#113400 From: "Ken H" Date: Mon Feb 7, 2011 9:16 pm Subject: Re: first stage of insight, was: Buddha taught Silabbata.. kenhowardau Hi Nina, Sorry for the convoluted question. :-) ---- <. . .> > 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. <. . .> ---- KH: > I was thinking of how easy it was for us to say we know the difference between nama and rupa. It may be true in the ordinary sense of knowing, but it is not true in the Abhidhamma sense. Ultimately, knowing is the function of panna, not of thinking. And we ordinary people only think we know things. I was also thinking of Howard's statement that he was "unaware of mistaking the two." Again, that is true enough in the ordinary sense, but I think in absolute reality we all mistake nama from rupa every time we have akusala consciousness. All akusala consciousness contains ignorance (moha), which prefers concepts over dhammas. I think the wording in the texts is "prefers to move amongst concepts." We have akusala consciousness much more often than kusala. Therefore, I deduced that most of the time - we ordinary people do indeed "mistake the two." Or, at least, we don't know the difference between them, even when we think we do. Ken H #113401 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Feb 7, 2011 9:46 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 truth_aerator Hello Sarah, all, > 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. You are absolutely right, and that is what I and others tried to say. It is possible to do something without paramasa. Wholesome action could, but don't have to include wrong views. This is how it is possible to meditate or fulfil virtue without Self View. In fact many teachers do talk about how everything (good or bad) that happens is anatta and should be recognized as anatta. With metta, Alex #113402 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Feb 7, 2011 11:12 pm Subject: Rejoicing Joy! bhikkhu5 Friends: Mutual Joy cures all vicious Envy and Jealousy! The dear companion can be the proximate cause for Mutual Joy, where one rejoices in another being's success... One thus rejoicing in others fortune is called a 'boon companion', for he is constantly glad: He laughs first and speaks afterward! So he should be the first to be pervaded with gladness. Or on seeing a dear person being happy, cheerful and glad, mutual joy can be aroused thus: 'See this being is indeed glad! How good, how excellent!' Just as one would be glad at seeing a dear and beloved person very happy, exactly so does one pervade all other beings in all directions with mutual joy... Rejoicing mutual joy can also be aroused by remembering other's happiness in the past and recollecting the elated joy aspect in this way: 'In the past he had great wealth, a great following and he was always glad'. Or mutual joy can be aroused by apprehending the future glad aspect of his in this way: 'In the future he will again enjoy similar success and will go about in gold palanquins, on the backs of elephants or on horseback'. Having thus aroused mutual joy regarding a dear person, one can then direct the very same feeling successively towards a neutral one, and gradually towards any hostile person. Vbh 274, Vism I 316 Comments: Mutual joy causes Contentment! No mutual joy thus means Discontentment! Therefore: If being generally dissatisfied, then be happy over others gains ;-) Secondly: Mutual joy causes all envy & jealousy to evaporate into equanimity! <...> Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samhita _/\_ * <....> #113403 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Feb 8, 2011 12:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sotapanna sarahprocter... Dear Vince, --- On Thu, 3/2/11, Vince wrote: V:> also I enjoy to read your messages :). Forgive me if my > messages can sound in > some robotic style, still I need some dictionary help. ... S: Not "robotic" in the least. I admire your perseverence, using the dict. .... > >S: 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. > A:> 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: Yes, it always comes back to attachment - attachment and ignorance which prevent the development of detachment and wisdom. .... V:> 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: And would you not agree that the most dangerous kind of attachment is that with wrong view - that which clings to the idea of self? It is this kind of attachment that has been completely eradicated for the sotapanna. ... > > 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:> 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. .... S: Perhaps we use "sustained" in different ways. I thought you meant that dhammas can last or be held onto, but perhaps you don't? ... > V:> While there is attachment the arising of wrong views is not > fully eradicated. ... S: There are kinds of attachment with and without wrong view. The sotapanna, sakadagami and anagami still have attachment, but no more wrong view. ... V:> 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. .... S: All conditioned dhammas are dukkha, regardless of whether we are talking about the wordling, the sotapanna, the arahat or even the Buddha. This is because they are impermanent and thereby unsatisfactory and not worth clinging onto. This is the truth the Buddha taught. The only "escape" is full enlightenment because for the arahat there is no further birth. .... > V:> I agree about the goal of the way and to be here the > present moment. ... S: That's good. And that's why we need to consider carefully what is "the present moment", what are the dhammas appearing now, so that awareness and understanding can grow. Metta Sarah ======= #113404 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Feb 8, 2011 1:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 sarahprocter... Hi Alex, --- On Tue, 8/2/11, truth_aerator 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. A:> You are absolutely right, and that is what I and others tried to say. It is possible to do something without paramasa. Wholesome action could, but don't have to include wrong views. .... S: Glad to find some agreement! Rather than talk about "wholesome action", let's talk about wholesome cittas, or wholesome consciousness and associated mental factors. Yes, while doing anything, any conventional action, there are many different kinds of cittas, including those without attachment or wrong view. So, again, the point, we now both agree on, is that whilst following the ceremonial observances, reading the Tipitaka, sitting in the forest, washing dishes or looking at the waves, there can be wholesome and unwholesome consciousness. The outer appearance will be the same, but right understanding can begin to know the difference. .... A:> This is how it is possible to meditate or fulfil virtue without Self View. In fact many teachers do talk about how everything (good or bad) that happens is anatta and should be recognized as anatta. ... S: Good point about anatta. Whether we're here in front of our computers or meditating on a cushion, different dhammas arise and fall away by conditions. All anatta. The goal is to understand such dhammas as dhammas, not self, not worth clinging on to. There has to be the growth of detachment from what is conditioned at this very moment. Please let me know if we are still in agreement. These are important points to discuss, I think. Metta Sarah ====== #113405 From: "Jessica" Date: Tue Feb 8, 2011 1:26 am Subject: Kamma and its Results jessicamui Dear Nina and all, I have a question regarding how kamma works. My understanding is that each volition plants the seed for bearing fruit in the future when the conditions are ripen. How do the "seeds" or potency being carried through the samsara existence ? If each citta arises and passes away, and nothing is permanent, when how does the "seed" stored ? This is probably a old question, am interested in knowing what the Pali scriptures said about it. Thanks in advance for the help. With Much Metta, Jessica. #113406 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Feb 8, 2011 1:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 sarahprocter... Hi Ken H, K:>I have been wondering lately, do the texts distinguish between 'belief in the efficacy of rite and ritual' and 'clinging to rite and ritual'? .... S: To me, what is meant by both is the same. When we say 'clinging to right and ritual', it means clinging with wrong view to a way of behaviour as being the Path. There could be just attachment to going to the Temple or reading a Dhamma book/listening to a talk or sitting on a cushion, but silabbata paramasa is attachment with the idea of its efficacy with regard to Path development. ... >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.' ... S: Actually, I think your wording is more accurate. .... K:>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. ... S: Silabbataparamasa is a form of wrong view - the practice or behaviour of wrong view. ... K:>'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). .... S: Silabbata paramasa (cling to rites and rituals) is just the third fetter. The fourth fetter, kama-raga (sensuous craving) refers to attachment to sense objects without wrong view. The sixth and seventh, rupa-raga and arupa-raga, again are without wrong view. .... K:>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. (?) ... S: As mentioned, I think it's a good translation. There is atta-ditthi at such times. I appreciate the qu. Let me know if you agree with this. Btw, I liked the following: >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.< Metta Sarah p.s Ken & Nina, you'll be glad to hear that my mother's trip out to Manly from UK went fine. We picked her up late at the airport on Thursday evening (after taking your ferry and train out, Ken). I told her the next morning to sleep in while we had an early morning swim with our group, but the next morning she was already up, having her cup of tea, and waiting for us to go out for her swim at 6 a.m.! Of course she gets tired during the day, but so do I! She's also doing fine on the camp bed, Ken. Anyway, time to get us some lunch. #113407 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Feb 8, 2011 1:37 am Subject: Re: Discussions in Bangkok with K.Sujin, Jan 2011(7) epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > 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. It just seems that all the kusala cittas are ideal absolutes that can't be reached until one is a sotapanna. That seems that it may be too remote in order to really have a path that is effective for those still stuck in samsara. After all it seems to me that the path is for those still mired in delusion not just for those already in a high state of awareness. I think it may be possible to acknowledge smaller gradations of awareness as we make a little progress in the current phase. But I understand what you are saying. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #113408 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Feb 8, 2011 3:10 am Subject: Re: : insight. was: Buddha taught Silabbata. epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > 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 realities appear. It is not a matter of > understanding knowing and object-content. It is a matter of > understanding different characteristics that appear. > ------- This was a good and interesting explanation. Is there a "useful post" about the different "doors" and processes and how they are realized at different levels of insight? Is there a good list anywhere, or an online rundown, of all the stages of insight and the order in which they develop? Best, Robert #113409 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Feb 8, 2011 3:19 am Subject: [dsg] Re: A Sotapanna epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > V:> While there is attachment the arising of wrong views is not > > fully eradicated. > ... > S: There are kinds of attachment with and without wrong view. The sotapanna, sakadagami and anagami still have attachment, but no more wrong view. How is it possible that attachment can still exist without wrong view? If one saw that a dhamma was anatta and dukkha, how could one remain attached? Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #113410 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue Feb 8, 2011 4:11 am Subject: Re: Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 kenhowardau Hi Sarah, --- <. . .> > S: Silabbataparamasa is a form of wrong view - the practice or behaviour of wrong view. --- I see. My limited research (the Buddhist Dictionary) had it simply as a form of upadana. ------------------------ > S: Silabbata paramasa (cling to rites and rituals) is just the third fetter. The fourth fetter, kama-raga (sensuous craving) refers to attachment to sense objects without wrong view. The sixth and seventh, rupa-raga and arupa-raga, again are without wrong view. <. . . > >>KH:<. . .> 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. (?) > S: As mentioned, I think it's a good translation. There is atta-ditthi at such times. > I appreciate the qu. Let me know if you agree with this. ----------------------- KH: I am still confused. But maybe I can see the cause of my confusion. Maybe it is because I have always associated the ten fetters with the stages of enlightenment. (The Sotapanna overcomes fetters 1 - 3, Sakadagami 4 - 5 in their grosser forms, Anagami 4 5 in all forms, and the Arahant 6 10.) I have always assumed 1 to include all wrong views, including wrong view of what is the Path and what is not the Path. Therefore, in that context it would have been an unnecessary duplication to say the Sotapanna overcame not only (1) wrong view but also (3) upadana with wrong view. That's why I liked my new understanding, which interpreted the third fetter as "clinging to rules and rituals without necessarily having wrong view of them". (I can easily imagine how a person could cling to the vinaya and the lifestyle of a monk without having wrong view of them.) But, as I say, maybe the texts also teach the ten fetters in other contexts, where 3 would not be a partial duplication of 1. Or maybe the first fetter simply does not include 'wrong views of what is the Path'. Ken H #113411 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Feb 8, 2011 8:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 nilovg Dear Sarah, Op 8-feb-2011, om 2:30 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > p.s Ken & Nina, you'll be glad to hear that my mother's trip out to > Manly from UK went fine. We picked her up late at the airport on > Thursday evening (after taking your ferry and train out, Ken). ------ N: I am so glad. We are thinking of her fondly and our warmest regards. Nina. #113412 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Feb 8, 2011 10:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: : insight. was: Buddha taught Silabbata. nilovg Dear Rob E, Op 8-feb-2011, om 4:10 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > This was a good and interesting explanation. Is there a "useful > post" about the different "doors" and processes and how they are > realized at different levels of insight? ------- N: Kh Sujin: Survey of Paramattha dhammas, on Zolag, but on Rob K's web there are easy to reach links to the relevant chapters: www.abhidhamma.org/Para12.htm www.abhidhamma.org/Para13.htm www.abhidhamma.org/Para14.htm My letters on vipassana: http://www.vipassana.info/ letters_about_vipassana-contents.htm --------- Nina. #113413 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Feb 8, 2011 10:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Discussions in Bangkok with K.Sujin, Jan 2011(7) nilovg Dear Rob E, Op 8-feb-2011, om 2:37 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > It just seems that all the kusala cittas are ideal absolutes that > can't be reached until one is a sotapanna. That seems that it may > be too remote in order to really have a path that is effective for > those still stuck in samsara. After all it seems to me that the > path is for those still mired in delusion not just for those > already in a high state of awareness. I think it may be possible to > acknowledge smaller gradations of awareness as we make a little > progress in the current phase. -------- N: We have to begin and it is natural that we are mired in delusion. The Path is for us. Do not think that kusala is too high, just for sotaapannas. Even a little progress is good. This can be acquired by listening and considering. As we say: "pa~n~naa works its way." ------ Nina. #113414 From: Vince Date: Tue Feb 8, 2011 2:13 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sotapanna cerovzt@... Dear Sarah you wrote: > S: And would you not agree that the most dangerous kind of attachment is that > with wrong view - that which clings to the idea of self? It is this kind of > attachment that has been completely eradicated for the sotapanna. I'm not sure the problem is just this. Such attachment impedes a total confidence in Dhamma. And this eradication is the end of the sceptic doubt, which is what the sotapanna has eradicated according texts. This is the belief in a final individuality, a soul, etc.. However, the eradication of the idea itself doesn't mean the end of attachment to what seems to be the owner of any idea, be right or wrong. We read a sotapanna can be flooded by lust or angry. Although texts also shows the sotapanna has reduced other things like envy, hate, jealously or pride. > S: Perhaps we use "sustained" in different ways. I thought you meant that > dhammas can last or be held onto, but perhaps you don't? I mean the notion of missing something. While there is a notion of progress also it shows attachment to what is able to make that progress. > S: ...The only "escape" is full > enlightenment because for the arahat there is no further birth. at least I understand from texts the sotapanna nibbana is not different of arhant. A cease is a cease. Difference would be in the eradications of old habits. For instance, leaving the present moment seem to be much more an habit instead a problem of the eradication of the -self idea. Note the animals experience the present moment but they are not arhants because they don't understand. We can understand but our mind prefers to be in another time and place, and the eradication of -self idea is not an end for this trend. By leaving the present moment we take many things and thoughts as real, despite they are not here and now. Therefore, the real understanding would be the way to rescue the present moment for the mind. Well, I'm not sure... All this is about the differences between wrong view and ignorance. > S: That's good. And that's why we need to consider carefully what is "the > present moment", what are the dhammas appearing now, so that awareness and > understanding can grow. yes :) Vince. #113415 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Feb 8, 2011 2:55 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 3.Item 4. nilovg Dear Han, Op 4-feb-2011, om 16:05 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > (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). ------ The Visuddhimagga, in the explanation about Purity by Knowledge and Vision (Ch XXII, 81-86), gives an additional explication about arisen in the sense of having obtained a soil. It states: (4) While unprofitable [kamma] is still unabolished in any given soil [plane], it is called arisen by having soil [to grow in]. This refers to the latent tendencies that lie dormant in the citta. We read further on (82): And here the difference between soil and having obtained a soil should be understood. For soil (plane) means the five aggregates in the three planes of becoming, which are the objects of insight. What has obtained a soil is an expression for defilements, capable of arising with respect to those aggregates. Those defilements have that soil (plane). That is why by having soil [to grow in] is said. And that is not meant in the sense of just making them the object. For defilements occupied with an object arise with respect to any aggregates including past or future ones as well [as present], and also with respect to the [subjectively] fully-understood aggregates in someone [else] whose cankers are destroyed, .... But arisen by having soil [to grow in] should be understood [subjectively] with respect to the bases [for them in oneself]. For the defilements that are the root of the round are inherent in [ones own]aggregates not fully-understood by insight from the instant those aggregates arise. And that is what should be understood as arisen by having soil [to grow in], in the sense of its being unabandoned." Vis. (XXII, 85):"But in the case of the Stream Enterer, etc., when a given defilement, which is the root of the round, has been abandoned by means of a given path in a given Noble Person's aggregates, then, his aggregates are no longer called 'soil' [bhuumi] for such defilements since they are no longer the basis for it. But in an ordinary man the defilements that are the root of the round are not abandoned at all, and so whatever kamma he performs is always either profitable or unprofitable. So for him the round goes on revolving with kamma and defilements as its condition." Item 4 is 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. It abandons latent tendencies that lie dormant in each citta. -------- Nina. #113416 From: han tun Date: Tue Feb 8, 2011 3:32 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 3.Item 4. hantun1 Dear Nina, My computer out of order. I will catch up later. Respectfully, Han > -------- #113417 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Feb 8, 2011 3:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and its Results nilovg Dear