of jelly-fish and "poor me"! ------- N: I especially appreciate the "poor me" part! It can happen any time, and we feel so sorry for ourselves. Snow forcasts in Europe are favorable, thus, nothing, and I thought of your mother. Nina. #113345 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Feb 3, 2011 6:42 am Subject: Re: Discussions in Bangkok with K.Sujin, Jan 2011(7) epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" Hi Rob E, > #113078 > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" R:What about pariyatti, or in the case of nimitta? One can regard it correctly, even if not present, no? ... S: Pariyatti refers to the understanding of present dhammas. If we think about other objects, it's just speculation, surely? = = = = = = = ROB: I am a little confused about this. My understanding of pariyatti is that it correctly discerns what is true on a conceptual level. This will be applied when one discerns directly, but I think pariyatti itself cannot be about the present moment, but is more like a preparation for how to see the present moment. If I understand the nature of rupa, eye-sense, namas that arise, etc., as a matter of principle, isn't that pariyatti? And if I am investigating the nimitta - the image of an arising dhamma after the moment of arising is gone - that is also a correct understanding, but not at the time the dhamma has actually arisen. My memory of what K. Sujin was reported to say about this is that we don't have to be concerned about whether the dhamma is still present or whether it is a nimitta, because we know the nimitta represents the nature of the dhamma and all is important is to understand the dhamma correctly. Do I have that at all right? = = = = = = = > Why did Buddha teach these large groups mindfulness of breathing, quite apart from what they may have been experiencing at a given moment? ... S: Because for many of these bhikkhus, samatha with breath as object had already been highly developed. Again, the Buddha was teaching about the understanding of present dhammas at such times. In the Satipatthana Sutta, it's made very clear - any dhamma, any posture, any time. = = = = = = = ROB: Well I would agree that whether he was advocating breathing meditation for samatha development or not, he was definitely advocating understanding the present dhamma that the breath presented, and the dhammas that could be known through the attention to breath. As anapanasati means "knowing the breath with mindfulness" or something like that, the emphasis is definitely on sati leading to vipassana and panna. = = = = = = = ... <...> - killing (#112892) When there is the intention to kill but someone is prevented from carrying out the act - maybe a wounding, for example. The intention is the same, but the act, the kamma-patha is not complete yet. It cannot produce rebirth, but can bring its results after rebirth. > I wonder what kamma-patha consists of, if it is not action per se. ... S: It is the completed course of action consisting of many moments of intention which condition particular rupas which we refer to as actions. = = = = = = = ROB: That's a really nice definition. Thanks for making that so clear. Just to play that back in reverse order: Action = "moments of intention which condition particular rupas." Kamma Patha = "the completed course of action consisting of many moments of intention...etc." Very helpful. = = = = = = = ... >>...It depends on the moment whether there is trying to have understanding, whether there is silabbataparamasa. ***** > R:Understandable. I guess it's good to remember that one can't try not to try or try not to want to understand either, but just see the trying and wanting for what they are. ... S: I like the way you pick up on all the points. I think one can try not to try or try not to want to understand too - further examples of attachment and possibly silabbataparamasa too. = = = = = = = ROB: Hard to get out of the infinite regress of it all, unless one just drops the whole trying thing all at once. I think that somewhere Buddha said that "letting go" was the whole of the path. Is that possible? = = = = = = = ... R:If we managed to have a dsg convention and get everyone to converge someday, that would be great too. ... S: Yes, would love to meet up with some of you guys in the States! = = = = = = = ROB:That would really be fun, especially if we had some nice lunches and cakes! [and plenty of green tea] :-) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #113346 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Feb 3, 2011 6:50 am Subject: Re: Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > > > Hi Robert E, > > ---- > <. . .> > >> KH: The Buddha would never have bothered to teach if everyone was going to understand him in an ordinary run-of-the-mill way. > > > R: Then why did he bother to teach in the run-of-the-mill way to those whom he would not have bothered to teach, in a way he would not want anyone to understand, according to your view? > ------------- > > KH: If I understand your question correctly, you are asking why, in my opinion, the Buddha taught some people a conventional path. My answer would be, he didn't. > > I seem to be pretty much alone with that answer. In previous conversations even the most hard-line of DSG's no-controllers have seemed to concede that the Buddha made exceptions for really dull-witted people. > > I can't see it that way. I reckon those dull-witted people would at least have been made aware that their conventional understandings of the teaching were not the real thing. Well you are entitled to your opinion - even the opinion that following a conventional path would be reserved only for the most exceptionally dull-witted [one must always take care that one is not in the category they are outlining for others - we may always turn out to be more dull-witted than we realize with our dull wits.] However, I always like a little evidence with my opinions. It spices them up and gives them a sense of authenticity, rather than just saying what one thinks with nothing to back it up. So my question remains - why do you think that Buddha spoke of conventional things in such conventional terms on so many occasions if he did not want anyone to receive a conventional teaching? Can you take a very conventional passage somewhere and explain how it is really teaching about arising dhammas? I would appreciate this without benefit of a commentary which does not explain the sutta but replaces it with a totally alternate explanation which the people of that time would not have access to. For instance, if you take some of the rules of conduct for monks or householders, do you see those as being about dhammas only? If so, how is that the case, and what message was Buddha giving by talking about those things, such as codes of conduct, diet, etc., even to the extent of requiring thousands of pages to write it all down, ie, in the Vinaya? What do you think about that? If Buddha said that one should not drink alcohol except in the case where it is necessary for a medicinal preparation, what does that have to do with being aware of momentary dhammas? Do you doubt that he was instructing people about alcohol consumption in that case, or do you think it was about something else? Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #113347 From: Ravi Doultani Date: Wed Feb 2, 2011 10:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The 8 Deliverances! ravidoultani [Ven Samahita] what a delivery it is! very good! From: Bhikkhu Samahita To: 1. 1A ; 1. 2A Cc: Sent: Thursday, 3 February 2011 4:32 AM Subject: [dsg] The 8 Deliverances! Friends: The 8 Deliverances (Attha Vimokkha): The Blessed Buddha Once said: Bhikkhus: There are eight deliverances. Which are these? 1: Experiencing forms on own body, one visualizes these internal objects, as if they were external, outside of one, (e.g. an organ, bone, or tooth, etc). This is the 1st deliverance. <....> #113348 From: "Ken H" Date: Thu Feb 3, 2011 3:30 pm Subject: Re: Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 kenhowardau Hi Robert E, ---- <. . .> >> KH: I reckon those dull-witted people would at least have been made aware that their conventional understandings of the teaching were not the real thing. >> > RE: Well you are entitled to your opinion - even the opinion that following a conventional path would be reserved only for the most exceptionally dull-witted ----- KH: Thanks, but I wouldn't want that opinion. There is nothing wrong with following conventional paths. There is, however, something wrong with believing in the ultimate efficacy of conventional paths. And so if a person has heard the Buddha's teaching, and yet still insists on the efficacy of conventional paths, that person has wrong view. If he publicly misrepresents his wrong view as being the Dhamma, he is slandering the Buddha. So be warned! :-) ----------------- > RE: [one must always take care that one is not in the category they are outlining for others - we may always turn out to be more dull-witted than we realize with our dull wits.] ----------------- KH: All non-ariyans are foolish. (Some non-ariyans are more foolish than others.) ----------------------- > RE: However, I always like a little evidence with my opinions. It spices them up and gives them a sense of authenticity, rather than just saying what one thinks with nothing to back it up. So my question remains - why do you think that Buddha spoke of conventional things in such conventional terms on so many occasions ----------------------- KH: I don't think that at all! The Buddha did not speak of conventional things on *any* occasions, he spoke only of conditioned dhammas. Some people might correct me and say the Buddha would have spoken of conventional things in the course of ordinary day to day conversations. I won't argue with that (now) so long as we can all agree that the Buddha never spoke of conventional things *in the course of his teaching*. Satipatthana - the teaching of the Buddha - is entirely a matter of right understanding of conditioned dhammas. ------------------------------- RE: > if he did not want anyone to receive a conventional teaching? ------------------------------- When you say "conventional teaching" do you mean belief in the efficacy of rite and ritual? That's what I mean. Formal vipassana meditation, for example, is belief in control over paramattha dhammas. There is no such control! The Buddha would never have taught it. --------------------------------------- > RE: Can you take a very conventional passage --------------------------------------- KH: You mean a *conventionally worded* passage. --------------------------------------------- > RE: somewhere and explain how it is really teaching about arising dhammas? --------------------------------------------- KH: Yes, of course I can: that is what people do all the time at DSG. --------------------------- > RE: I would appreciate this without benefit of a commentary which does not explain the sutta but replaces it with a totally alternate explanation which the people of that time would not have access to. --------------------------- KH: What a terrible commentary that would be! Are you thinking of something Ven Thanissaro has written? --------------------------------------- > RE: For instance, if you take some of the rules of conduct for monks or householders, do you see those as being about dhammas only? --------------------------------------- KH: Yes, because that's how the world is – dhammas only. --------------------------------------------- > RE: If so, how is that the case, and what message was Buddha giving by talking about those things, such as codes of conduct, diet, etc., even to the extent of requiring thousands of pages to write it all down, ie, in the Vinaya? What do you think about that? --------------------------------------------- KH: The path (the teaching of the Buddha) is a co-arising of the conditioned dhammas, right understanding, right thought. . . . . right concentration. Having first understood that, we might ask what is (for example) right action? We already know right action is a conditioned dhamma, but we might want for a description of that dhamma. Therefore, the Buddha listed various conventional examples of right action (including the actions of a monk). We can see those conventional examples as *descriptions* of the real thing. Just remember there is no control in ultimate reality. The Buddha would never have given instructions in the sense of "things to do." He would only have given descriptions of conditioned dhammas. -------------------------- > RE: If Buddha said that one should not drink alcohol except in the case where it is necessary for a medicinal preparation, what does that have to do with being aware of momentary dhammas? Do you doubt that he was instructing people about alcohol consumption in that case, or do you think it was about something else? --------------------------- KH: Again, it's just a description. A good, sensible person (whether Buddhist or non-Buddhist) understands the evils of drunken behaviour. Therefore, that person avoids all unnecessary consumption of alcohol. His avoidance can then be cited as a good description of the dhamma Right Action, which functions in a similar way, but at a different level. The dhamma, right action, functions in a momentary world in which there are no people, drunk or sober, and no beverages. It's a very different world and an incredibly one hard to see - except maybe at the theoretical, intellectual, level. And even then . . . :-) Ken H #113349 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Feb 3, 2011 4:10 pm Subject: Re: Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 truth_aerator Hello KenH, all, > KH: Thanks, but I wouldn't want that opinion. There is nothing >wrong with following conventional paths. > >There is, however, something wrong with believing in the ultimate >efficacy of conventional paths. And who believes in *ultimate efficacy* of conventional path? Path is the way there, it is not the goal in-and-of-itself. Because it is the way to the goal, it doesn't create the goal, it just gets you there. It is a means to get there. This means that the path may, at certain times, strategically include certain teachings that will be transcended later. For example, one can read and gain more conceptual knowledge. Then engage in forceful restraint of the hindrances and unwholesome tendencies of the mind. When the hindrances were restrained, perhaps due to responsible sense of self, there could be a good moment for previously learned wisdom of non-doing/anatta to use that fortunate circumstance and make a final breakthrough to magga phala. Before one establishes in some sort of virtue, it may be dangerous to teach anatta. Some may use it as an excuse to commit bad things saying things like "there is no killer and no victim - only conditioned dhammas. There was no choice or control to pull or not to pull the trigger." . etc. In most cases, anatta teaching may be misunderstood as compliance to hindrances that arise. IMHO. > KH: All non-ariyans are foolish. > (Some non-ariyans are more foolish than others.) That is why we read and put more weight to the statements made by the Buddha, the best source of wisdom. >KH: I don't think that at all! The Buddha did not speak of >conventional things on *any* occasions, he spoke only of conditioned >dhammas. This seems to be an interpretation by some, because when we read the suttas we will notice just how often the Buddha used conventional teachings - even to the people who didn't know anything about Dhamma. Moreover, some of them became stream-enterers or higher by listening to Buddha's sermon which may have been mostly, if not completely, conventional. IMHO. With metta, Alex #113350 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Thu Feb 3, 2011 2:55 pm Subject: The 5 Clusters of Clinging... bhikkhu5 Friends: The five Clusters of Clinging (Khandha): The Blessed Buddha once explained: Bhikkhus, there are these five Clusters of Clinging. What five? 1: The Cluster of Clinging to Form... 2: The Cluster of Clinging to Feeling... 