Jessica, I am very glad to hear from you. How are you doing in Hong Kong? Happy New Year to you. Op 8-feb-2011, om 2:26 heeft Jessica het volgende geschreven: > My understanding is that each volition plants the seed for bearing > fruit in the future when the conditions are ripen. How do the > "seeds" or potency being carried through the samsara existence ? If > each citta arises and passes away, and nothing is permanent, when > how does the "seed" stored ? > > > ------ N: The akusala volition or kusala volition has fallen away with the citta. But since each citta is succeeded by a following citta in the round of samsara, the force of kamma is accumulated in each citta and carried on from moment to moment, from life to life. That is why kamma commited aeons ago can bring a result today. It is said in the suttas that we are heirs to kamma, that kamma is matrix. Kamma causes beings to be born in different planes of existence, unhappy planes or happy planes. Also during life beings receive different vipaakas experiencing pleasant objects or unpleasant objects. Many suttas deal with this subject. See also 'Atthasaalinii' (Analysis of Terms, 65, 66). ------ Nina. #113418 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Feb 8, 2011 3:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: first stage of insight, was: Buddha taught Silabbata.. nilovg Dear Ken H, Op 7-feb-2011, om 22:16 heeft Ken H het volgende geschreven: > > KH: > I was thinking of how easy it was for us to say we know the > difference between nama and rupa. It may be true in the ordinary > sense of knowing, but it is not true in the Abhidhamma sense. ------- N: What you say here is very important and I am glad you bring this up again. It sounds so easy: naama knows an object, ruupa does not. As Howard said, one must be insane not to understand this ;-)) But when we come to consider presently appearing characteristics to be known by sati and pa~n~naa it is quite a different matter. Only pa~n~naa developed through insight can really understand the difference when they actually occur. -------- > K: > Ultimately, knowing is the function of panna, not of thinking. And > we ordinary people only think we know things. ------ N Absolutely. Direct understanding is not thinking, it is quite different from intellectual understanding or reasoning. ------ > Ken:I was also thinking of Howard's statement that he was "unaware > of mistaking the two." Again, that is true enough in the ordinary > sense, but I think in absolute reality we all mistake nama from > rupa every time we have akusala consciousness. > All akusala consciousness contains ignorance (moha), which prefers > concepts over dhammas. I think the wording in the texts is "prefers > to move amongst concepts." -------- N: Akusala citta is accompanied by moha that does not know what kusala is, what akusala is. There are many kinds of akusala cittas that experience different objects. They do not even think of naama and ruupa, they just do not know what naama and ruupa are. I think that when one learns about naama and ruupa then doubt may arise about their different natures. But this is not the case with each akusala citta. ------- > K:We have akusala consciousness much more often than kusala. > Therefore, I deduced that most of the time - we ordinary people > do indeed "mistake the two." ------ N: See above. There is just plain ignorance of realities. ------ > K: Or, at least, we don't know the difference between them, even > when we think we do. ----- N: When we *think* we know the difference: yes, then the mistaking occurs. Erroneously one believes that one knows while one does not know. Or else we may doubt: is this naama or ruupa? Some poeple believe that it is easy to understand the Dhamma or to practice in accordance with it. But, the Dhamma is subtle, deep, difficult to understand. We have to listen very carefully and acquire a precise and detailed understanding of the different cittas that arise. ------ Nina. #113419 From: nichicon cp Date: Tue Feb 8, 2011 4:01 pm Subject: mom nichiconn ?dear friends, They let Mom come home on Friday and there are no plans for chemo or radiation as long as the follow up tests later on still look good. So, just a matter of the swelling going down over the next couple of months and getting her eating good again now. I appreciated the < Super Daydream > reminder on the hospital blanket tags, but not all the time ;) peace, connie #113420 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Feb 8, 2011 4:25 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] mom nilovg Dear Connie, Op 8-feb-2011, om 17:01 heeft nichicon cp het volgende geschreven: > They let Mom come home on Friday and there are no plans for chemo > or radiation as long as the follow up tests later on still look good. ------- N: I am very glad to hear this. Best wishes for a good recovery. I myself am rather shocked, my sister's partner just died, she phoned now. It is all very tragic, and I cannot help her with dhamma perhaps indirectly. Nina. #113421 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Feb 9, 2011 2:58 am Subject: [dsg] Re: : insight. was: Buddha taught Silabbata. epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob E, > Op 8-feb-2011, om 4:10 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > > > This was a good and interesting explanation. Is there a "useful > > post" about the different "doors" and processes and how they are > > realized at different levels of insight? > ------- > N: Kh Sujin: Survey of Paramattha dhammas, on Zolag, but on Rob K's > web there are easy to reach links to the relevant chapters: > www.abhidhamma.org/Para12.htm > www.abhidhamma.org/Para13.htm > www.abhidhamma.org/Para14.htm > > My letters on vipassana: http://www.vipassana.info/ > letters_about_vipassana-contents.htm Thank you. I will try to read these in between my tax preparation. Everyday moments never cease! :-) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #113422 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Feb 9, 2011 3:00 am 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, > Op 8-feb-2011, om 2:37 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > > > It just seems that all the kusala cittas are ideal absolutes that > > can't be reached until one is a sotapanna. That seems that it may > > be too remote in order to really have a path that is effective for > > those still stuck in samsara. After all it seems to me that the > > path is for those still mired in delusion not just for those > > already in a high state of awareness. I think it may be possible to > > acknowledge smaller gradations of awareness as we make a little > > progress in the current phase. > -------- > N: We have to begin and it is natural that we are mired in delusion. > The Path is for us. Do not think that kusala is too high, just for > sotaapannas. Even a little progress is good. This can be acquired by > listening and considering. As we say: "pa~n~naa works its way." Thanks, that is encouraging. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #113423 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Feb 9, 2011 3:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] mom epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > I myself am rather shocked, my sister's partner just died, she phoned > now. It is all very tragic, > and I cannot help her with dhamma perhaps indirectly. Sorry to hear this, Nina. Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - - #113424 From: "Ken H" Date: Wed Feb 9, 2011 3:19 am Subject: Re: first stage of insight, was: Buddha taught Silabbata.. kenhowardau Hi Nina (and Sarah), ----- > > KH: All akusala consciousness contains ignorance (moha), which > > prefers concepts over dhammas. I think the wording in the texts is "prefers > > to move amongst concepts." > N: Akusala citta is accompanied by moha that does not know what > kusala is, what akusala is. > There are many kinds of akusala cittas that experience different > objects. They do not even think of naama and ruupa, they just do not > know what naama and ruupa are. > I think that when one learns about naama and ruupa then doubt may > arise about their different natures. But this is not the case with > each akusala citta. > ------- > > K:We have akusala consciousness much more often than kusala. > > Therefore, I deduced that most of the time - we ordinary people > > do indeed "mistake the two." > ------ > N: See above. There is just plain ignorance of realities. > ------ > > K: Or, at least, we don't know the difference between them, even > > when we think we do. > ----- > N: When we *think* we know the difference: yes, then the mistaking > occurs. Erroneously one believes that one knows while one does not > know. Or else we may doubt: is this naama or ruupa? > Some poeple believe that it is easy to understand the Dhamma or to > practice in accordance with it. But, the Dhamma is subtle, deep, > difficult to understand. We have to listen very carefully and acquire > a precise and detailed understanding of the different cittas that arise. ------ KH: Thanks Nina, I know that is the correct answer, but it still doesn't seem quite right to me. It reminds me of my question to A. Sujin when she was talking about "seeing, hearing and touching now." I asked if there was smelling now. It seemed to me that there was, even if there was not *consciousness of* smelling (or of odour). But her reply was similar to yours. Sarah has given me some private coaching on the subject, but I am still hazy on it. In the present example, for instance, I still tend to think moha can be performing certain functions that we are not necessarily consciousness of. But enough of that for now, I will let it mellow. :-) Ken H #113425 From: "Ken H" Date: Wed Feb 9, 2011 3:40 am Subject: Re: first stage of insight, was: Buddha taught Silabbata.. kenhowardau Hi again Nina and Sarah, As usual, I notice my typos after posting, not during the pre-post proof reading. I didn't mean to say, "even if there was not *consciousness of* smelling (or of odour)," I meant to say, "even if we think we are not smelling anything." But that reminded me of what (I think) Sarah was trying to explain to me. If there is no smelling now that is because smelling citta has not arisen to contact odour-rupa . . . etc. No dhammas, no nothing! :-) Ken H #113426 From: sīlānanda Date: Tue Feb 8, 2011 11:45 am Subject: Pa Auk Sayadaw --- Abhidhamma (in ENGLISH) silananda_t Dear Dhammafarers, Pasted below are some new uploads made avaliable for the many: Abhidhamma by Pa Auk Sayadaw in mp3 files (in English) ------------------------------ Abhidhamma March 2006 Abhidhamma 01 - 28MB Abhidhamma 02 - 31MB Abhidhamma 03 - 41MB Abhidhamma 04 - 36MB Abhidhamma 05 - 30MB Abhidhamma 06 - 47MB Abhidhamma 07 - 48MB Abhidhamma 08 - 35MB Abhidhamma 09 - 39MB Abhidhamma 10 - 42MB source: http://what-buddha-taught.net/Pa_Auk_mp3/Talks.htm ------------------------------ If you find they are rare and may bring many benefits to the many, please share them. mahakaruna silananda *www.what-Buddha-taught.net* #113427 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Tue Feb 8, 2011 11:59 pm Subject: The 22 Abilities! bhikkhu5 Friends: Human Beings Possess 22 Abilities! The 6 sense sources (Āyatana ): 1. The ability to see via the eye (cakkhu) 2. The ability to hear via the ear (sota) 3. The ability to smell via the nose (ghāna) 4. The ability to taste via the tongue (jivhā) 5. The ability to touch via the body (kāya) 6. The ability to think & experience via the mind (mano) The 3 kinds of Becoming (Bhava ): 7. The ability to be a woman = feminine (itthi) 8. The ability to be a man = masculine (purisa) 9. The ability to be alive = vitality (jīvita) The 5 Feelings (Vedanā ): 10. The ability to feel bodily pleasant feeling (sukha) 11. The ability to feel bodily pain (dukkha) 12. The ability to feel mental gladness (somanassa) 13. The ability to feel mental sadness (domanassa) 14. The ability to feel neutral indifference (upekkhā) The 5 Spiritual abilities (Bala ): 15. The ability to have convinced faith (saddhā) 16. The ability to harness energy (viriya) 17. The ability to be aware and mindful (sati) 18. The ability to concentrate mind (samādhi) 19. The ability to understand (paññā) The 3 Supramundane abilities: 20. The ability to come to know the yet unknown (aññātaññassāmītindriya) 21. The ability of the highest knowledge (aññindriya) 22. The ability of him who knows the highest (aññātāvindriya) Comments: Using these 22 tools beings can reach lasting happiness (Nibbāna ), which is the sole purpose and final meaning of being in existence... <...> Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samāhita _/\_ * <...> #113428 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Feb 9, 2011 9:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] mom sarahprocter... Dear Connie, Thank you for sharing and letting us know the update on your mother's condition. She'll be appreciating having you at home and helping her eat some healthy soups and so on. Let's hope all's well now, as well as can be in samsara, keeping the body serviced as best we can so that understanding can develop. What is "the reminder on the hospital blanket tags". Pls share when you have time. Our thoughts are with your mother and you. Perhaps it's a good time to share more Dhamma with her, such as the simile of the sick-room (quoted here by Larry #54617): "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV 220. 4. 'As to simile': the materiality aggregate [as object] of clinging is like a sick-room because it is the dwelling-place, as physical basis, door, and object, of the sick man, namely, the consciousness aggregate as object of clinging. The feeling aggregate as object of clinging is like the sickness because it afflicts. The perception aggregate as object of clinging is like the provocation of the sickness because it gives rise to feeling associated with greed, etc., owing to perception of sense desires, and so on. The formations aggregate as object of clinging is like having recourse to what is unsuitable because it is the source of feeling, which is the sickness; for it is said: 'Feeling as feeling is the formed that they form' (S.iii,87), and likewise: 'Because of unprofitable kamma having been performed and stored up, resultant body-consciousness has arisen accompanied by pain' (Dhs.556). The consciousness aggregate as object of clinging is like the sick man because it is never free from feeling, which is the sickness. *************************** 220. upamaatoti ettha hi gilaanasaalupamo ruupupaadaanakkhandho, gilaanupamassa vi~n~naa.nupaadaanakkhandhassa vatthudvaaraaramma.navasena nivaasa.t.thaanato. gela~n~nupamo vedanupaadaanakkhandho, aabaadhakattaa. gela~n~nasamu.t.thaanupamo sa~n~nupaadaanakkhandho, kaamasa~n~naadivasena raagaadisampayuttavedanaasabbhaavaa. asappaayasevanupamo sa"nkhaarupaadaanakkhandho, vedanaagela~n~nassa nidaanattaa. ``vedana.m vedanatthaaya abhisa"nkharontiiti (sa.m0 ni0 2.3.79) hi vutta.m. tathaa``akusalassa kammassa katattaa upacitattaa vipaaka.m kaayavi~n~naa.na.m uppanna.m hoti dukkhasahagatanti (dha0 sa0 556). gilaanupamo vi~n~naa.nupaadaanakkhandho, vedanaagela~n~nena aparimuttattaa. ***** Metta Sarah --- On Wed, 9/2/11, nichicon cp wrote: >They let Mom come home on Friday and there are no plans for chemo or radiation as long as the follow up tests later on still look good. So, just a matter of the swelling going down over the next couple of months and getting her eating good again now. I appreciated the < Super Daydream > reminder on the hospital blanket tags, but not all the time ;) ========= #113429 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Feb 9, 2011 9:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] mom sarahprocter... Dear Nina (& Lodewijk), --- On Wed, 9/2/11, Nina van Gorkom wrote: >N: ...I myself am rather shocked, my sister's partner just died, she phoned now. It is all very tragic,and I cannot help her with dhamma perhaps indirectly. ... S: I'm also shocked. I remember they had fairly recently moved into your city (Den Haag) from the countryside and I don't recall any health issues. A reminder again, that anything can happen anytime. Nina, I know that you and Lodewijk will be a great support to your sister, just by offering your care, company and assistance for her at this time. We can help a lot even when we don't mention the Dhamma at all, just by our example and friendship. Who knows, maybe later she may be interested to hear about the Dhamma, but this has to be in her own time, without any expectations or wishes of our own. Please let us know how all the funeral arrangements and everything goes, how your sister manages and how you find solace and support in the Dhamma yourselves. As usual, it comes back to the citta....just like now! Metta Sarah ======= #113430 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Feb 9, 2011 1:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] mom nilovg Dear Sarah, Op 9-feb-2011, om 10:32 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > just like now! ------- N: Thank you, Sarah. And thank you Rob E. I thought of this too: just like now: each citta that arises falls away. And this one: just gone. There were serious health issues. She never wanted to move and then she collapsed once just before the moval, and now again. She had a form of dementia and my sister had a lot of problems. We just wanted to invite them for a meal. She is supported by her four children. Lodewijk is going to visit two old colleagues who are also in bad health, and the mortality is all around us. We have the age for it to lose a lot of friends and acqaintances. ------- Nina #113431 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Feb 9, 2011 1:53 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: first stage of insight, was: Buddha taught Silabbata.. nilovg Dear Ken H, Op 9-feb-2011, om 4:19 heeft Ken H het volgende geschreven: > Sarah has given me some private coaching on the subject, but I am > still hazy on it. In the present example, for instance, I still > tend to think moha can be performing certain functions that we are > not necessarily consciousness of. > > But enough of that for now, I will let it mellow. :-) ------ N: I remember your pount and discussion with Kh Sujin on smelling. Perhaps it is not so complicated as you think. Each citta experiences only one object. Moha is just darkness, it is blank. some quotes: What on that occasion is dullness? The lack of knowledge, of vision, which is there on that occasion; the lack of coordination, of judgement, of enlightenment (1 The Atthasalini (II. 254), in its explanation of the passage of the Dhammasangani, states about lack of enlightenment that it is: 'not connecting them (things) with impermanence, dukkha and anatta", and "perceiving in an unreal, distorted way.''), of penetration (2 No penetration of the four noble Truths.); the inability to comprehend, to grasp thoroughly; the inability to compare, to consider, to demonstrate; the folly, the childishness, the lack of intelligence: the dullness that is vagueness, obfuscation, ignorance, the Flood (ogha) of ignorance, the Bond (yogo) of ignorance, the bias (3 ignorance is a bias, it continually lies latent in the sense of being firmly fixed.) of ignorance, the obsession of ignorance, the barrier of ignorance: the dullness that is the root of badness- this is the dullness that there then is. Ignorance is firmly fixed, it always lies latent and it is hard to eradicate. The Atthasalini (II, Part IX, Chapter I, 249) give the following definition of moha: "Delusion" has the characteristic of blindness or opposition to knowledge; the essence of non-penetration, or the function of covering the intrinsic nature of the object: the manifestation of being opposed to right practice (4 In Pali: patipatti. The English text translates here as: right conduct.) or causing blindness; the proximate cause of unwise attention: and should be regarded as the root of all immoralities. -------- Nina. #113432 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed Feb 9, 2011 10:36 pm Subject: The Four Trees! bhikkhu5 Friends: How are the 4 persons comparable to Trees? There are these four kinds of trees: One itself rotten & weak, but surrounded by strong hardwood ones... One itself of strong hardwood, but surrounded by rotten & weak ones... One itself rotten & weak, and also surrounded by rotten & weak ones... One itself of strong hardwood, and also surrounded by strong hardwood ones... Schiele: Four Trees There are four types of persons similar to these four classes of trees: A person himself rotten & weak, but yet surrounded by the strong & good! A person himself strong & good, but yet surrounded by the rotten & weak! A person himself rotten & weak, and also surrounded by the rotten & weak! A person himself strong & good, and also surrounded by the strong & good! How is the one himself is rotten & weak, but yet surrounded by the strong & good? Here one is immoral, and wicked, while his friends are moral men of lovely nature... Thus is a person, who himself is rotten & weak, surrounded by the strong & good, just in the same way as a rotten & weak tree is surrounded by strong & good ones... How is a person who himself is strong & good, yet surrounded by the rotten & weak? Here one is moral, of lovely nature, but he has friends, who are immoral, & wicked... Thus is a person, who is strong & good surrounded by the rotten & weak, just in the same way as a strong & good tree, is surrounded by many rotten & weak ones... How is a person who is rotten & weak, and also surrounded by the rotten & weak? Here one is immoral, wicked & evil, who has friends who are immoral, wicked & evil! Thus is a person, who is rotten & weak, and also surrounded by those rotten & weak, just in the same way as a rotten & weak tree, is surrounded by rotten & weak ones... Finally: How is a person who is strong & good surrounded by the strong & good? Here one is moral of lovely nature, who has similar moral friends of lovely nature... Thus is a person, who is strong & good surrounded by the strong & good, just in the same way as a strong & good tree, is surrounded by strong & good hardcore ones... These are the four persons comparable to trees existing in this world... Comment: Discrimination of good and bad groups is a signature sign of Understanding! <...> The 4th Higher Science Abhidhamma Book: The Personality Concept: Puggala-Paññatti. http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=130096 Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samāhita _/\_ * <....> #113433 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Feb 10, 2011 4:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sotapanna sarahprocter... Dear Vince, --- On Tue, 8/2/11, Vince wrote: >> S: And would you not agree that the most dangerous kind of attachment is that > with wrong view - that which clings to the idea of self? It is this kind of > attachment that has been completely eradicated for the sotapanna. V:>I'm not sure the problem is just this. Such attachment impedes a total confidence in Dhamma. And this eradication is the end of the sceptic doubt, which is what the sotapanna has eradicated according texts. This is the belief in a final individuality, a soul, etc.. .... S: The belief you refer to above is the wrong view of self, sakkaya ditthi which arises with certain kinds of attachment. The sceptical doubt about the Path, about dhammas is also eradicated at the stage of sotapanna. Such doubt arises with moha, ignorance. They are not the same. However, while there is wrong view of atta, there is bound to be doubt. ... V:> However, the eradication of the idea itself doesn't mean the end of attachment to what seems to be the owner of any idea, be right or wrong. We read a sotapanna can be flooded by lust or angry. Although texts also shows the sotapanna has reduced other things like envy, hate, jealously or pride. .... S: When sakkaya-ditthi has been eradicated, all other kinds of wrong views and doubts are eradicated, as are the grossest defilements which could lead to the breaking of precepts. The sotapanna has no more jealousy (what is there to be jealous or envious of?), but still has attachment, aversion, ignorance and conceit. I doubt the aversion would be strong enough to be called "hate", certainly not the hate that could harm or kill other sentient beings. .... Thx for your other comments and clarifications. Metta Sarah ======== #113434 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Feb 10, 2011 4:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 sarahprocter... Hi Ken H, --- On Tue, 8/2/11, Ken H wrote: >> S: Silabbataparamasa is a form of wrong view - the practice or behaviour of wrong view. --- K:>I see. My limited research (the Buddhist Dictionary) had it simply as a form of upadana. ... S: It is a "form of upadana". The first kind of upadana refers to clinging without wrong view. The other 3 refer to different kinds of clinging with wrong view. ------------------------ >> S: Silabbata paramasa (cling to rites and rituals) is just the third fetter. The fourth fetter, kama-raga (sensuous craving) refers to attachment to sense objects without wrong view. The sixth and seventh, rupa-raga and arupa-raga, again are without wrong view. <. . . > >>KH:<. . .> 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. (?) > S: As mentioned, I think it's a good translation. There is atta-ditthi at such times. > I appreciate the qu. Let me know if you agree with this. ----------------------- >KH: I am still confused. But maybe I can see the cause of my confusion. >Maybe it is because I have always associated the ten fetters with the stages of enlightenment. (The Sotapanna overcomes fetters 1 - 3, Sakadagami 4 - 5 in their grosser forms, Anagami 4 – 5 in all forms, and the Arahant 6 – 10.) ... S: Yes ... K>I have always assumed 1 to include all wrong views, including wrong view of what is the Path and what is not the Path. Therefore, in that context it would have been an unnecessary duplication to say the Sotapanna overcame not only (1) wrong view but also (3) upadana with wrong view. .... S: The first fetter (sa"myojana) is sakkaaya-di.t.thi (personality belief). When there is this kind of wrong view, all other kinds of wrong view follow and vice versa with the eradication. So, it can be said to refer to sakkaaya-di.t.thi and associated wrong views (the second and fourth kinds of upadana - di.t.thuupaadaana and atta-vaadupaadaana. The second fetter is vicikicchaa (sceptical doubt). As I was saying to Vince, this is also eradicated by the sotapanna and different from wrong view. The third fetter, also eradicated by the sotapanna, is siilabbata-paraamaasa (clinging to rites and rituals). As discussed, this is the kind of wrong view of practice - when one performs some deed or mental act (such as focussing, repeating a mantra etc) with the idea of its efficacy with regard to the path - not understanding dhammas as conditioned at this moment. This fetter is the same as the third kind of upadana, i.e siilabbatupaadaana. ... K:>That's why I liked my new understanding, which interpreted the third fetter as "clinging to rules and rituals without necessarily having wrong view of them". ... S: Don't get too attached to your new interpretation:-) ... >(I can easily imagine how a person could cling to the vinaya and the lifestyle of a monk without having wrong view of them.) ... S: Yes. Clinging can cling to anything, then it's common, ordinary attachment - kaamupaadaana or kaama-raaga. One doesn't need to have any interest in the Path to have this common lobha arising throughout most of the day. ... K:>But, as I say, maybe the texts also teach the ten fetters in other contexts, where 3 would not be a partial duplication of 1. Or maybe the first fetter simply does not include 'wrong views of what is the Path'. ... S: I think that 3, siilabbata-paraamaasa is different from sakkaaya-di.t.thi. It only arises at moments of actually 'doing' something with the idea that this is the Path, not just the wrong view. I haven't laid this out very well for others as I'm in a bit of a rush (for a change!!). For others, see: http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/dic_idx.html Scroll down to a)samyojjana, b) upadana for more details. Let me know how this sounds now. If anyone else would like to join in with any questions or have Ken or I set it out a little better, pls ask. Metta Sarah ======== #113436 From: "Ken H" Date: Thu Feb 10, 2011 5:50 am Subject: [dsg] Re: first stage of insight, was: Buddha taught Silabbata.. kenhowardau Hi Nina, --- <. . .> > N: The Atthasalini (II, Part IX, Chapter I, 249) give the following > definition of moha: > > "Delusion" has the characteristic of blindness or opposition to > knowledge; the essence of non-penetration, or the function of > covering the intrinsic nature of the object: the manifestation of > being opposed to right practice (4 In Pali: patipatti. The English > text translates here as: right conduct.) or causing blindness; the > proximate cause of unwise attention: and should be regarded as the > root of all immoralities. ---- Thanks Nina. So the function of moha is "covering the intrinsic nature of the object." I assume that means covering in the sense of hiding, or obscuring. I can see now that that is not the same as my suggestion: which was that the function of moha was to "create confusion between nama and rupa." In my defence, however, I could say that I wasn't thinking of a *conscious* confusion. I know when we are kicking a dog, for example, we are not thinking "there is no distinction between nama and rupa!" :-) A 'covering of the intrinsic nature of the nama or rupa object' is more what I had in mind. Ken H #113437 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Feb 10, 2011 10:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: first stage of insight, was: Buddha taught Silabbata.. nilovg Dear Ken H, Op 10-feb-2011, om 6:24 heeft Ken H het volgende geschreven: > So the function of moha is "covering the intrinsic nature of the > object." I assume that means covering in the sense of hiding, or > obscuring. > > I can see now that that it is not the same as my suggestion: which > was that the function of moha was to "create confusion between nama > and rupa." > In my defence, however, I could say that I wasn't thinking of a > *conscious* confusion. I know when we are kicking a dog, for > example, we are not thinking "there is no distinction between nama > and rupa!" A covering of the intrinsic nature of the nama or rupa > object, is more what I had in mind. :-) ------- N: When we read these definitions we should keep in mind that they are descriptions to help people to understand realities. Also similes are used with this aim. To really understand moha can only be achieved by sati sampaja~n~na. Direct awareness when it appears. ------ > K: As I understand it, moha performs its function in every akusala > citta, not just in cittas that expressly contemplate "intrinsic > nature." So maybe my theory wasn't entirely wrong. I won't discount > it just yet. :-) ----- N: Yes, that is correct. I just heard on a recording: from the moment we listen to the Dhamma there is no other aim but having more understanding, [N:thus less avijjaa or moha]. No special method to have more sati, then one has desire for something. ----- Nina. #113438 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Feb 10, 2011 12:58 pm Subject: Fwd: [dsg] Re: : insight. links. nilovg Dear Rob E, The links of Survey on insight stages I sent were not active and now I activated them. Nina. >> ------- >> N: Kh Sujin: Survey of Paramattha dhammas, on Zolag, but on Rob K's >> web there are easy to reach links to the relevant chapters: >> >> >> >> #113439 From: nichicon cp Date: Thu Feb 10, 2011 2:24 pm Subject: sangiitisutta sevens #9 nichiconn ?dear friends, CSCD 331 continued: < peace, connie #113440 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:53 pm Subject: Re: Buddha taught Silabbata - AN Hi Sarah and Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Ken H, > > --- On Tue, 8/2/11, Ken H wrote: > >> S: Silabbataparamasa is a form of wrong view - the practice or behaviour of wrong view. I'm enjoying this discussion. Very interesting information. I'm going to look over the technical details when I can, but they're a bit beyond me, so I'm jumping in for a moment to make a few quips and remarks. Hope you don't mind. I've always been a fan of having a good list of defilements; then you can just go down the list and check them off one by one. This is based on a joke by a comedian who said it was so convenient to have the Bible in hotel rooms. You can go to the Ten Commandments and check off each one as you break it. But in looking at the range of defilements with and w/o wrong view, and how long they all last, it does seem like we can pretty much check everything off for a long time? When does one get a single defilement category off the list? Only at the Sotapanna stage? > ------------------------ > >> S: Silabbata paramasa (cling to rites and rituals) is just the third fetter. The fourth fetter, kama-raga (sensuous craving) refers to attachment to sense objects without wrong view. My personal favorite. I figure when I overcome "sensuous craving" to food, people, objects in general, that will mark some real progress. Perhaps not in this lifetime... Also, not sure about the wrong view part... I may think there's some kusala where there's akusala in the sensual realm... Is there a category for sensuous craving with wrong view? ------------------ > >>KH:<. . .> 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. (?) > > > S: As mentioned, I think it's a good translation. There is atta-ditthi at such times. I wonder if there is some discussion of what is considered "rite and ritual" somewhere...? I know meditation gets thrown in there by dear friend Ken H., and by others in looking at that category. Well I've expressed enough ignorance for the moment. Sorry for tangentializing your very interesting thread on these details. I will try to study them as they are very intriguing. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #113441 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:56 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: first stage of insight, was: Buddha taught Silabbata.. epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Nina, > > --- > <. . .> > > N: The Atthasalini (II, Part IX, Chapter I, 249) give the following > > definition of moha: > > > > "Delusion" has the characteristic of blindness or opposition to > > knowledge; the essence of non-penetration, or the function of > > covering the intrinsic nature of the object: the manifestation of > > being opposed to right practice (4 In Pali: patipatti. The English > > text translates here as: right conduct.) or causing blindness; the > > proximate cause of unwise attention: and should be regarded as the > > root of all immoralities. > ---- > > Thanks Nina. So the function of moha is "covering the intrinsic nature of the object." I assume that means covering in the sense of hiding, or obscuring. > > I can see now that that is not the same as my suggestion: which was that the function of moha was to "create confusion between nama and rupa." Wouldn't covering the nature of the object include obscuring whether it was nama or rupa? Isn't that part of the nature of the object? > In my defence, however, I could say that I wasn't thinking of a *conscious* confusion. I know when we are kicking a dog, for example, we are not thinking "there is no distinction between nama and rupa!" :-) A 'covering of the intrinsic nature of the nama or rupa object' is more what I had in mind. Please don't kick the dog, Ken. :-) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #113442 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:57 pm Subject: Fwd: [dsg] Re: : insight. links. epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob E, > The links of Survey on insight stages I sent were not active and now > I activated them. > Nina. > >> ------- > >> N: Kh Sujin: Survey of Paramattha dhammas, on Zolag, but on Rob K's > >> web there are easy to reach links to the relevant chapters: > >> > >> > >> Thank you, Nina. I hope your sister is doing okay; I know it is a difficult time. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #113443 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Feb 10, 2011 2:02 pm Subject: Re: sangiitisutta sevens #9 epsteinrob Hi Connie. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nichicon cp wrote: > > ?dear friends, > > CSCD 331 continued: > < > Walshe > DN. 33.2.3(9) 'Seven powers (balaani): of faith, energy, moral shame, moral dread, mindfulness, concentration, wisdom. > > Olds > [ 7.9 ] Seven powers: Faith-power, energy power, sense-of-shame-power, fear-of-blame-power, mental-power, high-getting-power, wisdom-power. > > RDs > [ 7.9 ] Seven powers, to wit, the power of faith, energy, conscientiousness, discretion, mindfulness, concentration, insight. > > ***rd: > 7.9Cf. 1, II, xxvi, and pp. 102, 127 of text. > > > > > peace, > connie Thank you for all things you translate. And thank you for including the Pali. Sometimes I try to read the Pali as best I can just for the sound and the feel, and it is very nice. The above list, for instance, in Pali, has a very nice repeating sound of 'bala.m' with other sound combinations. It makes for a very nice chant. I think when we only read the English we lose some of the feeling of the Buddha speaking, and how beautiful the sound must have been. It's nice to "hear" that. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #113444 From: Vince Date: Thu Feb 10, 2011 4:14 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sotapanna cerovzt@... Dear Sarah you wrote: > S: When sakkaya-ditthi has been eradicated, all other kinds of wrong views > and doubts are eradicated, as are the grossest defilements which could lead to > the breaking of precepts. I read these commentaries in some places but one can keep an strong doubt because the attachment involved. Do you know some source of what you cites? Because if you read this Sutta: "At the moment of attaining sight, one abandons three things: identity-views, uncertainty, & any attachment to precepts & practices. One is completely released from the four states of deprivation, and incapable of committing the six great wrongs." **The six great wrongs are: murdering one's mother, murdering one's father, murdering an arahant. wounding a Buddha, causing a schism in the Sangha, choosing anyone other than a Buddha as the foremost teacher. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.2.01.than.html this is the only reference I know about the things a Sotapanna is unable to do regarding sila. > The sotapanna has no more jealousy (what is there to > be jealous or envious of?), but still has attachment, aversion, ignorance and > conceit. I doubt the aversion would be strong enough to be called "hate", > certainly not the hate that could harm or kill other sentient beings. then how can be possible the conciliation between attachment and the needed permanent awareness to anatta nature of phenomena in order to keep a perfect sila. Because this awareness should be absent at each moment in where attachment is present. It isn't right? Thanks for the discussion and explanations :) best, Vince, #113445 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Feb 10, 2011 4:20 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: : insight. was: Buddha taught Silabbata. sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- On Tue, 8/2/11, Robert E wrote: >... Is there a "useful post" about the different "doors" and processes and how they are realized at different levels of insight? >Is there a good list anywhere, or an online rundown, of all the stages of insight and the order in which they develop? .... S: Also, see lots more under "Stages of Insight" in "Useful Posts" in the files section on the homepage. Metta Sarah p.s If you're relaxing and enjoying your break from your nitty-gritty discussions with Jon, know it won't last:) He's been back in HK starting a new job, moving into a new studio flat without internet access in either place..... but, about to change, so be forewarned:-)) ======== #113446 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Feb 10, 2011 4:34 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sotapanna sarahprocter... Hi Rob E (& Vince), --- On Tue, 8/2/11, Robert E wrote: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > V:> While there is attachment the arising of wrong views is not > > fully eradicated. > ... > S: There are kinds of attachment with and without wrong view. The sotapanna, sakadagami and anagami still have attachment, but no more wrong view. R:>How is it possible that attachment can still exist without wrong view? If one saw that a dhamma was anatta and dukkha, how could one remain attached? .... S: Like now, attachment arises because of our tendency or accumulation for it to arise, to like what is seen, heard, smelt, tasted and touched throughout the day. Most of the time there isn't any wrong view, just lots of common attachment. For the sotapanna, who has no more wrong view and who has fully realised dhammas as anatta and dukkha, there won't be the attachment with wrong view or the strong attachment that is conditioned by the latent tendency of wrong view, such as the attachment involved in stealing and telling lies or in sexual misconduct, but there is still attachment to sense objects and other experiences, such as jhana (if relevant!). This can be in between moments of insight into the nature of dhammas. All by natural decisive support condition (pakatu-upanissaya paccaya), the main way our different tendencies manifest. Just like now, moments of calm and understanding, then moments of anger or attachment. Metta Sarah ========== #113447 From: "Ken H" Date: Thu Feb 10, 2011 4:40 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 kenhowardau Hi Sarah, ---- <. . .> > > KH: My limited research (the Buddhist Dictionary) had it simply as a form of upadana. > > > S: It is a "form of upadana". The first kind of upadana refers to clinging without wrong view. The other 3 refer to different kinds of clinging with wrong view. ---- KH: Ah, that's a good point! Checking again with my trusty Buddhist Dictionary I see the four upadanas are: sensuous clinging, clinging to views, clinging to mere rules and ritual, and clinging to personality belief. ---------------------------- <. . .> >> KH: I have always assumed 1 to include all wrong views, including wrong view of what is the Path and what is not the Path. > > Therefore, in that context it would have been an unnecessary duplication to say the Sotapanna overcame not only (1) wrong view but also (3) upadana with wrong view. > > > S: The first fetter (sa"myojana) is sakkaaya-di.t.thi (personality belief). When there is this kind of wrong view, all other kinds of wrong view follow and vice versa with the eradication. So, it can be said to refer to sakkaaya-di.t.thi and associated wrong views (the second and fourth kinds of upadana - di.t.thuupaadaana and atta-vaadupaadaana. ---------------------------- KH: Thanks, that makes sense too. I notice the second kind of upadana (clinging to views) isn't expressly mentioned among the Ten Fetters. But we can't have everything! :-) ---------------- <. . .