3: The Cluster of Clinging to Perception… 4: The Cluster of Clinging to Construction… 5: The Cluster of Clinging to Consciousness… These are the 5 Clusters of Clinging! The Noble 8-fold Way should indeed be developed for the direct experience of these five Clusters of Clinging, for the full understanding and elimination of them, and for their final overcoming, abandoning and leaving all behind…This Noble 8-fold Way is developed for the uprooting of all these five Clusters of Clinging! Explanation: The Cluster of Clinging to Form is internally to ‘own body’ and externally to what is appearing as ‘my world’ and ‘others body’… The Cluster of Clinging to Feeling is the obsession with pleasant feeling, fear of painful feeling & obstinate indifference towards neutral feeling… The Cluster of Clinging to Perception is the monomaniac fascination of the manifold, diverse, and momentarily tantalizing objects of the six senses… The Cluster of Clinging to Construction is fixated passion for intending, planning, attending, thinking, hoping, wanting, willing and worrying… The Cluster of Clinging to Consciousness is the addiction to all that is seen, heard, smelt, tasted, touched, and cognized… Cluster of Clinging means an assemblage, bunch, clump, collection, group, or knot of a tightly adhering collection of variegated attachment! There is nothing here ‘outside’ or ‘apart’ from these clusters of clinging, neither internally, nor externally! This 5-fold classification covers all... <...> Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikâya. Book [V:60-1] section 45: The Way. 178: The 5 Cluster of Clinging... Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samâhita _/\_ * <....> #113351 From: "fcckuan" Date: Thu Feb 3, 2011 5:53 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] more suttas in audio, it's about time fcckuan Hi Sarah, Nice to hear from you too! I'm living about 90min drive away from Abhayagiri monastery. I'm still doing the usual activities - Meditation, taiji, yoga, reading suttas, although trying to do much less reading of suttas and more listening. -Frank --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Frank, > > Nice to hear from you after a long break! Where are you living now? > > Best wishes with the project! > > Metta > > Sarah > > --- On Thu, 3/2/11, fcckuan wrote: > >I haven't been on this board in years. I've been working on a project the past few months of great interest to me. Putting together a library of audio suttas (excerpts, entire suttas, etc). > <.....> > #113352 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Feb 3, 2011 10:07 pm Subject: Re: Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > > > Hi Robert E, > > ---- > <. . .> > >> KH: I reckon those dull-witted people would at least have > been made aware that their conventional understandings of the teaching were not the real thing. > >> > > > RE: Well you are entitled to your opinion - even the opinion that following a conventional path would be reserved only for the most exceptionally dull-witted > ----- > > KH: Thanks, but I wouldn't want that opinion. There is nothing wrong with following conventional paths. > > There is, however, something wrong with believing in the ultimate efficacy of conventional paths. And so if a person has heard the Buddha's teaching, and yet still insists on the efficacy of conventional paths, that person has wrong view. If he publicly misrepresents his wrong view as being the Dhamma, he is slandering the Buddha. > > So be warned! :-) It is a sad display indeed to have debates about who is or isn't slandering the Buddha. I always think it's a safe bet to take him at his word, rather than making stuff up and saying that he said it when he didn't. Of course Buddha talked about the five kandhas and the selfless nature of all dhammas. No problem there. The problem is that he talked about other things as well, and it is you who are saying that these teachings are not part of the Dhamma. So who is contradicting what the Buddha actually said? It ain't me. > ----------------- > > RE: [one must always take care that one is not in the category they are outlining for others - we may always turn out to be more dull-witted than we realize with our dull wits.] > ----------------- > > KH: All non-ariyans are foolish. > > (Some non-ariyans are more foolish than others.) And if one non-ariyan attempts to measure the foolishness level of another, he is both foolish and presumptuous. > ----------------------- > > RE: However, I always like a little evidence with my opinions. It spices them up and gives them a sense of authenticity, rather than just saying what one thinks with nothing to back it up. So my question remains - why do you think that Buddha spoke of conventional things in such conventional terms on so many occasions > ----------------------- > > KH: I don't think that at all! The Buddha did not speak of conventional things on *any* occasions, he spoke only of conditioned dhammas. > > Some people might correct me and say the Buddha would have spoken of conventional things in the course of ordinary day to day conversations. I won't argue with that (now) so long as we can all agree that the Buddha never spoke of conventional things *in the course of his teaching*. Satipatthana - the teaching of the Buddha - is entirely a matter of right understanding of conditioned dhammas. > > ------------------------------- > RE: > if he did not want anyone to receive a conventional teaching? > ------------------------------- > > When you say "conventional teaching" do you mean belief in the efficacy of rite and ritual? That's what I mean. I mean practices, actions, and refraining from actions and involvements of various kinds. He did say "do this, don't do that" and in terms of dhammas no such "doings" exist, so he did speak in non-ultimate terms about the correct way to practice, live and think. > Formal vipassana meditation, for example, is belief in control over paramattha dhammas. No it is not. You may not be slandering the Buddha but you are slandering vipassana meditation in any case. I guess there's no serious punishment for that, other than being incorrect. > There is no such control! The Buddha would never have taught it. And neither have any vipassana teachers. Vipassana teaches to be aware, not to control anything, and there is no illusion that anyone can control anything, especially what arises in the moment. And it is clear that one doesn't control awareness either. Yet one can still practice and be as aware as one is of whatever arises. I don't see any problem with that. It does develop mindfulness over time, without any control whatsoever. > --------------------------------------- > > RE: Can you take a very conventional passage > --------------------------------------- > > KH: You mean a *conventionally worded* passage. That would be fine. > --------------------------------------------- > > RE: somewhere and explain how it is really teaching about arising dhammas? > --------------------------------------------- > > KH: Yes, of course I can: that is what people do all the time at DSG. Well then go for it; I'd like the Ken H. explication of what the Buddha is saying when he talks about refraining from sensuality, alcohol, dice, etc., or any other passage of that sort that you like. > --------------------------- > > RE: I would appreciate this without benefit of a commentary which does not explain the sutta but replaces it with a totally alternate > explanation which the people of that time would not have access to. > --------------------------- > > KH: What a terrible commentary that would be! Are you thinking of something Ven Thanissaro has written? No I'm thinking of the commentary you quoted about traversing the flood and what it really meant. It had no relation to what was said by the Buddha in that sutta. > --------------------------------------- > > RE: For instance, if you take some of the rules of conduct for monks or householders, do you see those as being about dhammas only? > --------------------------------------- > > KH: Yes, because that's how the world is – dhammas only. That's a circular argument, not authentic. You use your premise to prove that your premise correct. What you need to do if you really want to show that this was what *Buddha* had in mind, not you, is to explain how a particular code or rule of conduct is actually talking about arising dhammas only. Not just a general principle that pays no attention to what the Buddha said. > --------------------------------------------- > > RE: If so, how is that the case, and what message was Buddha giving by talking about those things, such as codes of conduct, diet, etc., even to the extent of requiring thousands of pages to write it all down, ie, in the Vinaya? What do you think about that? > --------------------------------------------- > > KH: The path (the teaching of the Buddha) is a co-arising of the conditioned dhammas, right understanding, right thought. . . . . right concentration. Having first understood that, we might ask what is (for example) right action? > > We already know right action is a conditioned dhamma, but we might want for a description of that dhamma. Therefore, the Buddha listed various conventional examples of right action (including the actions of a monk). We can see those conventional examples as *descriptions* of the real thing. What are they describing in terms of dhammas? Can you translate? > Just remember there is no control in ultimate reality. The Buddha would never have given instructions in the sense of "things to do." He would only have given descriptions of conditioned dhammas. So you don't think that action or following instructions is possible at all? Are there any activities that people do, or does this not exist? > -------------------------- > > RE: If Buddha said that one should not drink alcohol except in the case where it is necessary for a medicinal preparation, what does that have to do with being aware of momentary dhammas? Do you doubt that he was instructing people about alcohol consumption in that case, or do you think it was about something else? > --------------------------- > > KH: Again, it's just a description. A good, sensible person (whether Buddhist or non-Buddhist) understands the evils of drunken behaviour. Therefore, that person avoids all unnecessary consumption of alcohol. But if you do the above you are admitting the existence of both alcohol and drinking. They either exist or they don't, in reality. If there is no "object" such as alcohol - a concept - and there is no "drinking" per se - only experience of rupas, then how can one "avoid" doing or consuming anything? That would all be illusory, would it not? In that case if one thinks they can "avoid drinking alcohol" because it's "sensible" there is a definite idea of control - "I can refrain..." otherwise one could not bother to try to not drink or do or not do anything. So isn't this a direct contradiction to dhammas-only reality? How can you reconcile this at all? > His avoidance can then be cited as a good description of the dhamma Right Action, which functions in a similar way, but at a different level. The dhamma, right action, functions in a momentary world in which there are no people, drunk or sober, and no beverages. Well a person purposely refraining from drinking an illusory conceptual drink does not = the momentary world of no people, drunk or sober. You can't have it both ways. > It's a very different world and an incredibly one hard to see - except maybe at the theoretical, intellectual, level. > > And even then . . . :-) I can comprehend it intellectually. I can even imagine seeing it, and we can all "dwell on" the experience of hardness, color etc. and see it as separate from the conceptual objects we form. However, the question remains whether that is the only level of reality that exists, or whether they are coexistent. The world of atoms and electrons does not deny the existence of cars and bodies, it just shows what they are really made of. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #113353 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Feb 3, 2011 11:12 pm Subject: Re: How can killiing or stealing not be a conventional deed? epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > The meaning is this: the avoiding of an evil deed may be done with kusala or with akusala mind states, or with a mixture of both. Insofar as an avoiding is done with akusala mindstates, it is itself an akusala (i.e., 'evil') deed. I would agree - the fruit of a poison tree is itself poison, so an akusala mental state can ruin an otherwise appropriate action. But the opposite is also true in my opinion - a kusala mental state cannot save an akusala action, such as harming someone or wrong speech, can it? Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - #113354 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Feb 4, 2011 2:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing nilovg Dear Alex, Op 2-feb-2011, om 19:34 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > A worldling becomes wise gradually, through long path of development. ------ N: Very well said! Some people become discouraged because of the long way, but then they cling to a self who has to go a long way. If there is attention to just this moment, there is no time to think or worry about the long way. And understanding begins by listening and considering. If one does not consider thoroughly what one heard about naama and ruupa and the six doorways, the listening does not have much effect. ----- Nina. #113355 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Feb 4, 2011 2:50 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 3. nilovg Dear Han, Op 2-feb-2011, om 11:15 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > [Nina]: > I find the 8 meanings of upanna rather difficult and I wonder > whether the Burmese books have some addiitonal info. > > [Han] > I also find them difficult. ------ N: Meanwhile we could discuss them and see whether we come to understand more by means of our discussions. We could start with the most difficult one, which one? ----- Nina. #113356 From: han tun Date: Fri Feb 4, 2011 7:05 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 3. hantun1 Dear Nina, [Nina]: Meanwhile we could discuss them and see whether we come to understand more by means of our discussions. We could start with the most difficult one, which one? [Han]: To me all are equally difficult. I tried to pair off the Pali text and the English translation as below. But it does not give me any clue. All are difficult to understand. ----------- (1) Tattha ye kilesaa vijjamaanaa uppaadaadisama"ngino ida.m vattamaanuppanna.m naama. (1) Herein, those defilements which are existent, being possessed of arising and so on [1], are ‘[arisen as actually occurring]’ (vattamaanuppanna.m). ----------- (2) Kamme pana javite aaramma.narasa.m anubhavitvaa niruddhavipaako bhutvaa vigata.m naama. Kamma.m uppajjitvaa niruddha.m bhutvaa vigata.m naama. Tadubhayampi bhutvaa vigatuppannanti sa"nkha.m gacchati. (2) When kamma has been accumulated by impulsion [N:javana], the [kamma-] result which has ceased after experiencing the essential nature of the object is ‘gone away having experienced’, and kamma which has arisen and ceased is ‘gone away having been’; both are counted as ‘[arisen as experienced and gone] (bhutvaa vigatuppanna.m)’. ----------- (3) Kusalaakusalakamma.m a~n~nassa kammassa vipaaka.m pa.tibaahitvaa attano vipaakassa okaasa.m karoti. Eva.m kate okaase vipaako uppajjamaano okaasakara.nato pa.t.thaaya uppannoti vuccati. Ida.m okaasakatuppanna.m naama. (3) Profitable or unprofitable kamma inhibits the result of other kamma and makes the opportunity for its own result. When such an opportunity is thus made, the result which arises, from the [time of the] making of the opportunity, is counted as arisen; this is called ‘[arisen having got an opportunity] (okaasakatuppanna.m)’. ---------- (4) Pa~ncakkhandhaa pana vipassanaaya bhuumi naama. Te atiitaadibhedaa honti. Tesu anusayitakilesaa pana atiitaa vaa anaagataa vaa paccuppannaa vaati na vattabbaa. Atiitakkhandhesu anusayitaapi hi appahiinaava honti. Anaagatakkhandhesu, paccuppannakkhandhesu anusayitaapi appahiinaava honti. Ida.m bhuumiladdhuppanna.m naama. Tenaahu poraa.naa "taasu taasu bhuumiisu asamugghaatitaa kilesaa bhuumiladdhuppannaati sa"nkha.m gacchantii"ti. (4) But the five aggregates are called the plane of insight. These are divided into past, etc. But the defilements inhering in these are not to be said to be past, future or present; inhering in the past aggregates, they are unabandoned. Inhering in the future aggregates and in the present aggregates, they are also unabandoned. This is called ‘ arisen having obtained a plane’. Hence the ancients said: ‘[The defilements which are unabolished in this or that plane are counted as arisen having obtained a plane] (bhuumiladdhuppanna.m).’ ---------- (5) Tattha sampati vattamaana.myeva ‘samudaacaaruppanna.m’ naama. (5) Herein, that existing now is what is called ‘[arisen as behaviour] (samudaacaaruppanna.m)â€. ---------- (6) Saki.m cakkhuuni ummiiletvaa aaramma.ne nimitte gahite anussaritaanussaritakkha.ne kilesaa nuppajjissantiiti na vattabbaa. Kasmaa? AAramma.nassa adhigahitattaa. Yathaa ki.m? Yathaa khiirarukkhassa ku.thaariyaa aahataahata.t.thaane khiira.m na nikkhamissatiiti na vattabba.m, eva.m. Ida.m ‘aaramma.naadhigahituppanna.m’ naama. (6) After the eyes have been opened once, when an object has been grasped as a sign, it cannot be said that the defilements will not arise at any moment whenever [the object is] remembered (anussaritakkha.ne). Why? Because the object has been taken up. Like what? Just as it cannot be said that milk will not issue from a place on a milk tree which has been repeatedly struck by a hatchet. Thus this is called ‘[arisen because an object has been taken up] (aaramma.naadhigahituppanna.m)’. ----------- (7) Samaapattiyaa avikkhambhitakilesaa pana imasmi.m naama .thaane nuppajjissantiiti na vattabbaa. Kasmaa? Avikkhambhitattaa. Yathaa ki.m? Yathaa sace khiirarukkha.m ku.thaariyaa aahaneyyu.m, ‘imasmi.m naama .thaane khiira.m na nikkhameyyaa’ti na vattabba.m, eva.m. Ida.m ‘avikkhambhituppanna.m’ naama. (7) But when the defilements are not suppressed by an attainment, it is not to be said that they will not arise in that situation. Why? Because of non-suppression. Like what? Like it cannot be said that if one were to strike a milk tree with a hatchet, milk would not issue from that very spot. Thus this is called ‘[arisen through non-suppression] (avikkhambhituppanna.m)’. ----------- (8) Maggena asamugghaatitakilesaa pana bhavagge nibbattassaapi nuppajjissantiiti purimanayeneva vitthaaretabba.m. Ida.m ‘asamugghaatituppanna.m’ naama. (8) But the idea that it is not to be said that defilements which are not abolished by the path will not arise in one even if reborn in the summit of existence, should be elaborated in the same way. This is called ‘[arisen through non-abolition] (asamugghaatituppanna.m)’. -------- Respectfully, Han #113357 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Feb 4, 2011 7:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Discussions in Bangkok with K.Sujin, Jan 2011(7) nilovg Dear Rob E, I am butting in, while we wait for Sarah's answer. Op 3-feb-2011, om 15:42 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > My understanding > of pariyatti is that it correctly discerns what is true on a > conceptual level. This will be applied when one > discerns directly, but I think pariyatti itself cannot be > about the present moment, but is more like a preparation for > how to see the present moment. If I understand the > nature of rupa, eye-sense, namas that arise, etc., as a > matter of principle, isn't that pariyatti? -------- N: It concerns the present moment, it is not just theory. We hear about seeing, that it is just the experience of what is visible, and while we listen we can be reminded to "study" seeing right now. There is seeing right now, why not investigate it and verify the truth of what we heard? ------ > > R: And if I am investigating the nimitta - the image of an > arising dhamma after the moment of arising is gone - that is > also a correct understanding, but not at the time the dhamma > has actually arisen. My memory of what K. Sujin was > reported to say about this is that we don't have to be > concerned about whether the dhamma is still present or > whether it is a nimitta, because we know the nimitta > represents the nature of the dhamma and all is important is > to understand the dhamma correctly. Do I have that at > all right? > ----- N: Right, we do not have to think about nimitta, or think: it has just gone. All that interests us now is: learning more about the different characteristics that appear one at a time through one of the six doorways. Remember, one at a time. Seeing is a moment different from remembering that this is a tree. Gradually we can become familiar with different characteristics of realities. ------ Nina. #113358 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Feb 4, 2011 7:35 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 3. nilovg Dear Han, Op 4-feb-2011, om 16:05 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > (1) Tattha ye kilesaa vijjamaanaa uppaadaadisama"ngino ida.m > vattamaanuppanna.m naama. > > (1) Herein, those defilements which are existent, being possessed > of arising and so on [1], are ‘[arisen as actually > occurring]’ (vattamaanuppanna.m). > ----------- N: I like to go over them again, one at a time. No 1 : let us think of examples, for each point. I like the sound of beautiful quiet music, and immediately after hearing there is lobha already. That is vattamaanupanna. How often during the day? Very often, no matter when enjoying food, seeing pleasant colours. And when experiencing a tangible through the bodysense that is too hard, dosa arises immediately. Vattamaanupanna. ------ Nina. #113359 From: han tun Date: Fri Feb 4, 2011 1:38 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 3. hantun1 Dear Nina, [Nina]: I like to go over them again, one at a time. No 1 : let us think of examples, for each point. I like the sound of beautiful quiet music, and immediately after hearing there is lobha already. That is vattamaanupanna. How often during the day? Very often, no matter when enjoying food, seeing pleasant colours. And when experiencing a tangible through the bodysense that is too hard, dosa arises immediately. Vattamaanupanna. [Han]: It is a good idea to go over one at a time. Now, "kilesaa vijjamaanaa uppaadaadisama"ngino" has two parts: "kilesaa vijjamaanaa" and "uppaadaadisama"ngino". In your examples, there are also two parts: (1) hearing the music or touching a hard object, and (2) arising of lobha or the arising of dosa. Can I take it that: (1) hearing the music or touching a hard object = uppaadaadisama"ngino, and (2) arising of lobha or the arising of dosa = kilesaa vijjamaanaa? Thank you very much. Respectfully, Han #113360 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Feb 4, 2011 2:21 pm Subject: Clinging is caused by Craving! bhikkhu5 Friends: The 3 kinds of Craving (Tanhã): The Blessed Buddha once said: There are these three kinds of craving. What three? 1: The Craving for Sensing... 2: The Craving for Becoming... 3: The Craving for Non-Becoming… These are the three kinds of craving! This Noble 8-fold Way is to be developed for the direct experience of these three kinds of craving, for the full understanding of them, for their complete elimination, and for their final overcoming, abandoning & leaving all behind. The Noble 8-fold Way is developed for the ceasing of all craving! Comments: Any form of craving is a sign of an habitual addiction: 1: The first kind of sensual craving for sights, sounds, smells, flavours, touches, thoughts and mental states is fairly obvious, yet still tenacious... 2: The second craving is for becoming things such as: Rich, famous, praised, satisfied, beautiful, young, painless, healthy, strong, respected… etc… 3: The third kind of craving is for not becoming things such as: Sick, poor, criticized, despised, weak, ugly, afflicted, lonely, unsuccessful, dead. etc… The proximate Cause of all Suffering is this Craving, which have to be left! This is the 2nd Noble Truth! Craving means: All kinds of lust, desire, hunger, thirst, longing, urging, yearning for, attraction to, hankering, and hoping. Ceasing of all Craving is ceasing of Suffering! This is the 3rd Noble Truth! The proximate cause of craving is feeling. The effect of craving is clinging. Clinging is thus caused by craving. When craving arises, clinging also arises! Whatever is delighted in creates craving, clinging and thus Suffering! ,< Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta NikÄya. Book [V:58] section 45: The Way. 175: The 3 Cravings ... http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/index.html. Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu SamÄhita _/\_ * <...> #113361 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Feb 4, 2011 5:36 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Discussions in Bangkok with K.Sujin, Jan 2011(7) epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob E, > I am butting in, while we wait for Sarah's answer. That is great - always enjoy the benefit of your knowledge at any time. :-) > Op 3-feb-2011, om 15:42 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > > > My understanding > > of pariyatti is that it correctly discerns what is true on a > > conceptual level. This will be applied when one > > discerns directly, but I think pariyatti itself cannot be > > about the present moment, but is more like a preparation for > > how to see the present moment. If I understand the > > nature of rupa, eye-sense, namas that arise, etc., as a > > matter of principle, isn't that pariyatti? > -------- > N: It concerns the present moment, it is not just theory. We hear > about seeing, that it is just the experience of what is visible, and > while we listen we can be reminded to "study" seeing right now. There > is seeing right now, why not investigate it and verify the truth of > what we heard? Well, I like this very much and appreciate that. All I mean to say is that one cannot "directly discern" the moment as it is happening with pariyatti as I understand it. However, orienting oneself to the understanding one has and investigating the present moment in whatever form it can be accessed is great, and if this is part of pariyatti, that can be an exciting enterprise. I would guess one could do this in the form of a nimitta, taking an experience and focusing on what one can see of this, even if it is already gone. So if I rub a table and experience the hardness, I can then investigate that sensation and play with it a bit, seeing how it is a quality or experience of its own. I would see this as a kind of training for direct discernment, or at least, as you say, an investigation. > ------ > > > > R: And if I am investigating the nimitta - the image of an > > arising dhamma after the moment of arising is gone - that is > > also a correct understanding, but not at the time the dhamma > > has actually arisen. My memory of what K. Sujin was > > reported to say about this is that we don't have to be > > concerned about whether the dhamma is still present or > > whether it is a nimitta, because we know the nimitta > > represents the nature of the dhamma and all is important is > > to understand the dhamma correctly. Do I have that at > > all right? > > > ----- > N: Right, we do not have to think about nimitta, or think: it has > just gone. All that interests us now is: learning more about the > different characteristics that appear one at a time through one of > the six doorways. Remember, one at a time. Seeing is a moment > different from remembering that this is a tree. Gradually we can > become familiar with different characteristics of realities. Yes, I like the idea of slowing things down and looking at the different parts of experience one at a time, even though we can't see them as they happen at top speed. So we could look at something and go through the elements of the experience while looking: visible object, okay that is rupa. Eye-sense, which sees. And the thoughts about visible object and what comes up in thinking. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #113362 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Feb 5, 2011 2:14 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 3. nilovg Dear Han, Op 4-feb-2011, om 22:38 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > Now, "kilesaa vijjamaanaa uppaadaadisama"ngino" has two parts: > "kilesaa vijjamaanaa" and "uppaadaadisama"ngino". > In your examples, there are also two parts: (1) hearing the music > or touching a hard object, and (2) arising of lobha or the arising > of dosa. > > Can I take it that: > (1) hearing the music or touching a hard object = > uppaadaadisama"ngino, and > (2) arising of lobha or the arising of dosa = kilesaa vijjamaanaa? ------- N: The subject here is kilesa, not the vipaaka moments of hearing or touching. Uppaadaadisama"ngino means: being possessed of arising etc. , and this refers to the defilements. We should pay attention to the word *adi*, meaning etcetera. Arising etc. means: having the three moments of arising, presence and ceasing. These moments are so brief, that we can say that as soon as a defilement has arisen it is gone already. Comparing the “Expositor” (Book I, Part II, Ch I, 67): “Herein its word-definition: ‘present or existing’ is called uppanna, because it has arrived at the portal, so to speak, of genesis, etc. , after the end of the previous state". This kind of upanna, arisen as actually occurring (vattamaanuppanna.m), is not to be annihilated by the path, as we have read. This may become clearer when we go through the other ietms and compare the ones which are to be annihilated by the path and which ones are not. -------- Nina. #113363 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Feb 5, 2011 2:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Discussions in Bangkok with K.Sujin, Jan 2011(7) nilovg Dear Rob E, Op 5-feb-2011, om 2:36 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > I think pariyatti itself cannot be > > > about the present moment, but is more like a preparation for > > > how to see the present moment. > > N: It concerns the present moment, it is not just theory. ------------ > R:Well, I like this very much and appreciate that. All I mean to > say is that one cannot "directly discern" the moment as it is > happening with pariyatti as I understand it. However, orienting > oneself to the understanding one has and investigating the present > moment in whatever form it can be accessed is great, and if this is > part of pariyatti, that can be an exciting enterprise. > I would guess one could do this in the form of a nimitta, taking an > experience and focusing on what one can see of this, even if it is > already gone. So if I rub a table and experience the hardness, I > can then investigate that sensation and play with it a bit, seeing > how it is a quality or experience of its own. I would see this as a > kind of training for direct discernment, or at least, as you say, > an investigation. --------- N: I have the impression that you do here a lot of thinking and try to stay with it. As I see investigation: a beginning pa~n~naa that does its task already. Not so much thinking or trying to prepare. It is conditioned because of hearing the Dhamma, but not a specific action is needed. When I use the word investigation I mean: pa~n~na's task, not just thinking. -------- > N: > Remember, one at a time. Seeing is a moment > > different from remembering that this is a tree. Gradually we can > > become familiar with different characteristics of realities. > > R: Yes, I like the idea of slowing things down and looking at the > different parts of experience one at a time, even though we can't > see them as they happen at top speed. ------- N: It is not a matter of slowing things down, but a beginning understanding can discern different characteristics. We do not have to worry about top speed ;-)) -------- > R:So we could look at something and go through the elements of the > experience while looking: visible object, okay that is rupa. Eye- > sense, which sees. And the thoughts about visible object and what > comes up in thinking. ------ N: No need to name or lable. BTW eyesense is also ruupa, it does not see. Again, all this defining and thinking is not necessary. But it is not forbidden. When it comes up, it is conditioned, and different from awareness. -------- Nina. #113364 From: han tun Date: Sat Feb 5, 2011 3:12 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 3. hantun1 Dear Nina, [Nina]: The subject here is kilesa, not the vipaaka moments of hearing or touching. Uppaadaadisama"ngino means: being possessed of arising etc., and this refers to the defilements. We should pay attention to the word *adi*, meaning etcetera. Arising etc. means: having the three moments of arising, presence and ceasing. These moments are so brief, that we can say that as soon as a defilement has arisen it is gone already. Comparing the “Expositor†(Book I, Part II, Ch I, 67): “Herein its word-definition: ‘present or existing’ is called uppanna, because it has arrived at the portal, so to speak, of genesis, etc., after the end of the previous state". This kind of upanna, arisen as actually occurring (vattamaanuppanna.m), is not to be annihilated by the path, as we have read. This may become clearer when we go through the other items and compare the ones which are to be annihilated by the path and which ones are not. [Han]: Thank you very much for your above clarification. It is clear now. Respectfully, Han #113365 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Feb 5, 2011 7:35 am Subject: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 3. Item 2. nilovg Dear Han, no 2: (2) Kamme pana javite aaramma.narasa.m anubhavitvaa niruddhavipaako bhutvaa vigata.m naama. Kamma.m uppajjitvaa niruddha.m bhutvaa vigata.m naama. Tadubhayampi bhutvaa vigatuppannanti sa"nkha.m gacchati. (2) When kamma has been accumulated by impulsion [N:javana], the [kamma-] result which has ceased after experiencing the essential nature of the object is ‘gone away having experienced’, and kamma which has arisen and ceased is ‘gone away having been’; both are counted as ‘[arisen as experienced and gone] (bhutvaa vigatuppanna.m)’. ------- N: Within a process of cittas that experience an object, the moments of javana are akusala cittas or kusala cittas in the case of non- arahats. During the moments of javana kamma through body, speech or mind is committed and accumulated. Since each citta is succeeded by a following citta in the long series of cittas occurring in the cycle of birth and death, the force of kamma is accumulated from moment to moment and therefore, past kamma can produce result later on, This result is in the form of rebirth-consciousness and result occurring in the course of life, in the form of seeing, hearing etc. Seeing experiences visible object and then it is gone. Vipaakacitta experiences the flavour of the object (aaramma.narasa.m anubhavitvaa) , depending on whether the object is pleasant or unpleasant. Also kamma which is in this context akusala cetanaa cetasika, unwholesome volition, ceases after it has arisen. What is stressed here is that both kamma and vipaakacitta are gone (vigata) after they have arisen. They have gone, but this does not mean that they have never been. Kamma that has arisen in the past can at present produce result. There is result of kamma now in the form of seeing or hearing, but these do not stay, they all go away. When we are shouting to someone, kamma is being accumulated during the moments of javana, in this case, akusala cittas rooted in dosa. This kamma is gone, but, it will have effect in the future, in the form of unpleasant vipaakacittas. Item 2 is not to be annihilated by the Path. Even the arahat who has reached the end of rebirth and does not commit any new kamma, can still experience akusala vipaaka produced by akusala kamma of the past. Think of Moggallaana who lost his life by violence as a result of a former bad deed committed in a previous life. That kamma had arisen and gone, but its force was accumulated and produced extremely painful vipaaka. But then the cuticitta arose and this was not succeeded by rebirth-consciousness. ------ Nina. #113366 From: Lukas Date: Sat Feb 5, 2011 11:24 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 3. Item 2. szmicio Dear Nina, It seems vipaka is not so painful, but a new kamma is. Why mental unpleasant feeling is so painfull? Best wishes Lukas #113367 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Feb 5, 2011 2:18 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Discussions in Bangkok with K.Sujin, Jan 2011(7) epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > N: No need to name or lable. BTW eyesense is also ruupa, it does not > see. Again, all this defining and thinking is not necessary. But it > is not forbidden. When it comes up, it is conditioned, and different > from awareness. That's a good distinction. However, I wonder what is the purpose of all the study and understanding if it does not have some relation to the development of awareness? Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - #113368 From: han tun Date: Sat Feb 5, 2011 2:36 pm Subject: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 3. Item 2. hantun1 Dear Nina, Your explanation is very good and very clear. I am very grateful. It is also helpful that you mentioned why Item 2 is not to be annihilated by the Path. In subsequent Items, please also mention why the Item is annihilated or not annihilated by the Path. Respectfully, Han #113369 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat Feb 5, 2011 3:44 pm Subject: Feeling Causes Craving! bhikkhu5 Friends: The Three Basic Kinds of Feeling! The blessed Buddha once said: Bhikkhus and friends, there are these three feelings... What three? 1: Pleasant feeling, 2: Painful feeling, 3: Neutral neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling. These are the three basic feelings! A disciple of the Buddha, aware, focused, clearly comprehending, understands these three feelings. And contact as the cause of any feeling. When contact ceases they fade away & vanish. The Noble Way is leading to their elimination. With the final quenching of feeling, one is freed of all yearning and thus fully stilled... Whether feeling is pleasant, painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant, whether internal or external; whatever kind of feeling there is: Knowing: This is Suffering, perishing, momentary, disintegrating... Having been touched and contacted by them, noting their instant ceasing, their transience, one gradually loses all passion for them... There are these three basic feelings. What three? Pleasant feeling, painful feeling, and neutral feeling. Pleasant feeling causes craving towards the felt object! Painful feeling causes craving away from the felt object! Neutral feeling causes craving for something else, than the object! All mental states converges on this very felt quality of feeling... <...> From Sense Contact arises all Feeling! Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikâya. Book IV [204-5] 36: feeling. Vedanâ. Focused on Pleasure. 1-2. http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/index.html Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samâhita _/\_ * <....> #113370 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Feb 5, 2011 5:34 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 sarahprocter... Hi Alex & all, --- On Tue, 1/2/11, truth_aerator wrote: >KH: It's true the Buddha did not teach religious rites and rituals, >and any claim that he did teach them is horribly wrong. A:>What about Silabbata sutta? "when — by following a life of precept & practice, a life, a holy life that is followed as of essential worth — one's unskillful mental qualities decline while one's skillful mental qualities increase: that sort of precept & practice, life, holy life that is followed as of essential worth is fruitful." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.078.than.html ... S: Just looking at the full paragraph in the link: "When — by following a life of precept & practice, a life, a holy life that is followed as of essential worth — one's unskillful mental qualities increase while one's skillful mental qualities decline: that sort of precept & practice, life, holy life that is followed as of essential worth is fruitless. But when — by following a life of precept & practice, a life, a holy life that is followed as of essential worth — one's unskillful mental qualities decline while one's skillful mental qualities increase: that sort of precept & practice, life, holy life that is followed as of essential worth is fruitful." "That is what Ven. Ananda said, and the Teacher approved. .... S: The original question the Buddha asked was: "Ananda, every precept & practice, every life, every holy life that is followed as of essential worth: is every one of them fruitful?" Isn't the point of the sutta that even if the ceremonial services (siilabbata), the holy life (brahmacariya), the excellent services (upa.t.thaana saara), are followed, unles there is the development of kusala and the decline of akusala, such a life is without any fruit or benefit. Even if one appears to live the perfect life of a bhikkhu in a forest, if there isn't any understanding and development of kusala, it's useless. Wasn't that the point to which you were responding? Metta Sarah ========== #113371 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Feb 5, 2011 6:38 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 truth_aerator Hi Sarah, all, > S: The original question the Buddha asked was: > > "Ananda, every precept & practice, every life, every holy life that is followed as of essential worth: is every one of them fruitful?" > > Isn't the point of the sutta that even if the ceremonial services (siilabbata), the holy life (brahmacariya), the excellent services (upa.t.thaana saara), are followed, unles there is the development of kusala and the decline of akusala, such a life is without any fruit or benefit. Even if one appears to live the perfect life of a bhikkhu in a forest, if there isn't any understanding and development of kusala, it's useless. > > Wasn't that the point to which you were responding? The sutta says this: if something leads to more kusala and less akusala - then it is good. If something leads to more akusala and less kusala, then it is bad. Silabbata in and of itself is not bad, if it leads to kusala. ""When â€" by following a life of precept & practice, a life, a holy life that is followed as of essential worth â€" one's unskillful mental qualities increase while one's skillful mental qualities decline: that sort of precept & practice, life, holy life that is followed as of essential worth is fruitless. " http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.078.than.html With metta, Alex #113372 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Feb 5, 2011 2:39 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 upasaka_howard Hi, Alex, Sarah, and Ken - In a message dated 2/5/2011 9:38:25 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hi Sarah, all, > S: The original question the Buddha asked was: > > "Ananda, every precept & practice, every life, every holy life that is followed as of essential worth: is every one of them fruitful?" > > Isn't the point of the sutta that even if the ceremonial services (siilabbata), the holy life (brahmacariya), the excellent services (upa.t.thaana saara), are followed, unles there is the development of kusala and the decline of akusala, such a life is without any fruit or benefit. Even if one appears to live the perfect life of a bhikkhu in a forest, if there isn't any understanding and development of kusala, it's useless. > > Wasn't that the point to which you were responding? The sutta says this: if something leads to more kusala and less akusala - then it is good. If something leads to more akusala and less kusala, then it is bad. Silabbata in and of itself is not bad, if it leads to kusala. ""When â€" by following a life of precept & practice, a life, a holy life that is followed as of essential worth â€" one's unskillful mental qualities increase while one's skillful mental qualities decline: that sort of precept & practice, life, holy life that is followed as of essential worth is fruitless. " http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.078.than.html With metta, Alex ================================= As I understand the sutta, there are numerous systems of precept & practice that are followed by people who consider them to be of essential worth, but not all are in fact worthwhile. They are to be evaluated on the basis of the relative wholesomeness or unwholesomeness of the resulting mental qualities. For example, a practice of self-mutilation is harmful, but a practice of calm and mindful introspection is worthwhile. As Jesus said about 500 years later, "By their fruits ye shall know them." With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) _________________________ #113373 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Feb 6, 2011 12:57 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 nilovg Hi Howard, Op 6-feb-2011, om 4:39 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > As I understand the sutta, there are numerous systems of precept & > practice that are followed by people who consider them to be of > essential > worth, but not all are in fact worthwhile. They are to be evaluated > on the > basis of the relative wholesomeness or unwholesomeness of the > resulting mental > qualities. For example, a practice of self-mutilation is harmful, > but a > practice of calm and