> > S: The third fetter, also eradicated by the sotapanna, is siilabbata-paraamaasa (clinging to rites and rituals). As discussed, this is the kind of wrong view of practice - when one performs some deed or mental act (such as focussing, repeating a mantra etc) with the idea of its efficacy with regard to the path - not understanding dhammas as conditioned at this moment. This fetter is the same as the third kind of upadana, i.e siilabbatupaadaana. ------------- KH: That was where my theorising went astray. My definition of rules and rituals was too broad, including practices that were not mistaken for the Path. ------------------- <. . .> > S: Don't get too attached to your new interpretation:-) ------------------- KH: No indeed! :-) --------------------- > > KH: (I can easily imagine how a person could cling to the vinaya and the lifestyle of a monk without having wrong view of them.) > S: Yes. Clinging can cling to anything, then it's common, ordinary attachment - kaamupaadaana or kaama-raaga. One doesn't need to have any interest in the Path to have this common lobha arising throughout most of the day. ---------------------- KH: Yes, my mistake! I see now that clinging to rules and lifestyles without wrong view of them would be ordinary attachment, not silabbataparamassa. Thanks again. Ken H #113448 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Feb 10, 2011 5:09 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Discussions in Bangkok with K.Sujin, Jan 2011(2) sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- On Thu, 3/2/11, Robert E wrote: --- 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 R:>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? .... S: I'd prefer to say something like "the 12 ayatanas consist of 5 sense-bases, all kinds of consciousness, the sense objects experienced through the sense-doors and finally, the subtle physical elements, all kinds of mental factors and nibbana". As you rightly say, they refer to all kinds of consciousness, "all the elements of SENTIENT experience". Of course, at any moment, it depends on conditions as to which ayatanas are in operation. .... R:> 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. :-) ... S: Glad to hear it and best wishes to Melanie for the new car and to your Dad for his treatments. If you have to have an addiction, a DSG one is about as good as it gets:-)) ... >Thanks for your continued efforts to explain the ayatanas. It's getting a little less muddy. ... S: None of us gets less "muddy" on this topic without a lot of explanation and discussion. It's helpful for me too. Metta Sarah ======== #113449 From: "Ken H" Date: Thu Feb 10, 2011 7:45 pm Subject: Re: first stage of insight, was: Buddha taught Silabbata.. kenhowardau Hi Robert E, --------- <. . .> > > KH: I can see now that that is not the same as my suggestion: which was that the function of moha was to "create confusion between nama and rupa." > > RE: > Wouldn't covering the nature of the object include obscuring whether it was nama or rupa? Isn't that part of the nature of the object? ---------- KH: Yes, I think it would. I think the difference between my definition and the official one was that mine went a step too far. Moha obscures, but it doesn't go so far as to create confusion. ----------------- <. . .> > RE: Please don't kick the dog, Ken. :-) ----------------- I'll do my best :-) but I am sure the real secret to not kicking dogs lies in knowing nama from rupa. Just how it works I can't say with any confidence, but I think it is because concepts are created by a contrived merging of nama with rupa (or consciousness with the object of consciousness). And if we mistake concepts for realities we (and our dogs) are in big trouble. Ken H #113450 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Feb 10, 2011 8:08 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: : insight. was: Buddha taught Silabbata. epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Rob E, > > --- On Tue, 8/2/11, Robert E wrote: > >... Is there a "useful post" about the different "doors" and processes and how they are realized at different levels of insight? > > >Is there a good list anywhere, or an online rundown, of all the stages of insight and the order in which they develop? > .... > S: Also, see lots more under "Stages of Insight" in "Useful Posts" in the files section on the homepage. Thank you, I will check those posts. > Metta > > Sarah > p.s If you're relaxing and enjoying your break from your nitty-gritty discussions with Jon, know it won't last:) He's been back in HK starting a new job, moving into a new studio flat without internet access in either place..... but, about to change, so be forewarned:-)) Hm. Well I appreciate it. Please tell Jon "no rush" from me as I am sure he has more important things to attend to. :-) I don't know what good deeds I did in the past to warrant this period of time when Jon doesn't have internet access, but I know it won't last and that is fine. ;-) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #113451 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Feb 10, 2011 8:10 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: A Sotapanna epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > For the sotapanna, who has no more wrong view and who has fully realised dhammas as anatta and dukkha, there won't be the attachment with wrong view or the strong attachment that is conditioned by the latent tendency of wrong view, such as the attachment involved in stealing and telling lies or in sexual misconduct, but there is still attachment to sense objects and other experiences, such as jhana (if relevant!). This can be in between moments of insight into the nature of dhammas. All by natural decisive support condition (pakatu-upanissaya paccaya), the main way our different tendencies manifest. Just like now, moments of calm and understanding, then moments of anger or attachment. Thank you, that makes it clear for me. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #113452 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Feb 10, 2011 8:15 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing sarahprocter... Hi Alex, --- On Thu, 3/2/11, truth_aerator wrote: >>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". ... A:>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. ... S: Every kusala citta now, not just those with panna, is accompanied by calm. This includes every moment of kindness, generosity or sila. ... A:>It is also true that wise teachers do teach against thinking or belief in "*my* meditation" or "my success/failure" at meditation. ... S: Also, not "my mental or physical phenomena" - just impermanent, conditioned dhammas of no consequence. ... A:>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" ? ... S: Only wise hearing and considering about such realities now. If we've never heard about dhammas such as 'hearing' and 'sound' and 'thinking' now, no conditions for panna to arise. The main obstacle to panna arising now which knows the realities is any idea of Self doing anything or anything being atta. ... >A:Is the development same as the goal? or does a path brings to a goal? ... S: The development and path leads to the goal - the eradication of all defilements. Again, the development or path can only be at this moment. ... >A: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. ... S: Quite right - "then there isn't anything else one can do to cause X". There simply isn't anything "one" can do at all. It's just the development of understanding without any "doing". This is the subtle path the Buddha taught, beginning with samma di.t.thi. ... A:>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. ... S: Yes, it gradually comes with the development of right understanding now. In the beginning it's very little, but it grows and strengthens, like a little seedling. .... A:>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. .... S: I'd say that "non-doing" is the truth, the truth of anatta. It is an understanding that is reached after the gradual realisation that all the trying by the Self is completely counter-productive. Right understanding lets it all go! In the end all kinds of clinging have to be eradicated, even clinging to the right path, the raft. ... A:> 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. .... S: Yes, a gradual path of realising that the only right effort of the path is that which accompanies right understanding and which realises that however skilful other kinds of kusala might be, they don't help budge the bricks of samsara, so beautifully laid, one little bit. No "knight in shining armor" and no "him" or "her" to be saved. Just Right understanding and the accompanying path factors which learn the Truth, rather the 4 Noble Truths - gradually, as you say. Very happy to continue this useful discussion with you and to hear your further comments, Alex. Metta Sarah ======= #113453 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Feb 10, 2011 8:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] more suttas in audio, it's about time sarahprocter... Hi Frank, --- On Fri, 4/2/11, fcckuan wrote: >, Nice to hear from you too! I'm living about 90min drive away from Abhayagiri monastery. ... S: I think that's an Ajahn Chah temple in California, is that right? I remember you were considering options when deciding to leave Hawaii. Was it to be near the 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. ... S: It's a good idea to save the eyes and to share recordings of suttas. My mother is staying with me in Sydney and I notice when we get up in the morning that I'm the one who has to put glasses on first thing now. Have you ever tried listening to any of the edited discussions with A.Sujin that we've recorded and uploaded on www.dhammastudygroup.org? If you go to one of the top sets and listen for half an hour or so, I'd be interested to hear any of your comments. Metta Sarah ========== #113454 From: "epsteinrob" Date: Thu Feb 10, 2011 8:34 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Discussions in Bangkok with K.Sujin, Jan 2011(2) epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > R:> 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. :-) > ... > S: Glad to hear it and best wishes to Melanie for the new car and to your Dad for his treatments. If you have to have an addiction, a DSG one is about as good as it gets:-)) Thanks for the good wishes. Things are going pretty well, all things considered. My Dad's doing well, and we've got a new used car lined up that is almost exactly like the other one, but slightly newer. Sometimes things have a funny way of working out, at least for the moment. > >Thanks for your continued efforts to explain the ayatanas. It's getting a little less muddy. > ... > S: None of us gets less "muddy" on this topic without a lot of explanation and discussion. It's helpful for me too. Appreciate that. One nice thing about the dsg addiction - we don't easily tire here of Dhamma dialogue. :-) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #113455 From: "epsteinrob" Date: Thu Feb 10, 2011 8:37 pm Subject: Re: first stage of insight, was: Buddha taught Silabbata.. epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Robert E, > > --------- > <. . .> > > > KH: I can see now that that is not the same as my suggestion: which was that the function of moha was to "create confusion between nama and rupa." > > > > > RE: > Wouldn't covering the nature of the object include obscuring whether it was nama or rupa? Isn't that part of the nature of the object? > ---------- > > KH: Yes, I think it would. I think the difference between my definition and the official one was that mine went a step too far. > > Moha obscures, but it doesn't go so far as to create confusion. That makes sense, thanks. > ----------------- > <. . .> > > RE: Please don't kick the dog, Ken. :-) > ----------------- > > I'll do my best :-) but I am sure the real secret to not kicking dogs lies in knowing nama from rupa. > > Just how it works I can't say with any confidence, but I think it is because concepts are created by a contrived merging of nama with rupa (or consciousness with the object of consciousness). And if we mistake concepts for realities we (and our dogs) are in big trouble. Well I can see how conceptualizing the dog might very well lead to an increase in kicking. The dog on the other hand has the advantage of knowing a rupa when he sees one, and not being too apt to proliferate. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = #113456 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Feb 10, 2011 11:43 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Discussions in Bangkok with K.Sujin, Jan 2011(7) sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- On Thu, 3/2/11, Robert E wrote: >>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? .... S: As you say, it "like a preparation for how to see the present moment", so this means understanding the present moment dhammas conceptually, so that the understanding at this level conditions the direct understanding of these dhammas. In order to understand these dhammas even conceptually, we need to hear quite a lot of detail about "the nature of rupa, eye-sense, namas that arise, etc." as you say. .... 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? .... S: Exactly right. You've answered your own question. Whether we refer to the visible object appearing now as vis object, a rupa, a characteristic or a nimitta doesn't affect the reality which is seen and can be directly known now. .... >>R: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. .... S: I would just amend the last phrase to say: "and the dhammas that could be known whilst attending to the breath (or any other time)". ... R:> As anapanasati means "knowing the breath with mindfulness" or something like that, the emphasis is definitely on sati leading to vipassana and panna. ... S: I would say the emphasis is on sati-sampajanna, awareness with right understanding leading to vipassana, regardless of the nama or rupa appearing whilst engaged in anapanasati or any other time. = = = = = = = ... >>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? ... S: Yes, yes, yes. "The infinite regress of it all" is atta-belief, exactly what keeps the wheels of samsara rolling. Again it's not "we" who can drop "the whole trying thing", but panna, right understanding. Yes, the path is about detachment, "letting go", understanding what appears, rather than what we'd like to appear. = = = = = = = ... >>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] :-) .... S: We've been talking about it for 10 yrs, about time it happened! We're collecting lots of mileage points at the moment, so let's see..... Metta Sarah ======== #113457 From: "sarah" Date: Thu Feb 10, 2011 11:47 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: What is the ALL actually? sarahprocter... Hi Howard & all, #108263 (Catching up with some backlog posts put aside). Just wanted to say that I think you put the following summary on the historical use of sabhava very well: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > My understanding of the historical development is as follows: > The PTSM is a somewhat Abhidhamma-like compendium of suttas and > analyses that appeared relatively late on the scene, in the 2nd century C. E., > around the same time as Mahayana sutras found their way into China and also > around the time that the Sarvastivadins had their 4th council (around 100 > C. E.), and this "anti-sabhava material" in the PTSM matched the > "anti-svabhava material" in Mahayana, both likely reacting to a tendency within the > Sarvastivadin school replacing the innocent Theravadin sense of > "lakkhana/quality" for 'sabhava' by a substantialist, atta-like sense of "essence" for > 'svabhava'. (The Sarvastivadins seem to have used Sanskrit instead of Pali, > BTW.) .... S: I can't comment on the dates, but I think you put the main points very helpfully. It's an issue that comes up very often. Metta Sarah ======== #113458 From: "revtriple" Date: Fri Feb 11, 2011 12:43 am Subject: The first five diciples of Buddha? revtriple Hi there! Are the first five diciples of Buddha named in the Tipataka? Is there a source of reference on this? Rev.Triple #113459 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Feb 11, 2011 6:09 am Subject: [dsg] sangiitisutta sevens, sutta 9. nilovg Dear friends, Walshe DN. 33.2.3(9) 'Seven powers (balaani): of faith, energy, moral shame, moral dread, mindfulness, concentration, wisdom. (Sattabalaani - saddhaabala.m, viiriyabala.m, hiribala.m, ottappabala.m, satibala.m, samaadhibala.m, pa~n~naabala.m.) ------- N: Confidence, energy, mindfulness, concentration and wisdom are the mental faculties, indriyas, that are to be developed. The indriyas are 'leaders', each in their own field. They are among the factors pertaining to enlightenment. When they have been developed to the degree that they are unshakable by their opposites, they have become powers. Sometimes moral shame, hiri, and moral dread, ottappa, are also included among the powers. These two sobhana cetasikas arise with each kusala citta. Moral dread fears the consequences of evil. There is no specific commentary to suttas 9-11, but the commentary states in general of these suttas that they should be dealt with in the way as stated before. For the sutta about the seven powers we should go to the Fives, 23. The tiika to this sutta states that the powers refer to samatha, vipassanaa, magga, and phala, fruition, which is vipaakacitta that is lokuttara, the result of magga-citta. The powers in samatha lead to the attainment of jhaana. The powers in vipassanaa lead to enlightenment. Faith or confidence in wholesomeness overcomes lack of confidence. Wholesomeness cannot be developed when we do not see its benefit. Kusala can be gradually developed; it can be accumulated, so that there will be more conditions for its arising. When we keep on listening to the Dhamma and considering what we heard, the five spiritual faculties can develop and become powers. They lead to the experiencing of the Deathless, of nibbna, but we do not know in which life that will happen. We should only be intent on our task of this moment: developing more understanding of the reality which appears now. We read in Khun Sujins Survey of Paramattha Dhammas about the faculties, indriyas, and the powers, balas: < 1. The faculty of confidence, which is saddh cetasika. This is a leader when there is confidence in awareness of the characteristics of realities which are appearing. 2. The faculty of energy, which is viriya cetasika. This is a leader when there is energy and courage which prevents one from being lazy and disheartened with regard to awareness right now. It is energy for awareness of the characteristics of realities which are appearing. 3. The faculty of mindfulness, which is sati cetasika. It is a leader which prevents forgetfulness, it is mindful of the characteristics of realities which are appearing. 4. The faculty of concentration, samdhi, which is ekaggat cetasika. It is a leader in focussing on the object which is appearing. 5. The faculty of wisdom, which is pa cetasika. It is a leader in careful consideration, investigation and study of the characteristics of the realities which appear. When the five faculties have been developed they become powerful and unshakable. They do not vacillate with regard to their task of considering whatever object appears. Then they can become powers, balas. The powers are the following: 1. The power of confidence, saddh, which cannot be shaken by lack of confidence. 2. The power of energy, viriya, which cannot be shaken by discouragement. 3. The power of mindfulness, sati, which cannot be shaken by forgetfulness of the realities which appear. 4. The power of concentration, samdhi, which cannot be shaken by distraction with regard to the object which appears. 5. The power of wisdom, pa, which cannot be shaken by ignorance. Saddh, viriya, sati and samdhi can become strong when pa has become a power. When pa thoroughly understands the characteristics of nma and rpa, it has become unshakable, it does not vacillate. When seeing appears pa can realize its characteristic as nma, the reality, the element which experiences. It is the same with regard to hearing, smelling, tasting, the experience of tangible object and thinking; these can be realized as nma. When pa accompanied by sati considers the characteristics of nma and rpa over and over again, it becomes more accomplished, so that different stages of insight, vipassan aa.nas, can be reached. > It has been emphasized here that all the indriyas and powers pertain to the realities that are appearing at the present moment. They are not theory but they can be developed at this moment when realities are appearing through the six doors. ******* Nina. #113460 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Feb 11, 2011 6:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The first five diciples of Buddha? nilovg Dear Revtriple, Op 11-feb-2011, om 9:43 heeft revtriple het volgende geschreven: > Are the first five diciples of Buddha named in the Tipataka? ------ N: They are usually referred to as the group of five. In the Vinaya, Mahaavagga (6, 32-37, PTS edition, Vol 4), Konda~n~na, Vappa, Bhaddiya, Mahaanaama and Assaji are mentioned by name. See also M I, 227 (Cuulasaccaka sutta). Nina. #113461 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Feb 11, 2011 7:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: : insight. links. nilovg Dear Rob E and Sarah, Op 10-feb-2011, om 22:57 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > Thank you, Nina. I hope your sister is doing okay; I know it is a > difficult time. ------ N: Thank you for your kind words, we are just back from a visit to her. Her partner is lying in a coffin on the top floor of their appartment building for people who want to say goodbye to her. It gives one rather a blow to see the corpse lying there, everything so dead still. Naama and ruupa, but I did not say anything about this to my sister. Next week the cremation. You spoke about addiction to DSG in the midst of personal problems, like your Father. True, it helps to read messages and think of answers when feeling low, and feeling low is dosa, I know. The links to Survey did not want to become blue, sorry. Nina. #113462 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Feb 11, 2011 12:43 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing truth_aerator Hello Sarah, I've read your reply. Thank you. Few comments so far: >A:>It is also true that wise teachers do teach against thinking or >belief in "*my* meditation" or "my success/failure" at meditation. > ... >S: Also, not "my mental or physical phenomena" - just impermanent, >conditioned dhammas of no consequence. Right. That is what I've meant. One shouldn't consider anything to be "I, me, mine". > >A: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. > ... > S: Quite right - "then there isn't anything else one can do to >cause X". There simply isn't anything "one" can do at all. It's just >the development of understanding without any "doing". This is the >subtle path the Buddha taught, beginning with samma di.t.thi. Like above, I didn't meant "one" to be taken literally, just for grammatical purposes I used first/2nd/third person words. With metta, Alex #113463 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Feb 11, 2011 9:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing upasaka_howard Hi, Alex (and Sarah) - In a message dated 2/11/2011 3:43:04 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hello Sarah, I've read your reply. Thank you. Few comments so far: >A:>It is also true that wise teachers do teach against thinking or >belief in "*my* meditation" or "my success/failure" at meditation. > ... >S: Also, not "my mental or physical phenomena" - just impermanent, >conditioned dhammas of no consequence. Right. That is what I've meant. One shouldn't consider anything to be "I, me, mine". ==================================== Whew! That's good!! What I've been calling "my practice" has been lousy recently, but I'm still in good shape, 'cause the bhavana of "some other folks" has been just fine! ;-)) Just being facetious, of course. My practice has been just TERRIFIC. In fact, I'm nearly an arahant now! LOL! So I guess that means you two also are, because, after all, awakening is nothing personal!! ;-)) With manic metta, Howard P. S. Getting more serious, when I eat do you two get full? When I sleep, do you become rested? Does my kamma lead to your vipaka? I think one needs to give a bit of thought to what one really means when saying that one shouldn't consider anything to be "I, me, or mine." It's not meaningless, of course, but the meaning is deep, and not simple, and if it is understood wrongly it can lead to quite absurd and false conclusions. #113464 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Feb 11, 2011 4:48 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: : insight. links. epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob E and Sarah, > Op 10-feb-2011, om 22:57 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > > > Thank you, Nina. I hope your sister is doing okay; I know it is a > > difficult time. > ------ > N: Thank you for your kind words, we are just back from a visit to > her. Her partner is lying in a coffin on the top floor of their > appartment building for people who want to say goodbye to her. It > gives one rather a blow to see the corpse lying there, everything so > dead still. Naama and ruupa, but I did not say anything about this to > my sister. Next week the cremation. > You spoke about addiction to DSG in the midst of personal problems, > like your Father. True, it helps to read messages and think of > answers when feeling low, and feeling low is dosa, I know. > > The links to Survey did not want to become blue, sorry. > Nina. :) No problem with the links; thanks for sending them. Thanks for sharing what is happening with your sister. Life is very intense, and I know that is not easy to go through. With my father, it's funny - I told him something about "letting go" a few years ago and it became like magic for him. He mentions it to me all the time. He often just drops things and they don't bother him. He said about his current treatments that he really doesn't think about it, but he feels like he has already had so much time that he's not worried. He did not used to be like this, he used to be much more tense when he was younger. But he seems to have realized some equanimity as he got older. There's some detachment there. He was so cheerful going to his chemo treatment today that he cheered up a stranger, a woman, in the elevator. We were chatting before during and after the treatment, and actually enjoying the time. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #113465 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Feb 11, 2011 5:26 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing truth_aerator Hi Howard, all, >P. S. Getting more serious, when I eat do you two get full? When I >sleep, do you become rested? Does my kamma lead to your vipaka? Different causes lead to different results. Causes differentiate results. Some precise suttas do avoid self/other dichotomy and focus on causes and results. There are suttas in SN12 where Buddha refuses to answer questions such as "is suffering causes by self/other/both/fortuitious" and instead focus on causes & conditions. Example sutta: ================================================================= "Now, when asked, 'Is stress self-made?' you say, 'Don't say that, Kassapa.' When asked, 'Then is it other-made?' you say, 'Don't say that, Kassapa.' When asked, 'Then is it both self-made and other-made?' you say, 'Don't say that, Kassapa.' When asked, 'Then is it the case that stress, being neither self-made nor other-made, arises spontaneously?' you say, 'Don't say that, Kassapa.' When asked, 'Then does stress not exist?' you say, 'It's not the case, Kassapa, that stress does not exist. Stress does exist.' When asked, 'Well, in that case, does Master Gotama not know or see stress?' you say, 'Kassapa, it's not the case that I don't know or see stress. I know stress. I see stress.' Then explain stress to me, lord Blessed One. Teach me about stress, lord Blessed One!" "'The one who acts is the one who experiences [the result of the act]' amounts to the eternalist statement, 'Existing from the very beginning, stress is self-made.' 'The one who acts is someone other than the one who experiences'[2] amounts to the annihilationist statement, 'For one existing harassed by feeling, stress is other-made.' Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the middle: From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications. ... From birth as a requisite condition, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into play. Such is the origination of this entire mass of stress & suffering. "Now from the remainderless fading & cessation of that very ignorance comes the cessation of fabrications. ...From the cessation of birth, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair all cease. Such is the cessation of this entire mass of stress & suffering." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.017.than.html =============================================================== So when speaking precisely the Buddha avoided self/other dichotomy. And you are well aware of all the suttas that state that one shouldn't consider any of 5 aggregates to be "I, me, mine". ex: MN44 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.044.than.html With metta, Alex #113466 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Feb 11, 2011 8:10 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Discussions in Bangkok with K.Sujin, Jan 2011(7) epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > S: As you say, it "like a preparation for how to see the present moment", so this means understanding the present moment dhammas conceptually, so that the understanding at this level conditions the direct understanding of these dhammas. In order to understand these dhammas even conceptually, we need to hear quite a lot of detail about "the nature of rupa, eye-sense, namas that arise, etc." as you say. Great, that makes sense. Thanks for confirming that. > .... > 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? > .... > S: Exactly right. You've answered your own question. Whether we refer to the visible object appearing now as vis object, a rupa, a characteristic or a nimitta doesn't affect the reality which is seen and can be directly known now. Great, that's what I thought, but the statement above underlines it nicely. > R:> As anapanasati means "knowing the breath with mindfulness" or something like that, the emphasis is definitely on sati leading to vipassana and panna. > ... > S: I would say the emphasis is on sati-sampajanna, awareness with right understanding leading to vipassana, regardless of the nama or rupa appearing whilst engaged in anapanasati or any other time. > = = = = = = = I'm interested in sati-sampajanna - would the right understanding be different from the awareness? It seems like clear mindfulness of the object would have right understanding, but maybe it is a separate quality...? > ...Yes, the path is about detachment, "letting go", understanding what appears, rather than what we'd like to appear. Yes, I like that point very much. Even just noticing that what is happening now is "not what you'd like to appear" is educational. It's funny to see that, even though you can't change 'what is,' you can get involved in wanting it to be different anyway. A strange quality of the mind. > = = = = = = = > > ... > >>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] :-) > .... > S: We've been talking about it for 10 yrs, about time it happened! We're collecting lots of mileage points at the moment, so let's see..... Well that would really be special. I'll keep my green tea geared up for such an occasion to arise. :-) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #113467 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Feb 11, 2011 11:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: : insight. links. nilovg Dear Rob E, Op 12-feb-2011, om 1:48 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > But he seems to have realized some equanimity as he got older. > There's some detachment there. He was so cheerful going to his > chemo treatment today that he cheered up a stranger, a woman, in > the elevator. We were chatting before during and after the > treatment, and actually enjoying the time. ----- N: THat is wonderful that your father could cheer up someone else about chemo treatment. Such treatment is rather serious, not easy at all. Thank you for sharing your experiences. Nina. #113468 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Feb 12, 2011 12:31 am Subject: what I heard. nilovg Dear friends, Khun Sujin asked, what is better: having a lot of kusala without awareness or having akusala and in between sati and pa~n~naa, awareness and right understanding of it, so that one does not take it for self? When something appears it shows that there is naama, otherwise nothing would appear. While seeing now, there is an element that experiences, but we do not clearly know this if there is no sati and no consideration that it is not us who sees. The reality that experiences or knows something is different from what appears through the eyesense. There can be awareness when seeing, hearing or thinking so that it is known that this is the characteristic of reality that knows something. It is not a question of knowing the names naama and ruupa. If there is no awareness of the characteristics of realities appearing now the idea of self cannot be eradicated. The idea of self can only be eradicated if there is awareness very often. The faculties, indriyas, of confidence, energy, mindfulness, concentration and wisdom have to be developed together. --------- Nina. #113469 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Feb 12, 2011 12:41 am Subject: Dhamma in Sri Lanka. (1) nilovg Dear friends, Dhamma in Sri Lanka. (1) During her last trip to Sri Lanka Khun Sujin gave many Dhamma talks to the Thai group. Kh. Sujin: We remember that this is a tree, but there is still an idea of self who remembers. In order to understand the real nature of sa~n~naa, remembrance, we should not be interested in what we remember. We should know that sa~n~naa is a cetasika that arises with every citta. We take it for self and do not see it as a dhamma. Each dhamma has its specific characteristic and we do not call it by any name, such as sa~n~naa. Whatever we hear about realities is true, but we do not know them yet as dhammas. We do not have to find out whether realities are kusala or akusala, but we should know them as dhammas. What is dhamma? That which is true. When? Now. We should listen and understand so that it is known that what appears is dhamma which arises and falls away. Each citta is the condition for the arising of the following citta, and it must be known that this occurs now, at this moment. The Dhamma is difficult and deep but it can be understood , and this depends on listening. If someone believes that the Dhamma is easy to understand there is no way to understand the dhamma that appears. Seeing is real but it does not see people. Visible object or colour appears, so that it can be seen. Seeing, hearing and all sense- cognitions appear only one at a time, they fall away and then there is thinking about them. When there is understanding of characteristics of paramattha dhammas it can be known that they are not pa~n~nattis, concepts. It seems, when we are thinking, that there is a person there who is sitting and he seems to last. We do not yet know the specific charactreistics of realities that appear one at a time. ------ Nina. #113470 From: han tun Date: Sat Feb 12, 2011 3:11 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 3.Item 4. hantun1 Dear Nina, My computer is now okay, and so I can now catch up with your post. In this post, I now understand clearly, the meaning of ‘arisen having obtained a plane’. In particular, I have noted the following point you wrote: [Item 4 is 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. It abandons latent tendencies that lie dormant in each citta.] I understand this clearly since you have written before in your Recapitulation on 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, it is not very clear in Visuddhimagga. There is no clear distinction between "kilesa" and "anusaya kilesa" which are abandoned by the Path. Anyway, I will take your explanation. Respectfully, Han #113471 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Feb 12, 2011 12:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 2/11/2011 8:26:41 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hi Howard, all, >P. S. Getting more serious, when I eat do you two get full? When I >sleep, do you become rested? Does my kamma lead to your vipaka? Different causes lead to different results. Causes differentiate results. Some precise suttas do avoid self/other dichotomy and focus on causes and results. There are suttas in SN12 where Buddha refuses to answer questions such as "is suffering causes by self/other/both/fortuitious" and instead focus on causes & conditions. Example sutta: ================================================================= "Now, when asked, 'Is stress self-made?' you say, 'Don't say that, Kassapa.' When asked, 'Then is it other-made?' you say, 'Don't say that, Kassapa.' When asked, 'Then is it both self-made and other-made?' you say, 'Don't say that, Kassapa.' When asked, 'Then is it the case that stress, being neither self-made nor other-made, arises spontaneously?' you say, 'Don't say that, Kassapa.' When asked, 'Then does stress not exist?' you say, 'It's not the case, Kassapa, that stress does not exist. Stress does exist.' When asked, 'Well, in that case, does Master Gotama not know or see stress?' you say, 'Kassapa, it's not the case that I don't know or see stress. I know stress. I see stress.' Then explain stress to me, lord Blessed One. Teach me about stress, lord Blessed One!" "'The one who acts is the one who experiences [the result of the act]' amounts to the eternalist statement, 'Existing from the very beginning, stress is self-made.' 'The one who acts is someone other than the one who experiences'[2] amounts to the annihilationist statement, 'For one existing harassed by feeling, stress is other-made.' Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the middle: From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications. ... From birth as a requisite condition, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into play. Such is the origination of this entire mass of stress & suffering. "Now from the remainderless fading & cessation of that very ignorance comes the cessation of fabrications. ...From the cessation of birth, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair all cease. Such is the cessation of this entire mass of stress & suffering." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.017.than.html =============================================================== So when speaking precisely the Buddha avoided self/other dichotomy. And you are well aware of all the suttas that state that one shouldn't consider any of 5 aggregates to be "I, me, mine". ex: MN44 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.044.than.html With metta, Alex ================================== And the Buddha also taught that (every) one is heir to (that) one's own kamma. The Buddha also distinguishes wise people from fools, ariyans from worldlings, arahants from learners, and buddhas from other beings. The Buddha clearly distinguishes among beings, and among dhammas. At the same time, he teaches that there is no self of any sort to be found anywhere. Whatever is taught is a matter of who is being taught and the purpose of the teaching. The no-self teaching, which is of enormous importance to me and which I accept as the centerpiece of the Dhamma and of supreme importance, is deep, complex, and can be misunderstood. I maintain that great care needs to be taken to understand it not in slogan form but deeply and in line with reality. It can easily be misunderstood by some [and I do NOT mean you or Sarah] so as to lead to absurd and false conclusions. It is a neither a doctrine of nihilism nor, oppositely, one of separate essence, being, and identity. It is like the proverbial snake that must be rightly held. With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #113472 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Feb 12, 2011 5:52 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 3.Item 4. nilovg Dear Han, Op 12-feb-2011, om 12:11 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > However, it is not very clear in Visuddhimagga. There is no clear > distinction between "kilesa" and "anusaya kilesa" which are > abandoned by the Path. ------ N: The texts on upanna are similar as in the sammohavinodanii. Ch XXII, 91: <(IV) by having soil [to grow in],... can all be abandoned because a given mundane or supramundane knowledge, when it arises, nullifies a given one of these modes of being arisen.> Or do you think of another text? XXII, 49 classifies the kilesas, defilements, as ten, this is a specific group. The inherent tendencies or anusayas is another group. When we think of eradication by the path-consciousness, we should know: lokuttara pa~n~naa has grown to the level that there is no more opportunity or condition for the arising of such or such akusala dhammas. Vis. (XXII, 85):"But in the case of the Stream Enterer, etc., when a given defilement, which is the root of the round, has been abandoned by means of a given path in a given Noble Person's aggregates, then, his aggregates are no longer called 'soil' [bhuumi] for such defilements since they are no longer the basis for it..." Nina. #113473 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Feb 12, 2011 6:07 am Subject: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 3. Items 5 and 6. nilovg Dear Han, (5) Tattha sampati vattamaana.myeva samudaacaaruppanna.m naama. (5) Herein, that existing now is what is called [arisen as behaviour] (samudaacaaruppanna.m). ------- N: Samudaacaara is behaviour or practice. This is similar to the first item, that refers to the defilements that occur. Akusala cittas rooted in lobha, dosa and moha habitually occur at the present moment. These are not to be annihilated by the Path. When magga-citta arises akusala citta cannot arise at the same time. ----------- (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). --------- N: Very often defilements are likely to arise after the sense- cognitions that experience sense objects. There is more often unwise attention to the object than wise attention. The latent tendency of sense desire conditions the arising of akusala citta rooted in lobha. Just after seeing there is bound to be clinging to visible object or to seeing. We like to see, hear and experience all the sense objects. When pa~n~naa that sees dhammas as they really are has been fully developed it can become lokuttara pa~n~naa which eradicates latent tendencies stage by stage. Item 6 is to be annihilated by the path. -------- Nina. #113474 From: han tun Date: Sat Feb 12, 2011 6:56 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 3.Item 4. hantun1 Dear Nina, [Nina]: The texts on upanna are similar as in the sammohavinodanii. Ch XXII, 91: <(IV) by having soil [to grow in],... can all be abandoned because a given mundane or supramundane knowledge, when it arises, nullifies a given one of these modes of being arisen.