mindful introspection is worthwhile. As Jesus > said about > 500 years later, "By their fruits ye shall know them." ------ N: The practice of calm and mindful introspection is worthwhile, you write. It depends. What is this calm, what is this introspection? It is not fruitful without right understanding of naama and ruupa appearing at this very moment, through one of the six doors, one at a time. Without right understanding we take calm and introspection for self. I also doubt about introspection. Just any reality that appears now is the object of understanding. When we realize that this is lobha or dosa, can we be sure that there is not an idea of my lobha, my dosa? They are just conditioned naamas. As to calm, it is difficult to know its characteristic. It is a moment without lobha, dosa and moha, and it has to be known very precisely. Otherwise we take for calm for what is not calm. Can we be sure that there is not after seeing just now, a very, very subtle clinging to visible object or to seeing? Hard to discern such moments. First the difference between naama and ruupa has to be clearly known. That is the first stage of tender insight. After that there can gradually be a clearer understanding of different characteristics of realities. It grows stage by stage. ------ Nina. #113374 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Feb 6, 2011 1:25 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 3. Item 2. nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 5-feb-2011, om 20:24 heeft Lukas het volgende geschreven: > It seems vipaka is not so painful, but a new kamma is. ------ N: Seeing or hearing are accompanied by indifferent feeling and they do not hurt. Body-consciousness is accompanied by bodily pleasant feeling or by painful feeling. Painful feeling can hurt very much, but it hurts even more when akusala citta rooted in dosa accompanied by mental unhappy feeling arises. We think long stories about 'our painful feeling'. ------- > L:Why mental unpleasant feeling is so painful? ------ N: Because we take it for self. As Sarah said: we think "of poor me". This makes it worse. In reality it is just a conditioned naama and it falls away. It is an element, impersonal. Then there are other elements, like seeing or hearing. They all arise because of conditions and then they go. We can learn to see unpleasant feeling as an impersonal element and not attach too much importance to it. When it arises we cannot do anything, it arises because of its own conditions. We can develop patience together with right understanding. ------- Nina. #113375 From: "Lukas" Date: Sun Feb 6, 2011 4:14 am Subject: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 3. Item 2. szmicio Dear Nina > > It seems vipaka is not so painful, but a new kamma is. > ------ > N: Seeing or hearing are accompanied by indifferent feeling and they > do not hurt. Body-consciousness is accompanied by bodily pleasant > feeling or by painful feeling. Painful feeling can hurt very much, > but it hurts even more when akusala citta rooted in dosa accompanied > by mental unhappy feeling arises. We think long stories about 'our > painful feeling'. L: So even vipaka citta that is bodily painful feeling can hurt? What in the case of an Arahant, do they feel a pain? Are they still suffering cause of this bodily painful feeling? Arahants have no chance to mental unpleasant feeling to arise, how did they achive such state? > ------- > > L:Why mental unpleasant feeling is so painful? > ------ > N: Because we take it for self. As Sarah said: we think "of poor me". > This makes it worse. L: But it happens. Anything to do with it? Best wishes Lukas #113376 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Feb 6, 2011 5:20 am Subject: Re: should one try one's best? jonoabb Hi Robert E (113027) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > I am trying to keep up/catch up with you, but I may soon fail... > =============== J: You are doing a remarkable job, Robert. I fear it's a case of me struggling to keep up with you ;-)) > =============== > Is Nyanatiloka the final authority on all Buddhist definitions? > > Here is a more basic definition derived by a Buddhist dictionary from Access to Insight - > > Kusala: Wholesome, skillful, good, meritorious. An action characterized by this moral quality (kusala-kamma) is bound to result (eventually) in happiness and a favorable outcome. Actions characterized by its opposite (akusala-kamma) lead to sorrow. See kamma. > > I think it's a bit of an interpretive choice whether one sees the "moral quality" applying to the intention or the action, and that is not clarified in the direction of mental qualities in sutta. Nyanatiloka was trained in Burma and was a pretty strong adherent I think to Abhidhamma and commentaries, so his definition would be naturally turned towards your general direction. I'm not saying it's wrong, just that it's not conclusive. > =============== J: Yes, Nyanatiloka is standard Theravada orthodoxy. I quoted him to show the interpretation I was putting forward was not my own creation. In the ATI definition you've quoted, the expression 'moral quality' can only apply to the term 'kusala'. To my reading, "An action characterised by this moral quality" has to mean "An action characterised by the moral quality of kusala". > =============== > Why do breaches of ethics cause unfavorable rebirth? Because they are akusala, no? Why are they akusala? Because they lead to akusala actions. The term is not "thinking about breaking the precepts," or "breaking them internally," but "breaking the precepts," which involves doing something; just like "murder" is not a thought or intention, but the completion of the action. I think I'm onto something here! :-) > =============== J: ;-)). Yes, you're onto the point that many instances of kusala or akusala kamma require action through body or speech, in addition to the appropriate mental state, in order to be 'completed' actions. > =============== > I agree that kusala mental states and kusala actions often go together. > =============== J: There is no such thing in the Theravada teaching as a kusala act that is not accompanied by kusala mental states. > =============== > > I. The tenfold unwholesome courses of action (akusala-kamma-patha): > > 3 bodily actions: killing, stealing, unlawful sexual intercourse; > > 4 verbal actions: lying, slandering, rude speech, foolish babble; > > 3 mental actions: covetousness, ill-will, evil views. > > Unwholesome mental courses of action comprise only extreme forms of defiled thought: the greedy wish to appropriate others' property, the hateful thought of harming others, and pernicious views. > > And also, he specifies mental actions as a *separate category,* not as the underlying defining factor of the other two cateogries, which are bodily and verbal, *not* explicitly mental in nature. > > Why are there three separate categories of unwholesome acts, and why is only *one* of those categories "mental?" > =============== J: As mentioned above, some instances of kamma patha require actions of body or speech in order to be completed, others do not (these last are the so-called 'mental actions in the above 3-fold classification'). > =============== > > Both lists occur repeatedly, e.g. in A.X.28, 176; M.9; > > they are explained in detail in M.114, and in Com. to M.9 (R. Und., p. 14), Atthasālini Tr. I, 126ff. > > *********************************** > > It seems to me that those lists make my point that mental factors are only one aspect of akusala and not the sole determining factor in all akusala. > =============== J: The lists need to be read in conjunction with the preceding part of the dictionary entry which explains about kusala and akusala. > =============== > > J: To my understanding, taking the life of another being necessarily involves some moments of akusala, and is one of the types of akusala kamma patha (i.e., can condition rebirth in a lower plane). > > Sure, but the question is whether only the mental factor causes the akusala and I am contending it is not. > =============== J: If you're referring to kamma and vipaka, only the mental factor of intention is kamma. On the same subject, all the links in the Dependent Origination are actual dhammas. Jon #113377 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Feb 6, 2011 5:24 am Subject: Kusala intention (was, Re: The clansman who is a beginner ...) jonoabb Hi Robert E (113203) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. ... > > I have a hard time with everything arising based on what seem to be "arbitrary" accumulations and "spontaneous" appearances. To be clear, I'm not advocating any kind of control of when things arise or what arises, but it seems to me that each thing that arises would still be based in a logical ascension through a logical chain of dependent arising. Sometimes it seems that the commentarial model has things arising at random times and events, rather than the conditions that cause them having a sensible series of steps. But I may be misinterpreting that. It just seems that way. > =============== J: If you're talking about mental states, the accumulated latent tendencies obviously play a major role. As explained in detail in the commentaries, every dhamma arises by virtue of one or more of the 24 conditions that are discussed at length in the Patthana. Nothing is random or arbitrary. The way these conditions work may well be a mystery to us, but that's not a reason for rejecting the possibility that they work in the way suggested (until such time as they can be either verified or disproved). > =============== > I understand that if I say a cross word to someone, I may get a negative response back sometime later, and it may not occur at all, or may occur only when conditions align to allow it. And I can understand that this may occur in the world of dhammas as well. But I still don't quite resonate with the idea that the object of intention, the activity it leads to, and other things which seem like supporting conditions at very least, seem to have little consequence for what is kusala, or for how and when experiences take place. > =============== J: As regards kusala, you seem to be suggesting that having intention to develop kusala/do something kusala and making a deliberate effort in that regard are important factors in the arising of kusala. That would also be the view of the person who has never heard the dhamma. I think there is more to the Buddha's teaching than that. Jon #113378 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Feb 6, 2011 5:32 am Subject: Re: Meditation (was, The clansman ...) jonoabb Hi Robert E (113204) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. ... > > I don't object to the idea of the mental factor of right effort arising as being part of the path, but it does not make sense of the Buddha's statements to 'try diligently' and practice with great ardor' or similar statements. They refer to someone putting forth "right effort," not recognizing it as an arising dhamma. I feel that is twisting things to say that he did not give such encouragements, since he clearly did instruct people to do specific things in specific cases, and in general encouraged followers to 'try hard,' 'keep going until you reach the goal' and other conventional things that a coach might say. > =============== J: You are saying that the Buddha was recommending the doing of those things despite the fact that it would necessarily involve a lot of akusala on the part of the person undertaking the 'practice'. I don't think that would be consistent with his general teaching. > =============== > > J: The Buddha spoke about hearing and discussing and reflecting upon the teachings as being necessary conditions for the development of the path. He did not say the same about any form of 'sitting practice'. > > Well, we continue to have a different way of seeing the constant, continual references to attainment within jhana and the formal insight sequences and exercises laid out in sutta, as well as specific instructions throughout the Visudhimagga. > =============== J: But unless these things (i.e., jhana, the 'exercises laid out in sutta') are prerequisites to the development of insight (and I understand you are not saying they are), we don't need to be much concerned with them except to the extent that they occur in our lives already. Certainly, the idea that we should aspire to jhana attainment because of the (relative) ease with which dhammas can then be 'known' will have the effect of making the understanding of dhammas that may be arising now seem less important or significant, and the failure to keep the development of that understanding uppermost in one's mind will result in its decline or loss. Jon #113379 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Feb 6, 2011 5:37 am Subject: Satipatthana Sutta - Cemetary Contemplation (was, Re: A lovely dream ...) jonoabb Hi Robert E (113216) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > > (b) primarily speaking to/for the benefit of those who were already (or who had the potential to become) experienced and highly skilled in that contemplation, and explaining how awareness/insight might be developed at the same time as samatha is further developed. > > Okay; and how would one determine - meaning us, not Buddha - whether one "had the potential to become...experienced and highly skilled in that contemplation..."