> Or do you think of another text? [Han] Yes, the text in Visuddhimagga and the text in Sammohavinodanii are similar. But when it comes to the fact that [the Path does not eradicate the past, future and presently-arisen defilements, but it eradicates the underlying or latent tendencies], I had thought that they are not as clear as the text in Pa.tisambhidaamagga, Abhisamayakathaa, especially, when the latter gives the example of a young tree with unborn fruit. However, on second thought, the following paragraph might be taken as the explanation similar to Abhisamayakathaa. Vis. (XXII, 85):"But in the case of the Stream Enterer, etc., when a given defilement, which is the root of the round, has been abandoned by means of a given path in a given Noble Person's aggregates, then, his aggregates are no longer called 'soil' [bhuumi] for such defilements since they are no longer the basis for it..." In such a case, the explanation given in Visuddhimagga will have to be accepted. Kind regards, Han #113475 From: han tun Date: Sat Feb 12, 2011 7:15 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 3. Items 5 and 6. hantun1 Dear Nina, Here again, your explanations are better than the explanations given in the Visuddhimagga and the Sammohavinodanii. I like to take note, most strongly, your point that "When magga-citta arises akusala citta cannot arise at the same time". N: Samudaacaara is behaviour or practice. This is similar to the first item, that refers to the defilements that occur. Akusala cittas rooted in lobha, dosa and moha habitually occur at the present moment. These are not to be annihilated by the Path. When magga-citta arises akusala citta cannot arise at the same time. N: Very often defilements are likely to arise after the sense-cognitions that experience sense objects. There is more often unwise attention to the object than wise attention. The latent tendency of sense desire conditions the arising of akusala citta rooted in lobha. Just after seeing there is bound to be clinging to visible object or to seeing. We like to see, hear and experience all the sense objects. When pa~n~naa that sees dhammas as they really are has been fully developed it can become lokuttara pa~n~naa which eradicates latent tendencies stage by stage. Thank you very much. Respectfully, Han #113476 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Feb 12, 2011 2:56 am Subject: A Question: What are the Direct Causes of Kamma?/Nina upasaka_howard Hi, Nina and others well versed in Abhidhamma - I've been thinking about the conditions that directly lead to volition, and I've been experimenting with this. My experimenting pertains to the simple matter of lifting a finger. Just thinking about doing that, even thinking *intently* about it, does not produce the intention-push/impulsion that is finger-lifting volition. OTOH, with close to no effort at all, I can simply lift the finger! In that case, the "volitional push" is noticed and easily distinguishable from it's absence when merely thinking about the moving. Yet I cannot pick up on what causal conditions are present when the volition occurs but missing otherwise. I think it is important to pick up on this, for otherwise it deceptively seems that the volition "occurs on it's own," which would make it a kind of "self". I would like to know what Abhidhamma teaches as the detectable (experiential) basis for volition. I consider this a very practical and important matter. With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #113477 From: "Swee Boon" Date: Sat Feb 12, 2011 8:46 am Subject: Re: A Question: What are the Direct Causes of Kamma?/Nina nidive Hi Howard, > Yet I cannot pick up on what causal conditions are present when the volition occurs but missing otherwise. In my opinion, I believe that contact with the physical body allows the bodily volition to occur (lifting the finger). When you are just thinking with the mind, only the mind is contacted. For example, when we are angry, we may think of ways to bring harm to others. This is just contact with the mind. But when there is contact with the physical body, the anger is manifested outwardly, for example, as shouting, fighting, killing. When there is no contact, there is also no volition - mind or body. The ultimate bliss! Swee Boon #113478 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Feb 12, 2011 4:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Question: What are the Direct Causes of Kamma?/Nina upasaka_howard Hi, Swee Boon (and Nina & all) - I thank you for your reply, Swee Boon, and it's really nice to hear from you(!), but I find myself confused. In a message dated 2/12/2011 11:47:00 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, nidive@... writes: Hi Howard, > Yet I cannot pick up on what causal conditions are present when the volition occurs but missing otherwise. In my opinion, I believe that contact with the physical body allows the bodily volition to occur (lifting the finger). When you are just thinking with the mind, only the mind is contacted. For example, when we are angry, we may think of ways to bring harm to others. This is just contact with the mind. But when there is contact with the physical body, the anger is manifested outwardly, for example, as shouting, fighting, killing. When there is no contact, there is also no volition - mind or body. The ultimate bliss! -------------------------------------------------- I don't get the "contact" answer. Volition is mental, a cetasika. Without prior physical contact, I can simply lift my finger due to volition. What causes that volition? That is what I'm looking for. ------------------------------------------------ Swee Boon ========================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #113479 From: Ken O Date: Sat Feb 12, 2011 10:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Who am I? ashkenn2k Dear Ari I suggest you do not use this exercise because there is no I in dhammas. Conceivings of I is due to three dhammas, ditthi, mana and lobha. Using this exercise would not help in mindfuless, it could be rather counter productive as it keeps the mind on I which in the first place does not exist. Mindfulness is not about asking Who am I, mindfulness can arise with or without panna. Mindfulness is awareing of dhamma that arise. Mindfulness guards the mind but it is not for knowing dhamma. Panna knows the nature of dhamma. Without panna, mindfulness would lead to a blissful life but not salvation. Many people are concerned over mindfulness due sutta that depicts mindffullness. But many did not look deeper into sutta. To practise mindffulness as in the sutta, one must have virtue and panna. Without virtue, one is blameable, if one is blameable, one mind is not at peace, if it is not at peace, the mind is not being able to be calm or concentrate. Why panna, because mindfullness of breathing is used as a basis of insight but is not insight itself. Insight could be developed through panna, through listening, through investigating of dhamma, through good dhamma friends. Also I rather not use Who am I but Is there an I. We can be mindful of sound citta or other sense citta but it is not very useful for salvation as it only being mindful. It must be accompanied by investigating of the nature of citta. there are a variety of way to understand the nature of citta through investigation for eg since sound citta arise is dependent on sound rupa, since it is dependent, it is condition, if it is condition, it is impermanent, if it is impermanet, it is painful due to change, if it is painful, do you consider it as me, I or myself. Definitely not, so there is no I in sound citta. cheers Ken O > >Dear list, > >I am told that it's a great mindfulness exercise to repeatedly ask yourself "who > >am I" > >Has anyone had any experience with this? > >For myself, I have no idea who I am, and "who I am" is an interesting question. #113480 From: Ken O Date: Sat Feb 12, 2011 10:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: should one try one's best? ashkenn2k Dear pt > >Hi KenO, > >Thanks for your reply, I think we're getting close to the source of >confusion/disagreement. > >> KO: I used to think in such a way until I relook at the process of concepts >> with dhamma, because panna can arise with concepts. Panna arise whether the >> object of a citta is a concept or dhamma. Simple example is panna could arise >> in mundane jhanas.� It is not exclusively dhamma. At the moment of concept, >> citta already think of it, panna could arise with citta that think of the >> concept. > >pt: Ok, I agree here. For the sake of clarity though, to make sure we're on the >same page - when panna arises with a concept - that would not be an instance of >proper insight, right? I mean, it could be samatha panna, or it could be right >intellectual understanding (pariyati), but it's not vipassana/satipatthana >proper, right? KO: One could only reach proper insight or vipassana through intellectual understanding. There is no way to reach vipassana without intellectual understanding of dhammas. Intellectual understanding finds it basis on concepts of dhammas and not on the nama and rupa level. If we want ot understand the nama and rupa level, then we must first understand the intellectual level or conventional level. Even if one claims one understand seeing sees, unless it is vipassana level, one understanding of this nama and rupa is also intellectual level or conventional level or a better term conceptual level which have real dhamma as the basis > >> KO: I thought I was very clear, that your insight proper is only at Vipassana, > > >> During vipassana, it is only dhamma as object of citta. > >pt: I think in one of the previous messages you said that satipatthana too can >have a concept as object. Perhaps I misunderstood you. That's what was confusing > >me anyway, because I think saying "satipatthana" is basically the same as saying > >proper insight/vipasssana, i.e. dhamma would be object of citta. KO: satipatthana in mindfulness of breathing starts with concept as an object and not nama and rupa as an object. You could always read the commentary of the satipatthana in detail and how this arise to jhanas and then to be a basis for insight. So to say satipatthana is only about vipassana is only half true because satipathana also has samantha bhavana as an important element. > >> KO: Nope, their views are at even during conecptual understanding, the object >> of panna must be a dhamma which I disagreed because the text do not support >>such >> >> a view.�� > >pt: You mean that Sarah, Jon and others here think that "even during conceptual >understanding, the object of panna must be a dhamma"? >I think you might have misunderstood them - I just spoke to Sarah about it a few > >days ago, and she too says that for right intellectual understanding, panna >arises with with a citta that has a concept as the object. So, perhaps this >whole argument is a misunderstanding? KO: Yes that is their view, it must be a dhamma which is a nama and rupa. I dont think I have misrepresent them unless they change their mind recently. chees Ken O > #113481 From: Ken O Date: Sat Feb 12, 2011 11:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: An afternoon with Pt - round 3 ashkenn2k Dear pt > > >1. Regarding insight proper that takes a dhamma as the object of citta - in >previous messages I wrote that it's supposed to happen in one mind-door process >which follows a previous sense-door process, or a previous mind-door process. >However, Sarah corrected me that insight happens in AT LEAST one mind-door >process - so it could be one or more mind-door processes in which a dhamma is >the object, which would then be followed by mind-door processes that take up >concepts as the object. She also said that there's more information on this >topic in the Dispeller of delusion (commentary on Vibhanga) and in the >commentary to abhidhammattha sangaha, which can be found in English in the >translation of AS by Rupert Gethin and A.S.Wijeratne. KO: Panna can arise in the sense door process as well and then to the mind door process. Now whether panna arise first in the very first mind door or not, it is still panna that could arise after many mind doors for a concept, panna still arise with concepts. What is impt, the 1st mind door that could only be experience in vipassana or the panna with concepts that could be understood, investigate right now by us. Does investigating concepts with panna diminishes our development? The gist of Buddha is understanding not self and not trying to debunk concepts (except for the understanding of nama and rupa) as though it is a nemesis for development. >2. Regarding right intellectual understanding which takes concepts as the object > >of cittas - Jon pointed out that this is not academic knowledge as such. As I >understood him, right intellectual understanding actually has to do with >relating the present experience to anatta. The more there's such understanding, >the closer it gets to actual insight proper. >3. I've also asked about not being certain whether what I'm experiencing at the >moment is a particular kind of dhamma or another - for example, when touching >something, I'm not really sure whether I'm actually experiencing hardness (rupa) > >or is it a perception (of hardness - nama). Sarah pointed out that most likely >in these cases the reality/dhamma at that moment is probably thinking and doubt. > >So, I think for beginners doubt is probably the most accessible dhamma :) Of >course, whatever arises at present - even if it's doubt, can be understood in >light of anatta. And I guess that would then be an instance of right >intellectual understanding. KO: Whats wrong with thinking, it is just another dhamma. In order to understand reality one must investigate what one learn, and investigation use thinking. Panna is call right thinking when it is arise with vittaka :-) In suttas, there is always terms used like investigation of dhamma or learn, without thinking, I dont think we could learn or investigate. Citta thinks, we cannot run away from it. To me, it does not matter whether you are experiencing hardness or your preception is experience hardness. it should be hardness is understand as not self. Anyway, it is body citta that experience hardness, sana cannot experience hardness because sanna roles is to mark or note. It must be first experience and then sana remembers assocaiton between experience and the object and the experience and object as well/ > >4. I've also mentioned how difficult it was for me to understand that just the >fact that I'm putting in effort into something does not necessarily mean that >it's kusala effort. Only when I started learning abhidhamma did this point come >across - i.e. that pretty much any activity can be either kusala or akusala, and > >more precisely - effort, concentration, perception, attention, etc, can be >kusala or akusala depending on the citta. Hence, the importance of understanding > >the difference between the two experientially. (Sarah, this was a discussion >that Jon and me sneaked in without you, while fixing the printer :) KO: You should put effort, even listening to talks, reading books, doing dicussion or writing in emails are all effort and to me there are all directed effort conditioned by panna, chanda, kamma and effort. There is nothing wrong about directed effort. Not self is not about control or not control , it is about nature of dhamma cannot be changed. > >5. And there was the topic of small talk, which is not really related to any >present discussions here - the issue of how difficult I find it sometimes to >engage in small talk with people, even though it's the only way to relate to >them - i.e. talking about the weather, how's the family, etc. Sarah pointed out >that even the Buddha engaged in "small talk" - I think in the suttas it's often >described as the exchange of cordial greetings. So, it's not so much about >what's being said - even if it's about the weather, or family - but the point is > >that it's about the citta - for example if it's said with metta, that would be >kusala, while if it's done reluctantly - then it's probably with akusala cittas. > >Same deal as with effort, concentration, etc. KO: we are all different :-). Strictly speaking on talk if we used the Buddha standard, five things; timely, truthful, amity, gentle and on dhamma. cheers Ken O #113482 From: Ken O Date: Sat Feb 12, 2011 11:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: An afternoon with Pt - round 3 ashkenn2k Dear Nina Sarah pointed out that even the Buddha >> engaged in "small talk" - I think in the suttas it's often >> described as the exchange of cordial greetings. So, it's not so >> much about what's being said - even if it's about the weather, or >> family - but the point is that it's about the citta - for example >> if it's said with metta, >------ >N: Thank you for your report. Later on I would like to react to some >of these, but for now just this. I used to be very sad while during >our visit in Sri Lanka, there often was small talk instead of Dhamma >talk. I also spoke about this with the late Ven. Dhammadharo. He >reminded me of animal, such as talk about kings. He said that it all >depends, one can think: even kings have to die. And as Sarah said, it >depends on the citta. One can talk about someone's flowers and have >mudita, sympathetic joy, about someone else's kusala vipaaka. >I liked the idea of Dhamma talk while fixing the printer with Jon. It >is all so daily! KO: to say it depends on the citta is not entirely correct. the reason Buddha prevent small talk so the mind is not scattered, restless, or excited. Talk can condiitoned akusala citta to arise hence why he discourage talk about kings, politics etc. Buddha understand that as long as latency is not eradicated, small talk does not help in the development of panna. Buddha dont engage in small talk except in greetings thanks Ken O #113483 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Feb 12, 2011 12:18 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing truth_aerator Hello Howard, all, Sometime ago I've written some ideas on pragmatic use of anatta as a strategy. When it comes to defilements, one should not act on them, but consider them "not I, not me, not mine" so one would not act on them. When it comes to doing good, one should adopt a wholesome idea of self-responsible, and do good deeds. When it comes to relating to past experiences, be they good or bad, one should not consider them to be "mine" (so not to become conceited if they were good or depressed if they were bad). With metta, Alex #113484 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Feb 12, 2011 8:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 2/12/2011 3:18:44 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hello Howard, all, Sometime ago I've written some ideas on pragmatic use of anatta as a strategy. When it comes to defilements, one should not act on them, but consider them "not I, not me, not mine" so one would not act on them. ------------------------------------------------- That is excellent if it works for you. It may on occasion work for me, but more usually thinking "harmful" does the trick for me. ------------------------------------------------- When it comes to doing good, one should adopt a wholesome idea of self-responsible, and do good deeds. -------------------------------------------------- I tend generally tend towards "doing good" unless laziness intervenes. ;-) In that case, for me the thought "But it's the right thing to do" seems to do the job much of the time. ----------------------------------------------------- When it comes to relating to past experiences, be they good or bad, one should not consider them to be "mine" (so not to become conceited if they were good or depressed if they were bad). ------------------------------------------------------ I'm inclined to see past experiences as mere recollections: unrealities that may be learned from but otherwise best be let go of. --------------------------------------------------- With metta, Alex ================================ With metta, Howard P. S. Thanks for writing this, Alex. Skillful means are important, and I appreciate hearing of them. Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #113485 From: Vince Date: Sat Feb 12, 2011 3:46 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A Question: What are the Direct Causes of Kamma?