? > =============== J: To begin with, there would have to be a clear understanding of the difference between kusala and akusala on an ongoing basis. Jon #113380 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Feb 6, 2011 1:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 2/6/2011 3:57:05 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, Op 6-feb-2011, om 4:39 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > As I understand the sutta, there are numerous systems of precept & > practice that are followed by people who consider them to be of > essential > worth, but not all are in fact worthwhile. They are to be evaluated > on the > basis of the relative wholesomeness or unwholesomeness of the > resulting mental > qualities. For example, a practice of self-mutilation is harmful, > but a > practice of calm and mindful introspection is worthwhile. As Jesus > said about > 500 years later, "By their fruits ye shall know them." ------ N: The practice of calm and mindful introspection is worthwhile, you write. It depends. What is this calm, what is this introspection? It is not fruitful without right understanding of naama and ruupa appearing at this very moment, through one of the six doors, one at a time. Without right understanding we take calm and introspection for self. ----------------------------------------------- Well, in this regard, then, I must have right understanding, because the very idea of taking calm and introspection in this mind stream as "self" or "myself" seems just plain silly to me. ------------------------------------------------ I also doubt about introspection. Just any reality that appears now is the object of understanding. ------------------------------------------------- You think so? I do not. It may or it may not be. ---------------------------------------------- When we realize that this is lobha or dosa, can we be sure that there is not an idea of my lobha, my dosa? They are just conditioned naamas. ---------------------------------------------- So, please clarify: The Buddha warned against introspection? Better not to "see" what's what? --------------------------------------------- As to calm, it is difficult to know its characteristic. ---------------------------------------------- If one is confused, lots of things are difficult to know. That's true. ---------------------------------------------- It is a moment without lobha, dosa and moha, and it has to be known very precisely. ---------------------------------------------- Do you know genuine calm and peace when it is present, Nina? Should one carry a checklist with them at all times? ;-) ------------------------------------------- Otherwise we take for calm for what is not calm. --------------------------------------------- What is the point you are making, Nina? One rarely takes calm for what is not calm - at least I do not. By means of introspection, I pretty much know what my mental state is - even from moment to moment. What do you think, Nina: best not to look, see, and examine? -------------------------------------------- Can we be sure that there is not after seeing just now, a very, very subtle clinging to visible object or to seeing? ---------------------------------------------- If one is not yet "perfect," mistakes can be made. So? --------------------------------------------- Hard to discern such moments. First the difference between naama and ruupa has to be clearly known. ---------------------------------------------- Maybe so. Maybe not. Must that knowledge be perfect first - before anything else? BTW, I am unaware of mistaking the two. (So, of course, either I do not mistake them, or am totally lost, not even knowing what I know and what I do not know!) I never confuse knowing from object-content so that is experienced, etc. Actually, it strikes me that one who confuses these would be mildly insane. Of course, I do engage in introspection, that dirty habit ;-), so perhaps I only THINK that I don't confuse these, and I'm just hell-bound! ;-)) --------------------------------------------- That is the first stage of tender insight. After that there can gradually be a clearer understanding of different characteristics of realities. It grows stage by stage. --------------------------------------------- It grows due to what? Reading and thinking about it? I don't buy that for a second. (Though I do think that study and contemplation are important.) --------------------------------------------- ------ Nina. =============================== With metta, Howard Mindfulness of the Body /Monks, whoever develops & pursues mindfulness immersed in the body encompasses whatever skillful qualities are on the side of clear knowing. Just as whoever pervades the great ocean with his awareness encompasses whatever rivulets flow down into the ocean, in the same way, whoever develops & pursues mindfulness immersed in the body encompasses whatever skillful qualities are on the side of clear knowing./ (From the Kayagatasati Sutta) #113381 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Feb 6, 2011 1:47 am Subject: Deleted Material (Re: [dsg] Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78) upasaka_howard Hi again, Nina - In a message dated 2/6/2011 9:23:48 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, upasaka@... writes: BTW, I am unaware of mistaking the two. (So, of course, either I do not mistake them, or am totally lost, not even knowing what I know and what I do not know!) I never confuse knowing from object-content so that is experienced, etc. ------------------------------------------------- The last sentence is missing the center portion. As I recall, the sentence was supposed to be approximately along the following lines: "I never confuse knowing from object-content, feeling from what is so felt, experiencing warmth from the warmth that is experienced, etc." (BTW, my English would have been better had I written "with" instead of "from".) I could also have added, of course, not confusing seeing with the seen sight, hearing with the heard sound, and so on. -------------------------------------------------------------- Actually, it strikes me that one who confuses these would be mildly insane. Of course, I do engage in introspection, that dirty habit ;-), so perhaps I only THINK that I don't confuse these, and I'm just hell-bound! ;-)) ================================= With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #113382 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Feb 6, 2011 1:23 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 truth_aerator Dear Nina, all, > N: The practice of calm and mindful introspection is worthwhile, >you >write. It depends. What is this calm, what is this >introspection? If this calm and introspection is connected with Dhamma and leads to cessation of all craving, then it is good. If it is connected with wordliness (adhamma) than it is bad. Thinking proper thoughts can lead to Nibbana. An interesting sutta that I've read again was MN19 ==================================== The Blessed One said, "Monks, before my self-awakening, when I was still just an unawakened Bodhisatta, the thought occurred to me: 'Why don't I keep dividing my thinking into two sorts?' So I made thinking imbued with sensuality, thinking imbued with ill will, & thinking imbued with harmfulness one sort, and thinking imbued with renunciation, thinking imbued with non-ill will, & thinking imbued with harmlessness another sort. ... "And as I remained thus heedful, ardent, & resolute, thinking imbued with renunciation arose. I discerned that 'Thinking imbued with renunciation has arisen in me; and that leads neither to my own affliction, nor to the affliction of others, nor to the affliction of both. It fosters discernment, promotes lack of vexation, & leads to Unbinding. ... "Whatever a monk keeps pursuing with his thinking & pondering, that becomes the inclination of his awareness. If a monk keeps pursuing thinking imbued with renunciation, abandoning thinking imbued with sensuality, his mind is bent by that thinking imbued with renunciation. If a monk keeps pursuing thinking imbued with non-ill will, abandoning thinking imbued with ill will, his mind is bent by that thinking imbued with non-ill will. If a monk keeps pursuing thinking imbued with harmlessness, abandoning thinking imbued with harmfulness, his mind is bent by that thinking imbued with harmlessness. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.019.than.html ============================================================ With metta, Alex #113383 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Feb 6, 2011 1:32 pm Subject: Satipatthana Sutta - Cemetary Contemplation (was, Re: A lovely dream ...) truth_aerator Hello Jon, all, >J: To begin with, there would have to be a clear understanding of the >difference between kusala and akusala on an ongoing basis. There is nothing akusala about cemetery contemplation as taught by the Buddha if it is approached appropriately, and at the right time. I don't think that the Buddha would teach anything akusala. "A monk whose mind is thus released does not take sides with anyone, does not dispute with anyone. He words things by means of what is said in the world but without grasping at it." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.074.than.html#fnt-2 So conventional speech is used by Arahants. There is nothing akusala about it as long as one doesn't grasp it. With metta, Alex #113384 From: "Ken H" Date: Sun Feb 6, 2011 11:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 kenhowardau Hi Howard and all, ---- <. . .> > H: As I understand the sutta, there are numerous systems of precept & > practice that are followed by people who consider them to be of essential > worth, but not all are in fact worthwhile. They are to be evaluated on the > basis of the relative wholesomeness or unwholesomeness of the resulting mental > qualities. For example, a practice of self-mutilation is harmful, but a > practice of calm and mindful introspection is worthwhile. As Jesus said about > 500 years later, "By their fruits ye shall know them." ---- KH: Once again, everything comes back to 'control or no control.' With a 'control' understanding of the Dhamma some of us will inevitably see this sutta as advocating certain rules and practices in preference to certain other rules and practices. With a 'no-control' interpretation others of us will see the same sutta as advocating right understanding, here and now, regardless of rules and practices. Until we are in agreement on the all-important question of control/no-control, we can only discuss superficial questions. But that's not so bad. :-) My question for Howard is: why, if Ananda was describing two different lifestyles, did he describe each of them in exactly the same words? If he was talking about one bad set of rules and practices (such as self-mutilation) and one good set of rules and practices (such as introspection) why did he not say so? Ken H #113385 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Feb 6, 2011 9:58 pm Subject: Feeling is caused by Contact! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: Real Peace is without urge for Pleasant Feeling! The Blessed Buddha once explained this to some gravely sick Bhikkhus: A Bhikkhu should spend his time acutely aware & clearly comprehending... This is our instruction to you! While a Bhikkhu lives in this way, aware and clearly comprehending, enthusiastic, keen, and determined, if there arises in him a pleasant feeling, then he understands this: There has arisen in me an event of pleasant feeling. Now that is dependent, it is not independent. Dependent on what? Dependent on this sense-contact! But all contact is impermanent, passing, conditioned, constructed and dependently arisen... So when this pleasant feeling has arisen in dependence on sense-contact, that indeed is impermanent, conditioned, dependently arisen, how could it ever then itself be lasting and permanent? He dwells in this way always contemplating this impermanence of contact and also of pleasant feeling, and he considers the inevitable vanishing, fading away, and total ceasing, that entails relinquishment of all constructions. While he reflects thus, then the underlying tendency to lust for contact and pleasant feeling is gradually reduced. This deep craving fades way and is finally eliminated... He understands: With the breakup of this body, at the exhaustion of this fragile life, whatever feeling, and all that is felt, whether pain or pleasure, neither being hankered after, nor clung to, will cool down right there... Sense Organ + Sense Object + Sense Consciousness = Sense-Contact Visibility of Eye + Visible Form + Visual Consciousness = Eye-Contact Ear Sensitivity + Sound + Auditory Consciousness = Ear-Contact Nose Sensitivity + Smell + Olfactory Consciousness = Nose-Contact Tongue Sensitivity + Taste + Gustatory Consciousness = Tongue-Contact Skin Sensitivity + Touch Object + Tactile Consciousness = Body-Contact Mind Receptivity + Thought + Mental Consciousness = Mental-Contact Contact is not the outer physical impact, but a neural mental construction! The Buddha on Contact (Phassa ): Dependent on the eye and the forms, eye-consciousness arises. The coming-together of these three phenomena, is sense-contact. MN 18 For those overcome by contact, flowing along in the stream of becoming, following a miserable path, the ending of fetters is quite far away. While those, who comprehend contact, delighting in stilling through insight, they, by breaking through contact, free from craving, are totally unbound! Sn 736-7 Subduing desire for both the inner and the outer, comprehending contact, with no greed. Doing nothing, for which he would rebuke himself, the fully enlightened person doesn't cling to what is seen, or to what is heard! Sn 778 Not attaching to the future, without sorrow over the past, he constructs no wrong 'ego-self-I-me' view fancying mere contact as 'my' experience. Sn 851 Pleasure, pain and indifference all have their source in sense-contact. When this sense-contact is absent, these affective states are also absent. The idea of appearing & disappearing, existence & non-existence, and any events of becoming & non-becoming also emerge from this same contact! Sn 870 What is the cause of sense-contact? From what arises so much clinging? By the absence of what, is there no selfish possessiveness or attachment? By the disappearance of what, does sense-contact, not make contact? Sn 871 Sense-contact depends on mentality and materiality: Name-and-Form . Clinging possessiveness has its source in longing for & wanting something! When not longing for anything, then there is no egoistic possessiveness... By the vanishing of formed objects, sense-contact cannot make contact! Sn 872 When a Bhikkhu is touched by bodily painful contact, he does not bemoan. He wouldn't long for coming into another state, or tremble at any terror! Sn 923 Pleasant Feeling induces Greed and Attraction... Painful Feeling produces Hate and Aversion... Neither-painful-nor-pleasant = neutral Feeling, causes neglect and generates Ignorance thereby! <...> Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikâya. Book IV [214] section 36: Feeling. Vedanâ. The Sick-Ward. 8. http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/index.html Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samâhita _/\_ * <...> #113386 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Feb 6, 2011 9:40 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - I think that reading the sutta, seeing what is actually says, and reading my reply should answer the question you have for me. With metta, Howard #113387 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Feb 7, 2011 3:20 am Subject: Re: should one try one's best? epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: Rob: > > Sure, but the question is whether only the mental factor causes the akusala and I am contending it is not. > > =============== > > J: If you're referring to kamma and vipaka, only the mental factor of intention is kamma. Well, if you take into account that kamma patha can not take place as the completion of kamma unless the action is completed, I'd say that the action component is extremely important in such a case. Would you disagree that kamma patha makes a big difference and is not just a mental factor? > On the same subject, all the links in the Dependent Origination are actual dhammas. Would you like to review them with me...when you have time...? :-) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = #113388 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Feb 7, 2011 3:33 am Subject: Kusala intention (was, Re: The clansman who is a beginner ...) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (113203) > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon. ... > > > > I have a hard time with everything arising based on what seem to be "arbitrary" accumulations and "spontaneous" appearances. To be clear, I'm not advocating any kind of control of when things arise or what arises, but it seems to me that each thing that arises would still be based in a logical ascension through a logical chain of dependent arising. Sometimes it seems that the commentarial model has things arising at random times and events, rather than the conditions that cause them having a sensible series of steps. But I may be misinterpreting that. It just seems that way. > > =============== > > J: If you're talking about mental states, the accumulated latent tendencies obviously play a major role. > > As explained in detail in the commentaries, every dhamma arises by virtue of one or more of the 24 conditions that are discussed at length in the Patthana. Nothing is random or arbitrary. The way these conditions work may well be a mystery to us, but that's not a reason for rejecting the possibility that they work in the way suggested (until such time as they can be either verified or disproved). > > > =============== > > I understand that if I say a cross word to someone, I may get a negative response back sometime later, and it may not occur at all, or may occur only when conditions align to allow it. And I can understand that this may occur in the world of dhammas as well. But I still don't quite resonate with the idea that the object of intention, the activity it leads to, and other things which seem like supporting conditions at very least, seem to have little consequence for what is kusala, or for how and when experiences take place. > > =============== > > J: As regards kusala, you seem to be suggesting that having intention to develop kusala/do something kusala and making a deliberate effort in that regard are important factors in the arising of kusala. That would also be the view of the person who has never heard the dhamma. I think there is more to the Buddha's teaching than that. There may well be more to the dhamma than the obvious chains of intention-action-consequence, but I would disagree, as usual, that the ordinary person understands that ordinary chain of causation. Part of illusion, which seems to be dismissed around here, is that people behave as though the obvious is not so, and that is how most of us live our lives, without much logic to our actions and expectations. Someone who eats a lot of high-fat food and spends most of their time gaining weight on the couch may "know" that this kind of intention and action will lead to suffering and a shortened life, but they may very well live in denial of this and continue to go about their normal pattern of activity. Part of Buddhism, to me, is the conventional understanding that the actions we take will lead to certain inevitable results. The person who smokes and gets cancer is usually surprised by it. Why? They didn't think it would happen to "them." So this part of conventional understanding, in my view, is not to be dismissed so easily, and is a big part of how we ignore the obvious and cause suffering through attachment and delusion. I think it's extremely important, because it is how we actually live, and this kind of denial and persistence is what keeps us from going further on the path and perhaps realizing more profound things like the ones you are interested in. Leaving that aside, there is a certain logic to the idea of kamma, which is that certain kinds of causes and conditions will lead to certain kinds of results, and that basic situation is not a mystery. It may take a lot of effort to understand exactly how bodies interact in space or within the energy field of an atom, but the basic formulas of Newtonian physics are not difficult to understand. Neither is the basic formula of the Buddha as regards kamma. You do akusala things you get akusala results would be a simple way of summing it up. I can understand that sometimes these results may be delayed and that the combinations of causes, tendencies, opportunities and conditions that allow kamma to reach fruition in vipaka may be very complex, but the pattern should be explicable in some reasonable way. What I don't quite relate to, or immediately have confidence in, is that the conditions and how they accumulate and arise is *so* mysterious and comvoluted that no one can ever predict anything, and it is all just too complicated to make any sense to our simple minds. I just don't think it is that hard to see that someone who has lived a life of negative thoughts and actions will live in a certain kind of atmosphere and yield predictable results. We do see this happen pretty often. The idea that everything gets thrown into latency and it may not come up at all until fourty-thousand lives later, or whatever, is fine and may be true, but I don't really have a reason to think it is true with no evidence to support it. I'd rather stick to a version of kamma that shows a path to more kusala, as gradual as it may be, and that makes some sense of our present thoughts and actions. To the extent that is taken into account, and the explanations are not totally removed from our experience, I'm sure we can reach some common understanding of how kamma works. I'm also happy to entertain the more complicated version of "kamma incessantly delayed" which seems to go along with "direct experience of dhammas on semi-permanent hold" if someone can give me a reasonable explanation of why it is supposed to work that way. I just don't see the "come and see" attitude of Buddha to the Kalamas as being well expressed in a philosophy in which *everything* that can be experienced of kusala and the path happens later, and nothing that happens now is evidence of anything. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = #113389 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Feb 7, 2011 4:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 sarahprocter... Hi Alex, (Howard & all), --- On Sun, 6/2/11, truth_aerator wrote: > S: The original question the Buddha asked was: > > "Ananda, every precept & practice, every life, every holy life that is followed as of essential worth: is every one of them fruitful?" > > Isn't the point of the sutta that even if the ceremonial services (siilabbata), the holy life (brahmacariya), the excellent services (upa.t.thaana saara), are followed, unles there is the development of kusala and the decline of akusala, such a life is without any fruit or benefit. Even if one appears to live the perfect life of a bhikkhu in a forest, if there isn't any understanding and development of kusala, it's useless. > > Wasn't that the point to which you were responding? The sutta says this: if something leads to more kusala and less akusala - then it is good. If something leads to more akusala and less kusala, then it is bad. .... S: Or In relation to/when X, if there is more kusala and less kusala - then it is fruitful In relation to/when X, if there is less kusala and more akusala - then it is not fruitful We could say, when living the monk's life or when there are cemetary contemplations or when washing dishes, if there is more kusala and less akusala - then it is fruitful, when there is less kusala and more akusala, not fruitful. Let's be very clear that what brings 'good' fruit is kusala kamma, what brings 'bad' fruit is akusala kamma. It is not the monk's life, cemetary contemplations or washing of dishes in and of themselves. ... >Silabbata in and of itself is not bad, if it leads to kusala. S: As discussed, it is not the ceremonies, the rules for bhikkhus, the observances that are the problem. It is the "paraamaasa", the "holding onto", the "attachment", the "caressing" of those observances. If there is an idea that by becoming a monk, reflecting/focussing on ceremetery contemplations, washing dishes.....or even reading the Tipitaka, discussing Dhamma, that any of these activities are of themselves kusala, resulting in 'good' fruit, then when following them, it is siilabbata paraamaasa. Is there any siilabbata paraamaasa now? Only pa~n~naa can know! Metta Sarah ====== #113390 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Feb 7, 2011 5:20 am Subject: Re: Meditation (was, The clansman ...) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (113204) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon. ... > > > > I don't object to the idea of the mental factor of right effort arising as being part of the path, but it does not make sense of the Buddha's statements to 'try diligently' and practice with great ardor' or similar statements. They refer to someone putting forth "right effort," not recognizing it as an arising dhamma. I feel that is twisting things to say that he did not give such encouragements, since he clearly did instruct people to do specific things in specific cases, and in general encouraged followers to 'try hard,' 'keep going until you reach the goal' and other conventional things that a coach might say. > > =============== > > J: You are saying that the Buddha was recommending the doing of those things despite the fact that it would necessarily involve a lot of akusala on the part of the person undertaking the 'practice'. That's your interpretation not mine, and not verified by the Buddha, who never said -- never -- never-ever -- "don't purposely follow the path because if you do you will be invoking an akusala sense of control and self-view." I mean, I understand that this is *your* view, and I have no problem with that, but it remains that the Buddha never ever said anything like that, so I'm not sure what makes you think that seeing conventional effort, intention and action as akusala is Buddhist in nature. What did the Buddha say to make you think that this is his view, that conventional Right Effort, Right Intention, Right Action and Right Livelihood -- the Action portion of the teachings -- is akusala? I don't think that would be consistent with his general teaching. Where does it contradict his general teaching. Have you got a quote from sutta handy? > > =============== > > > J: The Buddha spoke about hearing and discussing and reflecting upon the teachings as being necessary conditions for the development of the path. He did not say the same about any form of 'sitting practice'. > > > > Well, we continue to have a different way of seeing the constant, continual references to attainment within jhana and the formal insight sequences and exercises laid out in sutta, as well as specific instructions throughout the Visudhimagga. > > =============== > > J: But unless these things (i.e., jhana, the 'exercises laid out in sutta') are prerequisites to the development of insight (and I understand you are not saying they are), we don't need to be much concerned with them except to the extent that they occur in our lives already. There is quite a bit of disagreement about this, and we've gone over it before, I think. There are more than one way of developing insight, and Buddha made it clear that the path that includes jhana as the base for insight, which was *his* personal path as well his entire life, was a high kusala path that was well defined and recommended by him. The path of dry insight was a secondary path, not his path or those of his most devoted followers, and in the best case scenario was subsidiary for those who could not develop jhana. > Certainly, the idea that we should aspire to jhana attainment because of the (relative) ease with which dhammas can then be 'known' will have the effect of making the understanding of dhammas that may be arising now seem less important or significant, That is another presumption which I would not agree with. One would aspire to understand the reality of dhammas in any case, but the fact that jhana is a great base for the development of insight for those who can develop jhana is worth knowing about, and it is a major kusala path. That makes it hard for me to understand why one would want to fight against it. >...and the failure to keep the development of that understanding uppermost in one's mind will result in its decline or loss. If one follows the Buddha's instructions, one is inclined to keep insight foremost in the mind in every circumstance, 24/7, 365 days a year. That does not mean we have to ignore the full breadth and import of his teachings and how the parts coordinate. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #113391 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Feb 7, 2011 5:40 am Subject: Satipatthana Sutta - Cemetary Contemplation (was, Re: A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Jon. :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (113216) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon. > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > > > > (b) primarily speaking to/for the benefit of those who were already (or who had the potential to become) experienced and highly skilled in that contemplation, and explaining how awareness/insight might be developed at the same time as samatha is further developed. > > > > Okay; and how would one determine - meaning us, not Buddha - whether one "had the potential to become...experienced and highly skilled in that contemplation..."? > > =============== > > J: To begin with, there would have to be a clear understanding of the difference between kusala and akusala on an ongoing basis. That is fine with me, but it seems that in your [by which I mean the commentarial] philosophy, one is not equipped to tell kusala from akusala until it can be discerned in the momentary arising that is reserved for sotapanna and above. So once again the ability to do *anything* of worth on the path, other than very very gradually developing right understanding, is postponed for hundreds or thousands of lifetimes. My own opinion is that the gradual path does not have to be only about right understanding of dhammas, but can be a more conventional way of discerning kusala from akusala and related understandings. One may not be able to catch a moment of kusala as it happens and discern it from a momentary arising of akusala, but one can certainly develop mindfulness to the point of observing when there is *obvious* akusala, and perhaps even some obvious kusala at time in our lives. At a moment of happiness, fellowship and good will, there may be some clinging or other akusala, but we can observe some clear kusala, even if we are not aware of the exact moments during which it is arising. And if we do notice clinging, worry or other akusala things, we can acknowledge it. So perhaps we can begin to become more aware of the preponderence of what is arising in a given situation before we can even approach the individual moments. To me, that is a very valuable way to develop the path, during this lifetime, rather than waiting for an interminable period to see anything of note. And in that vein, maybe we can use a little common sense to get a beginning sense of what our natural tendencies are. If someone enjoys sitting peacefully and calmly, perhaps reading a book or sitting under a tree and enjoying nature, and if during such a time one's breathing relaxes and slows and one has a feeling of ease without a lot of worry and attachment, maybe one has a natural tendency towards the development of samatha, of calm. [That would not be me!] If one has a tendency to notice little things about the moment, to notice qualities of experience, etc., maybe that person has a tendency towards awareness and insight. So again, I think we can get a sense of these things without demanding that we wait until as sotapannas - because it's hard to imagine how we would ever reach that level if there are no building blocks along the way - we are able to discern individual moments with great clarity. I feel like the gradual path of semi-conventional awareness that will gradually shift to greater and greater discernment is a path we can begin to follow now, rather than waiting for many unknown lifetimes to pass. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #113392 From: "Ken H" Date: Mon Feb 7, 2011 5:52 am Subject: Re: Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: <. . .> > S: As discussed, it is not the ceremonies, the rules for bhikkhus, the observances that are the problem. It is the "paraamaasa", the "holding onto", the "attachment", the "caressing" of those observances. If there is an idea that by becoming a monk, reflecting/focussing on ceremetery contemplations, washing dishes.....or even reading the Tipitaka, discussing Dhamma, that any of these activities are of themselves kusala, resulting in 'good' fruit, then when following them, it is siilabbata paraamaasa. > ------------- Hi Sarah, I have been wondering lately, do the texts distinguish between 'belief in the efficacy of rite and ritual' and 'clinging to rite and ritual'? An old Buddhist book I used to read referred to the third fetter as 'belief in the efficacy of rite and ritual' and I have been using that wording for a long time. But one of your recent reports from Bangkok referred to the third fetter as 'clinging to rite and ritual.' Your version makes much more sense to me because 'belief in the efficacy of' would be a form of wrong view, which is the first fetter, not the third. 'Clinging to', it would seem, covers more than one fetter: the third (rite and ritual) the fourth (sense pleasures) the sixth (fine material existence) and the seventh (fine immaterial existence). That makes sense to me, but I just wonder now if the texts mention 'belief in the efficacy of rite and ritual' at all. I suppose it would be a form of atta-ditthi. (?) Ken H #113393 From: "Ken H" Date: Mon Feb 7, 2011 7:07 am Subject: Re: Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 kenhowardau Hi Nina and Howard, ----- <. . .> >> N: First the difference between naama and ruupa has to be clearly known. >> > H: Maybe so. Maybe not. Must that knowledge be perfect first - before anything else? BTW, I am unaware of mistaking the two. ---- KH: I know you have explained this before, Nina, but I am wondering: would it be correct to say that every akusala citta confused (created ignorance of the difference between) nama and rupa? And would it be correct say that every kusala citta that did not contain panna simply (without creating ignorance of it) did not realise the difference? Ken H #113394 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 7, 2011 7:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Discussions in Bangkok with K.Sujin, Jan 2011(7) nilovg Dear Rob E, Op 5-feb-2011, om 23:18 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > N: No need to name or lable. BTW eyesense is also ruupa, it does not > > see. Again, all this defining and thinking is not necessary. But it > > is not forbidden. When it comes up, it is conditioned, and different > > from awareness. > > That's a good distinction. However, I wonder what is the purpose of > all the study and understanding if it does not have some relation > to the development of awareness? ------- N: Your remark that study and understanding are not useful if it does not relate to the development of awareness is correct. It is not enough to just study or listen, because we cannot really understand the realities that appear if there is no awareness of them. We also have to remember that listening is not self. Sati and understanding are not self. Listening and study can keep us on the right track. The goal should be to eliminate defilements. Listening and study help us not to take the wrong direction, to discard all the misunderstandings about the right way of developing understanding of the eightfold Path. It has to be known what are the objects of understanding and awareness, what are understanding and awareness, and in what way these can be developed. We have accumulated so much ignorance, we do not know what naama is and what ruupa. Naama experiences an object. Seeing experiences visible object, hearing experiences sound. When lobha arises it experiences an object that it likes. When dosa arises it experiences an object that it dislikes. We learn what kusala is and what akusala, but without awareness and right understanding it is difficult to know their characteristics. I heard a recording taken in a temple in Chiengmai. Kh Sujin explained that it is difficult to know what kusala is and what akusala is if we do not listen to the Dhamma explanations. When we are helping it seems that there are kusala cittas for quite some time, but in reality kusala cittas and akusala cittas alternate time and again. A refined and detailed understanding of the different cittas that arise is necessary. You write in another post: R: If someone enjoys sitting peacefully and calmly, perhaps reading a book or sitting under a tree and enjoying nature, and if during such a time one's breathing relaxes and slows and one has a feeling of ease without a lot of worry and attachment, maybe one has a natural tendency towards the development of samatha, of calm. [That would not be me!] ------ N: Here again we have to understand the different cittas. Enjoyment of nature, feeling relaxed: we have to find out ourselves whether this is attachment or not. We like these things, don't we? ------- R: If one has a tendency to notice little things about the moment, to notice qualities of experience, etc., maybe that person has a tendency towards awareness and insight. So again, I think we can get a sense of these things without demanding that we wait until as sotapannas - ---------- N: No, don't wait. But first we have to know what sati is and what its objects are: characteristics of naama and ruupa as they appear one at a time, thorugh one of the six doors, nothing else. It is not semi-conventional awareness as you write later on. Sati is different from thinking. ------- Nina. #113395 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 7, 2011 8:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: first stage of insight, was: Buddha taught Silabbata.. nilovg Dear Ken H, Op 7-feb-2011, om 8:07 heeft Ken H het volgende geschreven: > > H: Maybe so. Maybe not. Must that knowledge be perfect first - > before anything else? > BTW, I am unaware of mistaking the two. > ---- > > KH: I know you have explained this before, Nina, but I am > wondering: would it be correct to say that every akusala citta > confused (created ignorance of the difference between) nama and rupa? > And would it be correct say that every kusala citta that did not > contain panna simply (without creating ignorance of it) did not > realise the difference? ------- N: Ken, I am not sure I understood your question. When shouting angry words there is not any thinking or confusing of naama and ruupa. One only thinks of the object of dosa. When giving without pa~n~naa, just because it is one's natural inclination to do so, there is no ignorance, no thought of confusing naama and ruupa. One is just intent on giving, giving is the object of citta. But it is difficult to clearly know the characteristics of different naamas before the first stage of insight.Understanding can begin to develop , but there is not yet clear understanding, since one does not know precisely what pure naama is. Naama is not blended with ruupa. What do you think? It is important to gain more understanding of what the first stage of insight is. ------ Nina. #113396 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 7, 2011 8:44 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 3. Item 2. nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 6-feb-2011, om 13:14 heeft Lukas het volgende geschreven: > N: Painful feeling can hurt very much, > > but it hurts even more when akusala citta rooted in dosa accompanied > > by mental unhappy feeling arises. We think long stories about 'our > > painful feeling'. > > L: So even vipaka citta that is bodily painful feeling can hurt? ------- N: To be more precise: bodily painful feeling experiences tangible object that is unpleasant such as temperature that is too hot. ------ > L:What in the case of an Arahant, do they feel a pain? Are they > still suffering cause of this bodily painful feeling? ------ N: Also the bodily painful feeling of the arahat experiences an unpleasant object, but they have no mental unhappy feeling about it. As the sutta says, they feel only bodily unpleasant feeling. ------- > L:Arahants have no chance to mental unpleasant feeling to arise, > how did they achive such state? ---- N: They had to begin like us now: developing right understanding of all realities, so that they would see them as only elements devoid of self. ------- > > > L:Why mental unpleasant feeling is so painful? > > ------ > > N: Because we take it for self. As Sarah said: we think "of poor > me". > > This makes it worse. > > L: But it happens. Anything to do with it? -------- N: Mental unpleasant feeling has already arisen because of its own conditions before we notice it. How could we send it back? All that can be done is developing right understanding, not only of feeling, but of all realities that appear. No selection of feeling or any other reality. Just what occurs at this moment. ------ Nina. #113397 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 7, 2011 8:46 am Subject: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 3, item 3. nilovg Dear Han, (3) Kusalaakusalakamma.m a~n~nassa kammassa vipaaka.m pa.tibaahitvaa attano vipaakassa okaasa.m karoti. Eva.m kate okaase vipaako uppajjamaano okaasakara.nato pa.t.thaaya uppannoti vuccati. Ida.m okaasakatuppanna.m naama. (3) Profitable or unprofitable kamma inhibits the result of other kamma and makes the opportunity for its own result. When such an opportunity is thus made, the result which arises, from the [time of the] making of the opportunity, is counted as arisen; this is called ‘[arisen having got an opportunity] (okaasakatuppanna.m)’. ------ N: The Visuddhimagga (Ch XXII, 81) also gives an explanation:< (3) Kamma described in the way beginning 'Deeds that he did in the past' (M. III, 164), even when actually past, is called arisen by opportunity made because it reaches presence by inhibiting other [ripening] kamma and making that the opportunity for its own result. And kamma-result that has its opportunity made in this way, even when as yet unarisen, is called 'arisen by opportunity made', too, because it is sure to arise when an opportunity for it has been made in this way.> The Atthasaalinii (Expositor, p. 88) states that though being a dhamma of the past it excludes any other kammic result and makes an opportunity only for its own result. As to the result that is sure to arise, the Atthasaalini(Expositor p. 464) states that the dhammas that are bound to arise are not to be regarded as non-existent. The kamma referred to is very powerful, and it may have been committed in a past life. This third item is not to be annihilated by the Path, just as in the case of the first and second item. ------ Nina. #113398 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 7, 2011 9:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] : insight. was: Buddha taught Silabbata. nilovg Hi Howard, Quite a lot of points you disagree with. Not easy to answer your post. I select one item I find important. Op 6-feb-2011, om 15:22 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I never confuse knowing from object-content so that is > experienced, etc. Actually, it strikes me that one who confuses > these would be > mildly insane. Of course, I do engage in introspection, that dirty > habit > ;-), so perhaps I only THINK that I don't confuse these, and I'm just > hell-bound! ;-)) > > Quote N: That is the first stage of tender insight. After that > there can gradually be a clearer understanding of different > characteristics of realities. ------ N: Perhaps I did not explain enough that insight is not merely discerning *knowing from object-content*. Then it is my fault. We should discuss more what insight and stages of insight are, different from intellectual understanding. I have a try. When there is seeing there is also visible object, but seeing which is naama is different from ruupa, they have different characteristics. Sati can be directly aware of only one characteristic at a time, either of naama or of ruupa. It does not matter that seeing and visible object are both present, it depends on the sati what object it takes. Sati is different from thinking about realities. At the moment of awareness of a reality understanding that is accompanied by sati can little by little penetrate to the true nature of the reality that appears. When the first stage of insight arises it is known what a mind-door process is, because the difference between the characteristics of naama and ruupa is realised in a mind-door process. Just now visible object is known through the eye-door and after that through the mind-door, but since cittas arise and fall away so fast it is not known directly when visible object is known through the mind-door. As Kh Sujin says: the mind-door is concealed. Cittas are so fast that it seems that we can see and hear at the same time, but in reality there are different processes. At the moment of insight realities are known through the mind-door, and it is as if the sense-doors are concealed. The opposite of what happens just now. Any naama or ruupa that appear are known as they are. Thus, not necessarily seeing and visible object, it may be feeling and visible object, whatever reelities appear. It is not a matter of understanding knowing and object-content. It is a matter of understanding different characteristics that appear. ------- > H: .quotes: It grows stage by stage. > --------------------------------------------- > It grows due to what? Reading and thinking about it? I don't buy that > for a second. (Though I do think that study and contemplation are > important.) ------ N: Due to being aware of realities over and over again. Perseverance, viriya, is necessary. But sati can only arise after listening and considering quite a lot. ---- Nina. #113399 From: han tun Date: Mon Feb 7, 2011 11:59 am Subject: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 3, item 3. hantun1 Dear Nina, (3) Profitable or unprofitable kamma inhibits the result of other kamma and makes the opportunity for its own result. When such an opportunity is thus made, the result which arises, from the [time of the] making of the opportunity, is counted as arisen; this is called ‘[arisen having got an opportunity] (okaasakatuppanna.m)’. N: The Visuddhimagga (Ch XXII, 81) also gives an explanation: < (3) Kamma described in the way beginning 'Deeds that he did in the past' (M. III, 164), even when actually past, is called arisen by opportunity made because it reaches presence by inhibiting other [ripening] kamma and making that the opportunity for its own result. And kamma-result that has its opportunity made in this way, even when as yet unarisen, is called 'arisen by opportunity made', too, because it is sure to arise when an opportunity for it has been made in this way.> [Pali inserted by Han: "Yaanissa taani pubbekataani kammaanii"ti (ma. ni. 3.248) evamaadinaa nayena vutta.m kamma.m atiitampi samaana.m a~n~na.m vipaaka.m pa.tibaahitvaa attano vipaakassokaasa.m katvaa .thitattaa tathaa katokaasa~nca vipaaka.m anuppannampi samaana.m eva.m kate okaase ekantena uppajjanato okaasakatuppanna.m naama.] The Atthasaalinii (Expositor, p. 88) states that though being a dhamma of the past it excludes any other kammic result and makes an opportunity only for its own result. As to the result that is sure to arise, the Atthasaalini (Expositor p. 464) states that the dhammas that are bound to arise are not to be regarded as non-existent. The kamma referred to is very powerful, and it may have been committed in a past life. This third item is not to be annihilated by the Path, just as in the case of the first and second item. ----------- Han: It is clear. Thank you very much. Respectfully, Han