/Nina cerovzt@... Dear Howard you wrote: > My experimenting pertains to the simple matter of lifting a finger. Just > thinking about doing that, even thinking *intently* about it, does not > produce the intention-push/impulsion that is finger-lifting volition. just for some added interest, there is the famous Libet experiment on free will, precisely using the finger and the will to move it. It seems there is a delay, the finger start the movement before there is a conscious will to do it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Libet best Vince. #113486 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Feb 12, 2011 4:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 sarahprocter... Hi Rob E & all, --- On Fri, 11/2/11, Robert E wrote: R:>But in looking at the range of defilements with and w/o wrong view, and how long they all last, it does seem like we can pretty much check everything off for a long time? When does one get a single defilement category off the list? Only at the Sotapanna stage? .... S: That's right:-) > ------------------------ > >> S: Silabbata paramasa (cling to rites and rituals) is just the third fetter. The fourth fetter, kama-raga (sensuous craving) refers to attachment to sense objects without wrong view. R:>My personal favorite. I figure when I overcome "sensuous craving" to food, people, objects in general, that will mark some real progress. Perhaps not in this lifetime... .... S: Only the anagami has eradicated sensuous craving. Meanwhile, we can distinguish between common, ordinary craving as you describe (sama lobha)and craving that is seriously harmful to others (visama lobha) and eradicated by the sotapanna at the first stage of enlightenment. Obvious examples of this are killing, stealing, lying and sexual misconduct. ... R:>Also, not sure about the wrong view part... I may think there's some kusala where there's akusala in the sensual realm... ... S: Usually that's just moha, common ignorance. We're always taking the akusala for kusala, thinking that the calm we feel when looking at the sunset or waves is kusala, for example. ... >Is there a category for sensuous craving with wrong view? ... S: Yes, wrong view always arises with attachment, usually sensuous craving. For example, if we're not just enjoying the sunset or waves or our friend's company, but really have the idea that in reality the namas and rupas experienced are things and people in actuality, that is wrong view. If, like most children and adults, there is no thinking about the path, no thinking about the Truth, about realities, then no wrong view arises. For example, animals just have lots and lots of sensuous attachment with ignorance. There is the latent tendency of wrong view accumulated, but no conditions for wrong view to arise. ... R:>I wonder if there is some discussion of what is considered "rite and ritual" somewhere...? I know meditation gets thrown in there by dear friend Ken H., and by others in looking at that category. ... S: Of course, lots in "useful posts" under "Rites & Rituals (Silabbataparamasa)" - worth checking and reading. We all mean different things by "meditation". If it is bhavana - the development of right understanding, the development of samatha and vipassana, then it is not silabbataparamasa. If however we have an idea of "meditation" as being a particular posture, a particular technique, a particular form of activity as being the path, then it is silabbataparamasa, but we've discussed this before:-) There's a MN sutta I'd like to quote from for you, but it'll have to be later as I need to start preparing lunch now my mother's just back from the fish shop. .... R:>Well I've expressed enough ignorance for the moment. Sorry for tangentializing your very interesting thread on these details. I will try to study them as they are very intriguing. ... S: Really appreciate your keen interest and thanks for joining in and contributing. Not "tangentializing" at all;-) Btw, yesterday evening, there was nothing my mother and I wanted to watch on TV, so after 10 mins of doing the crossword together (and missing Jon's assistance), I said I was going to print out the DSG messages and read them. She started looking through them too and we had a few laughs as she read out the Pali from the Sangiti Sutta, discussed the use of 'aggregate' for khandha (she likes 'collection' better), had I used an American spelling by mistake (probably copying you!), she wondered and we had a brief explanation on moha (ignorance). It was all a bit 'deep' and heavy going until she got to your messages. These are her favourites. In fact, I told her to feel free to skip all the others and just read yours:-) You sound "normal", she said and humourous too. So keep writing plenty! Nina, she also appreciated yours and Lodewijk's kind wishes. I was interested to read about your discussions with your father and touched about his good spirits as he goes for his chemo. I liked the "letting go". We share many reminders here about "it's gone". Very helpful for everyone and at some level, everyone can appreciate it. It's all about the present moment. Metta Sarah ======== #113487 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Feb 12, 2011 7:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: thoughts about the path, not-Self strategy, etc sarahprocter... Dear Alex, (Ken H, Nina & all), --- On Sun, 16/1/11, A T wrote: >Buddha did teach "rites & rituals" (Silabbata) being required at some point of the path. >"He doesn't speak of purity in connection with view, learning, knowledge, precept or practice (Silabbatenāpi). Nor is it found by a person through lack of view, of learning, of knowledge, of precept or practice (Asilatā abbatā)." - Snp 4.9 TB Transl. >What I understand that to mean is that those are the steps toward the goal, but not goal themselves. But note, awakening cannot occur without using Silabbata at some point. ... S: I was interested to look at the Snp verse, having looked at and discussed the AN one. I think as discussed with regard to the raft, lobha has to let go of everything. As discussed silabbata just refers to ceremonies - nothing inherently kusala or akusala in them. Here's the Pali for the verse above: ‘‘Na di.t.thiyaa na sutiyaa na ~naa.nena, (maaga.n.diyaati bhagavaa) Siilabbatenaapi na suddhimaaha; Adi.t.thiyaa assutiyaa a~naa.naa, Asiilataa abbataa nopi tena; Ete ca nissajja anuggahaaya, Santo anissaaya bhava.m na jappe’’. *** Here is Norman's translation: " 'One says that purity is not by view, by learning, by knowledge, or even by virtuous conduct and vows, Maaganidya', said the Blessed One. 'Not by absence of view, of learning, of knowlege, of virtuous conduct, or vows, not by that either. And discarding these, without grasping, calmed, not dependent, one would not long for existence.' " I thought Ven T's notes here were interesting, which I share without further comment: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.4.09.than.html "The Pali of the first sentence puts the words for "view, learning, knowledge, precept, & practice" in the instrumental case. This case stands for the relationship "by means of" or "because of" but it also has an idiomatic meaning: "in terms of." (To keep the translation neutral on this point, I have translated with the idiom, "in connection with," which can carry both possibilities.) The second sentence puts the words for lack of view, etc., in the ablative case, which carries the meaning "because of" or "from." "If we assume that the instrumental case in the first sentence is meant in the sense of "by means of," then we are dealing — as Magandiya asserts — with plain nonsense: the first sentence would say that a person cannot achieve purity by means of views, etc., while the second sentence would be saying that he cannot achieve purity by means of no view, etc. The fact that the two sentences place the relevant terms in different grammatical cases, though, suggests that they are talking about two different kinds of relationships. If we take the instrumental in the first sentence in the sense of "in terms of," then the stanza not only makes sense but also fits in with teachings of the rest of the Pali discourses: a person cannot be said to be pure simply because he/she holds to a particular view, body of learning, etc. Purity is not defined in those terms. The second sentence goes on to say that a person doesn't arrive at purity from a lack of view, etc. Putting the two sentences together with the third, the message is this: One uses right views, learning, knowledge, precepts, & practices as a path, a means for arriving at purity. Once one arrives, one lets go of the path, for the purity of inner peace, in its ultimate sense, is something transcending the means by which it is reached. In the stanza immediately following this one, it's obvious that Magandiya has not caught this distinction." *** Metta Sarah ======== #113488 From: "Ken H" Date: Sat Feb 12, 2011 7:52 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing kenhowardau Hi Alex Howard and all, Whenever Thanissaro B's "anatta strategy" heterodoxy is given an airing on DSG I feel duty bound to speak out against it. So feel free to ignore the following, it's just something I have to do. :-) ---------- > > A: Some time ago I've written some ideas on pragmatic use of anatta as a strategy. ---------- KH: Anatta was never taught as a strategy. It was taught by the Buddha as a basic characteristic of all reality. --------------------- > > A: When it comes to defilements, one should not act on them, but consider them "not I, not me, not mine" so one would not act on them. ------------------- KH: This aspect of the Dhamma was originally taught, not as a strategy, but as a way of understanding conditioned dhammas. They are not worth clinging to (not mine) they are not worth the conceit of identification (not what I am) and they are anatta (not my self). -------------------------- > H: That is excellent if it works for you. It may on occasion work for me, but more usually thinking "harmful" does the trick for me. -------------------------- KH: I should acknowledge that while Alex and Howard both misinterpret descriptions as prescriptions (which is an easy mistake) they apparently do not go as far as Thanissaro goes. They do not deny that anatta means no self. ------------------------------------ > > A: When it comes to doing good, one should adopt a wholesome idea of self-responsible, and do good deeds. ------------------------------------ KH: That does go dangerously close to saying there is a self. I can only hope Alex did not mean it that way. --------------------- > H: I tend generally tend towards "doing good" unless laziness intervenes. ;-) In that case, for me the thought "But it's the right thing to do" seems to do the job much of the time. --------------------- KH: An even better tendency would be to understand that everything is conditioned: dhammas do not choose what they do. --------------------------- > > A: When it comes to relating to past experiences, be they good or bad, one should not consider them to be "mine" (so not to become conceited if they were good or depressed if they were bad). > > > H: I'm inclined to see past experiences as mere recollections: unrealities that may be learned from but otherwise best be let go of. ---------------------------- KH: Right understanding does not dwell on the past or worry about the future. It knows there are always only dhammas - no self. Ken H #113489 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Feb 12, 2011 8:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sotapanna sarahprocter... Dear Vince & all, --- On Fri, 11/2/11, Vince wrote: >> S: When sakkaya-ditthi has been eradicated, all other kinds of wrong views > and doubts are eradicated, as are the grossest defilements which could lead to > the breaking of precepts. .... V:>I read these commentaries in some places but one can keep an strong doubt because the attachment involved. >Do you know some source of what you cites? .... S: 1)"Now, householder, as to those divers views that arise in the world, ...and as to these sixty-two views set forth in the Brahmajala, it is owing to the personality view that they arise, and if the personality view exists not, they do not exist" (S 1V 7.3). 2) See the Simile of the Cloth with commentary notes at the end: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nyanaponika/wheel061.html For example: a)"According to the Comy., the sixteen defilements are finally abandoned by the noble paths (or stages of sanctity) in the following order: "By the path of stream-entry (sotapatti-magga) are abandoned: (5) denigration, (6) domineering, (7) envy, (8) jealousy, (9) hypocrisy, (10) fraud. "By the path of non-returning (anagami-magga): (2) ill will, (3) anger, (4) malice, (16) negligence. "By the path of Arahatship (arahatta-magga): (1) covetousness and unrighteous greed, (11) obstinacy, (12) presumption, (13) conceit, (14) arrogance, (15) vanity." b)"Unwavering confidence" (aveccappasada). Comy.: "unshakable and immutable trust." Confidence of that nature is not attained before stream-entry because only at that stage is the fetter of sceptical doubt (vicikiccha-samyojana) finally eliminated. Unwavering confidence in the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha are three of four characteristic qualities of a stream-winner (sotapaññassa angani); the fourth is unbroken morality, which may be taken to be implied in Sec. 9 of our discourse referring to the relinquishment of the defilements." ... V:>Because if you read this Sutta: "At the moment of attaining sight, one abandons three things: identity-views, uncertainty, & any attachment to precepts & practices. One is completely released from the four states of deprivation, and incapable of committing the six great wrongs." **The six great wrongs are: murdering one's mother, murdering one's father, murdering an arahant. wounding a Buddha, causing a schism in the Sangha, choosing anyone other than a Buddha as the foremost teacher. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.2.01.than.html .... S: See above. .... V:> this is the only reference I know about the things a Sotapanna is unable to do regarding sila. .... S: Others may provide other references. We had some before about how a bhikkhu who is a sotapanna will not/can not knowingly break the vinaya rules, for example. ... S:>> The sotapanna has no more jealousy (what is there to > be jealous or envious of?), but still has attachment, aversion, ignorance and > conceit. I doubt the aversion would be strong enough to be called "hate", > certainly not the hate that could harm or kill other sentient beings. ... V:>then how can be possible the conciliation between attachment and the needed permanent awareness to anatta nature of phenomena in order to keep a perfect sila. Because this awareness should be absent at each moment in where attachment is present. It isn't right? ... S: It's true that when there is awareness, there is no attachment and vice versa. However, because the latent tendency to the grosser defilements, such as wrong view and doubt have been eradicated, there is no further inclination under any circumstances to break the precepts. There is no more idea of a person that has wronged one, for example. There is not the gross attachment that would deceive or harm another through lying or sexual misconduct. No more jealousy either as I mentioned. ... V:>Thanks for the discussion and explanations :) ... S: A pleasure. Thx also for the helpful discussion. Metta Sarah ====== #113490 From: Ken O Date: Sat Feb 12, 2011 11:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] awareness of 4 elements within one's body ashkenn2k Dear Jon >=============== > >J: I have a different view on a couple of the points in your comments here. To >my understanding: >- When panna takes a citta as its object, the citta is one that has just fallen >away, not the one the panna arises together with. >- If the object of panna is a citta, then the object of that citta cannot also >be the object of the panna. For example, if panna takes seeing consciousness as >its object, the visible object cannot also be object of the same moment of >panna. >Perhaps your different take on these points explains the emphasis you like to >give to the matter of `dhammas arising with concepts'? KO: It is not about different view, it is about understanding how dhamma works in the paramatha level. Panna cannot take citta as its object, only citta can experience an object, panna knows the object that citta experiences. panna arise with whatever citta experiences and citta can experience concepts :-). that is how one understand dhamma by listening and investigating. thanks Ken O #113491 From: Ken O Date: Sat Feb 12, 2011 11:07 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Part 2 on Intentional development, simplified ashkenn2k Dear Jon >=============== > >J: Yes, I'm sure that previously accumulated panna and saddha would play a major > >role. Which is what I mean when I say it's not the intentional activity itself >that is the conditioning factor. > KO: If it is not intentional, then I dont know how you are condition to go. Intentional or directed is also arise with cetana or chanda. Without chanda, one cannot be a Buddha :-) >=============== >> KO: Definitely there are quite a few examples in the suttas. I dont think you >> need me to quote right because Alex will have given you many examples. I have >> no qualms about Buddha asking his disciples to meditate or other intentional >> actions because I know that intentional activity can be kusala and aksuala. >=============== > >J: Not sure I follow you here. Are you saying that intentional activity that is >akusala would be included in the intentional activity recommended by the Buddha? > >Surely not!! KO: As I said, look at the fundamental dhamma, there are cetasikas for intentional and it is not necessary all akusala. The revulsion on intentional is due to a belief that intentional must arise with aksuala. I dont know where you get this idea from, because in the text in Abhidhamma and sutta, there is nothing wrong about intentional unless is arise with aksuala. Ken O #113492 From: Ken O Date: Sat Feb 12, 2011 11:12 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] What Would Be Revising 2? Re: Revising 1: Arising of Mundane Paññaa ashkenn2k Dear Jon >=============== > >J: The factors that you mention -- sati, viriya, concentration, etc. – when >arising with mundane jhana are not path factors. These same factors arise with >all kinds of kusala. They are path factors only when they accompany a moment of >awareness/insight. >Similarly, only the panna that arises with a moment of awareness/insight is a >path factor; the panna that arises with mundane jhana is not. > KO: If we dont learn from mundane level how do you go to supramundane level. :-) So you are saying you could straight away go to supramudane level without going to mundane level first. Even those nama and rupa you are learning how are all mundane level. Are you saying that such mundane level are not impt. Or are you saying the panna, and jhana factors that arise in jhana are different in characteristics when panna arise in other activities like learning and listening to dhamma Ken O #113493 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Feb 13, 2011 12:32 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Buddha taught Silabbata - AN Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Rob E & all, > > --- On Fri, 11/2/11, Robert E wrote: > > R:>But in looking at the range of defilements with and w/o wrong view, and how long they all last, it does seem like we can pretty much check everything off for a long time? When does one get a single defilement category off the list? Only at the Sotapanna stage? > .... > S: That's right:-) Well, have to wait a while then. Patience..... ========================== > R:>Well I've expressed enough ignorance for the moment. Sorry for tangentializing your very interesting thread on these details. I will try to study them as they are very intriguing. > ... > S: Really appreciate your keen interest and thanks for joining in and contributing. Not "tangentializing" at all;-) > > Btw, yesterday evening, there was nothing my mother and I wanted to watch on TV, so after 10 mins of doing the crossword together (and missing Jon's assistance), I said I was going to print out the DSG messages and read them. > > She started looking through them too and we had a few laughs as she read out the Pali from the Sangiti Sutta, discussed the use of 'aggregate' for khandha (she likes 'collection' better), had I used an American spelling by mistake (probably copying you!), she wondered and we had a brief explanation on moha (ignorance). It was all a bit 'deep' and heavy going until she got to your messages. These are her favourites. In fact, I told her to feel free to skip all the others and just read yours:-) You sound "normal", she said and humourous too. So keep writing plenty! That is very nice to hear, Sarah. Regards to your mom! > Nina, she also appreciated yours and Lodewijk's kind wishes. > > I was interested to read about your discussions with your father and touched about his good spirits as he goes for his chemo. I liked the "letting go". We share many reminders here about "it's gone". Very helpful for everyone and at some level, everyone can appreciate it. It's all about the present moment. Yes, I still like "it's gone" very much. If I think of that sometimes now, it's refreshing to know that the slate is clear and we have a chance to start over again at each moment. Even though the usual 'stuff' arises again, there is a micro-moment here and there where the mental and emotional atmosphere seems nice and clear. And then 'it's gone' again. :-) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #113494 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Feb 13, 2011 1:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: An afternoon with Pt - round 3 nilovg Dear Ken O, Op 12-feb-2011, om 20:38 heeft Ken O het volgende geschreven: > Buddha dont engage in > small talk except in greetings ------ N: This was not small talk, but rather: an expression of mettaa and karu.na. Arahats have eradicated the inclination to useless talk. Nina. #113495 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Feb 13, 2011 2:11 am Subject: What I heard. nilovg Dear friends, Someone may dislike a specific kind of akusala that occurs with him, such as anger, stinginess or jealousy. He is ashamed of it, but this is not the way to eradicate akusala. There is not only akusala one dislikes, but also akusala one likes. One likes pleasant colour experienced through the eyes, harmonious sound experienced through the earsense, delicious flavour experienced through the tongue, one enjoys watching T.V. , going out for walks. There are many objects experienced through the senses which condition the arising of attachment. We like attachment. If one had not accumulated the inclination to akusala one dislikes it would not arise and it is the same with akusala one likes. Pa~n~naa should be developed which knows both akusala one dislikes and akusala one likes as only a type of naama. The indriyas (faculties) of confidence, energy, mindfulness, concentration and wisdom have to be developed for a long time to know realities as they are. Someone remarked that when he is reading he sees black and white and on account of what is seen he thinks about stories. It is the same in daily life when he sees people. He sees colour and on account of what is seen he thinks of stories for a long time. We watch T.V. and this is daily life. If there is no awareness also at such moments of the different dhammas that appear, the four noble Truths cannot be realized. ****** Nina. #113496 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Feb 13, 2011 12:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A Question: What are the Direct Causes of Kamma?/Nina upasaka_howard Hi, Vince - In a message dated 2/12/2011 6:46:45 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, cerovzt@... writes: Dear Howard you wrote: > My experimenting pertains to the simple matter of lifting a finger. Just > thinking about doing that, even thinking *intently* about it, does not > produce the intention-push/impulsion that is finger-lifting volition. just for some added interest, there is the famous Libet experiment on free will, precisely using the finger and the will to move it. It seems there is a delay, the finger start the movement before there is a conscious will to do it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Libet ------------------------------------------------ Yes, I vaguely recall that. It seems to me that the volition per se, i.e., the actual cetana (in Dhammic terms), is usually subliminal, and I find it unsurprising that there is a temporal gap between the cetana and the resultant effect. What I am interested in mainly is the conditions producing the cetana. Possibly among them are subliminal thinking and desire. Perhaps subliminal thought and emotion (especially desire) are essential, with these engaging a requisite energy (viriya) that supports cetana. Perhaps a subliminal conditionality pattern along the lines of thinking ->emoting/desiring -> energy -> cetana cycles back again and again, building in intensity, and should the willing become strong enough (i.e., a threshold being reached), resultant willed action occurs. -------------------------------------------- best Vince. ============================ With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #113497 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Feb 13, 2011 12:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Alex) - In a message dated 2/12/2011 10:52:33 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Alex Howard and all, Whenever Thanissaro B's "anatta strategy" heterodoxy is given an airing on DSG I feel duty bound to speak out against it. So feel free to ignore the following, it's just something I have to do. :-) ---------- > > A: Some time ago I've written some ideas on pragmatic use of anatta as a strategy. ---------- KH: Anatta was never taught as a strategy. It was taught by the Buddha as a basic characteristic of all reality. --------------------- > > A: When it comes to defilements, one should not act on them, but consider them "not I, not me, not mine" so one would not act on them. ------------------- KH: This aspect of the Dhamma was originally taught, not as a strategy, but as a way of understanding conditioned dhammas. They are not worth clinging to (not mine) they are not worth the conceit of identification (not what I am) and they are anatta (not my self). -------------------------- > H: That is excellent if it works for you. It may on occasion work for me, but more usually thinking "harmful" does the trick for me. -------------------------- KH: I should acknowledge that while Alex and Howard both misinterpret descriptions as prescriptions (which is an easy mistake) they apparently do not go as far as Thanissaro goes. They do not deny that anatta means no self. -------------------------------------------------- I consider the third of the tilakkhana to be a description of the way things are, and not "a strategy". It is, of course, always useful to keep what is true in mind. -------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------ > > A: When it comes to doing good, one should adopt a wholesome idea of self-responsible, and do good deeds. ------------------------------------ KH: That does go dangerously close to saying there is a self. I can only hope Alex did not mean it that way. --------------------- > H: I tend generally tend towards "doing good" unless laziness intervenes. ;-) In that case, for me the thought "But it's the right thing to do" seems to do the job much of the time. --------------------- KH: An even better tendency would be to understand that everything is conditioned: dhammas do not choose what they do. -------------------------------------------------- Better for whom? We possibly can properly judge for ourselves, Ken, but we should be cautious in our universal claims. ------------------------------------------------- --------------------------- > > A: When it comes to relating to past experiences, be they good or bad, one should not consider them to be "mine" (so not to become conceited if they were good or depressed if they were bad). > > > H: I'm inclined to see past experiences as mere recollections: unrealities that may be learned from but otherwise best be let go of. ---------------------------- KH: Right understanding does not dwell on the past or worry about the future. It knows there are always only dhammas - no self. Ken H =============================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #113498 From: Ken O Date: Sun Feb 13, 2011 8:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The clansman who is a beginner : one of the ancient wise ones? ashkenn2k Dear Rob E > > >When you say that an "arising dhamma" has anicca and anatta as part of its >"nature," what exactly does that mean to you? A characteristic is not just a >label that you can attach to something; it is, as you would say, a reality. So >it has to actually mean something. Anicca does not make *any* sense in any >defineable way if it does not apply to the changing nature of a dhamma, the fact > >that it does not stay the same even for a moment. That is Buddha's teaching, and > >if you try to make anicca mean something other than constant change, it is >meaningless terminology. So anicca only means something if you can describe what > >it actually means, not just say it is its "inherent nature." That is just a >generalization. If something is a characteristic, that is a description of >something actual *about* it. > KO: anicca is simply impermanent, rise and fall. conditioned dhamma is inherently impermanent. Hence one cannot say let my form be thus or let my form not be thus. Or in the analysis of 4NT by Ven Sariputtra, one cannot wish that death dont come to oneself etc. this is the nature of dhamma, rise and fall, suffering and not self, inherent in all conditioned dhamma, >Yes, and anatta reflects the complete lack of self-hood or entity that pertains >to a dhamma. It is a negative assertion. KO: In Buddhism, sensual pleasure is always describe as vile, low or disgusting. These to many modern people as negative due to societal conditioning, but such assertation are important because it leads to ultimate happiness which is Nibbana which does not have a self at all. >I believe that things have characteristics, but you have to ask 'what is a >characteristic?' Is it inherent? Is it static, like a mole on someone's face? Is > >it a function? Is a characteristic constrained by what we can identify? Is it >the same every time? If vittaka strikes object A, does it behave exactly the >same way when it strikes object B? Obviously every time there is a new set of >conditions, all the functions and characteristics, while similar, are slightly >different to accommodate a new object, new set of conditions, new combination of > >factors. It's a mistake, in my opinion, to overdue the idea of "inherent >characteristics" to the point where we change them into static ideals, instead >of recognizing investigating what happens in different circumstances. To say >something has this characteristic or this function is general. How that applies >to a particular situation is specific to a particular set of conditions - at >least that's what makes sense to me. And those conditions are unique each time >they arise. KO: To a certain extent, conditions could be unique each time they arise but the basic characteristic of dhamma of this uniquity always remain the same. Just like the sciencetific elements table, the elements are basic and their mixing produce unique situations. Just like when we are craving, it is always accompanied by pleasure or indifferent. But there are different shades of strength of craving and feelings that arise with it which this shades that condition uniquity of experience of craving. Still the basic block remains the same, craving and feelings (though there are many other factors) Ken O #113499 From: Ken O Date: Sun Feb 13, 2011 8:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. ashkenn2k Dear Howard and Rob E There are references in suttas of monks being enlighted without jhanas. In the Aditta-pariyaya sutta, one thousand monks attain enlightment immediately after Buddha finsih speaking sutta. There is no attainment of jhanas Ken O #113500 From: Ken O Date: Sun Feb 13, 2011 10:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: should one try one's best? ashkenn2k Dear Rob E > >Well, that is my question. Several folks here are saying that only intention is >kamma, and that actions are neither kusala or akusala in themselves. I have been > >saying that actions also are kusala or akusala, not just mental state or >intention. If killing is *always* bad, no matter what the intention, then the >*act* is akusala, not only the intention. That is what we have been arguing >about. KO: To me, intention is not easy to identify as a dhamma because it could be vittaka or chanda (wish to do or purpose). We cannot say intention is kamma as it is a different dhamma but they are right to say that actions or kamma are neither kusala or akusla. Why because kamma is will or an act, that act is dependent on the kuasala or aksuala cetasikas that accompanied it. Similiarly to vittaka and chanda, it depends on the cetasikas that accompanied it. Ken O #113501 From: Ken O Date: Sun Feb 13, 2011 10:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: notes from Bangkok with A.Sujin 3b ashkenn2k Dear Rob E I am most happy to disccuss with you on the body comtemplation in the sutta or the crossing the flood usiing the commentarian texts. though I dont think I have the commentarian text on crossing the flood but do have the body comtemplation. There is nothing wrong about the commentarian text, it is the way it is interpret by us that is the cause of the diverse views. Jon and Ken H don't believe in meditation so talking them is not going to be helpful. IMHO, they are pure vipassana practitioners or the dry insightors ways. It is like in the case of the sutta where it shows the differences of the dry insightors and jhanas practitioners. There are samantha bhavana (jhanas as a basis of insight) though not easy to attain but in reality it is still possible to attain, maybe not in this life but it sets the stage for future lifes. they dont believe in methods or instructions. At times refering to such actions as accumulated behaviour. Alias, if one does not start doing it in the previous lifes, how could it be possible to be accumulate. Just my views. there are indeed two different ways of learning the dhammas conventional or ultimate as explain by Nina, each suited for different type of human beings. So if ultimate realities is not your cup of tea, then conventional reality could be used. Ultimately, it is the understanding of anatta that matters. And comprehending ultimate realities IMHO helps in the understanding of anatta tremenduously and to me what we learn as ultimate reality now is the conventional understanding of the realities. to go to the level of vipassana, one must start conventional. Ken O #113502 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Feb 13, 2011 5:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Robert) - In a message dated 2/13/2011 11:32:45 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn2k@... writes: Dear Howard and Rob E There are references in suttas of monks being enlighted without jhanas. In the Aditta-pariyaya sutta, one thousand monks attain enlightment immediately after Buddha finsih speaking sutta. There is no attainment of jhanas --------------------------------------------------- I consider that an irrelevancy. There is no attainment of jhanas WHEN? Attainment of jhanas is a part of mental cultivation and is one factor of the 8-fold noble path, but there is no need for it to occur close in time to awakening. There are stories of awakening triggered even by the sound of a pebble hitting a bamboo tree!! --------------------------------------------------- Ken O ================================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #113503 From: nichicon cp Date: Sun Feb 13, 2011 10:38 am Subject: Sangiiti Corner nichiconn Hi Rob E, All, re: 113443 Nina's the one who does all the work reading & translating the Commentaries and Sub-Commentaries. I don’t translate anything, but just match the Rhys Davids, Walshe and Olds translations of the Sutta with the Pali. I like the ‘listening’, too. best wishes, connie #113504 From: "Ken H" Date: Sun Feb 13, 2011 4:50 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing kenhowardau Hi Howard, ------- <. . .> > H: I consider the third of the tilakkhana to be a description of the way things are, and not "a strategy". ------- KH: I consider it to be an inherent characteristic of paramattha dhammas. Any other way of seeing it must (IMHO) be as a strategy. -------------- > H: It is, of course, always useful to keep what is true in mind. -------------- KH: Yes it is useful. But there is no traveller on the Path, so in what way is it useful? -------------------- <. . .> > > KH: An even better tendency would be to understand that everything is conditioned: dhammas do not choose what they do. > > > H: Better for whom? We possibly can properly judge for ourselves, Ken, but we should be cautious in our universal claims. --------------------- KH: Better for our present-moment understanding of the way things are. The Dhamma is about the here and now, it is not about somewhere in the future. Ken H #113505 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Feb 13, 2011 5:11 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing truth_aerator Hi KenH, all, > KH: Anatta was never taught as a strategy. It was taught by the >Buddha as a basic characteristic of all reality. And the Buddha avoided saying "anatta as characteristic". He is nowhere directly quoted of saying anattalakkhana. But he does talk about anattasanna (perception/recognition of anatta). In MN#2, "there is no Self for me" is considered to be an inappropriate attention. One should rather examine in 4NT's. Stress has to be known, its causes abandoned, cessation experienced, and path realized. Practical! This is something most/all religions lack. They talk about having faith and belief in some proposition, and for the most part it ends there. "Have belief in Jesus and you will be saved!". Other religions have other beliefs... How to distinguish between them? What makes Dhamma so unique? Because it leads to cessation of Dukkha, it is pragmatic - and ultimately this is what matters. I've read so many diverse philosophical views, and have seen so many angles from which to build philosophical systems, that I am not very convinced of another philosophy. Even within Buddhism there were many Abhidhammic schools that argued with each other. This shows that philosophy, even of Buddhism is not beyond refutation. But it is the result which separates mere philosophy from the path of Dhamma. With metta, Alex #113506 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Feb 13, 2011 5:42 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: thoughts about the path, not-Self strategy, etc truth_aerator Dear Sarah, all, As I understand it (Snp 4.9), and what it seems to say is that: "view, learning, knowledge, precept or practice." are the means, the raft to the goal. The goal is not them, but Nibbana. They are like steps of the staircase "to Nibbana". You can't reach the higher floor by remaining standing on a particular step, but you can't reach the higher floor without walking on them. So they are a strategy to reach Nibbana. IMHO. With metta, Alex #113507 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Feb 13, 2011 6:34 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing kenhowardau Hi Alex, ---- <. . .> > > KH: Anatta was never taught as a strategy. It was taught by the >Buddha as a basic characteristic of all reality. > A: And the Buddha avoided saying "anatta as characteristic". He is nowhere directly quoted of saying anattalakkhana. But he does talk about anattasanna (perception/recognition of anatta). ---- KH: That's news to me. But if, as you say, the Buddha is nowhere directly quoted as saying "anattalakkhana" then he certainly is indirectly quoted as saying it. He described everything in the conditioned world, and also Nibbana, as having that characteristic. --------------------- > A: In MN#2, "there is no Self for me" is considered to be an inappropriate attention. --------------------- KH: Yes, so you keep telling us. And I keep telling you that "There is no self in ultimate truth and reality" is considered to be *appropriate* attention. (Alagadduupama Sutta ) ---------------------------- > A: One should rather examine in 4NT's. ---------------------------- KH: No, don't be putting anatta aside. Before you examine the 4NT's you must first understand they are about paramattha dhammas (ultimate realities) and the most important characteristic of all paramattha dhammas is anatta. ----------------------------------- > A: Stress has to be known, its causes abandoned, cessation experienced, and path realized. ----------------------------------- KH: "Stress" is Thanissaro B's weasel word for dukkha. It is actually a translation of "dukkha dukkha" which refers to the conventionally unpleasant, or stressful, feelings that we all know. The ultimate dukkha (the one taught only by the Buddha) pertains to all conditioned dhammas � both pleasant and unpleasant - owing to their unsatisfactory, momentary, natures. --------------------- > A: Practical! This is something most/all religions lack. They talk about having faith and belief in some proposition, and for the most part it ends there. "Have belief in Jesus and you will be saved!". Other religions have other beliefs... --------------------- KH: I don't think we can compare religions of any sort with the Dhamma. The Dhamma is in a territory of its own. Christianity and other religions don't even address the same questions, and so for the most part they contain neither right views nor wrong views. ------------------------------- > A: How to distinguish between them? What makes Dhamma so unique? Because it leads to cessation of Dukkha, it is pragmatic - and ultimately this is what matters. ------------------------------- KH: I think all religions basically say, "Do good, avoid evil, and purify the mind." However, only the Dhamma teaches there is no one to do those things. ------------------------- > A: I've read so many diverse philosophical views, and have seen so many angles from which to build philosophical systems, that I am not very convinced of another philosophy. Even within Buddhism there were many Abhidhammic schools that argued with each other. This shows that philosophy, even of Buddhism is not beyond refutation. But it is the result which separates mere philosophy from the path of Dhamma. -------------------------- KH: No, please don't say that! Thanissaro wants us to believe that the truth/untruth of no-self is not important so long as it gets us to the goal. But that is not the case. The path is one of *right* understanding, all the way - from beginning to end. Ken H #113508 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Feb 13, 2011 6:52 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing truth_aerator Hi KenH, all, > > > KH: Anatta was never taught as a strategy. It was taught by the >Buddha as a basic characteristic of all reality. > > > A: And the Buddha avoided saying "anatta as characteristic". He >is nowhere directly quoted of saying anattalakkhana. But he does >talk about anattasanna (perception/recognition of anatta). > ---- > > KH: That's news to me. But if, as you say, the Buddha is nowhere >directly quoted as saying "anattalakkhana" then he certainly is >indirectly quoted as saying it. He described everything in the >conditioned world, and also Nibbana, as having that characteristic. > And that description of (all dhammas are anatta) is to be actually used rather than held as frozen view/ > --------------------- > > A: In MN#2, "there is no Self for me" is considered to be an >inappropriate attention. > --------------------- > > KH: Yes, so you keep telling us. And I keep telling you that "There >is no self in ultimate truth and reality" is considered to be >*appropriate* attention. (Alagadduupama Sutta ) There is no self is a statement. Ultimately it has to be used, rather than being just another philosophy. Other religions have various views on what "the truth" is. Often their "truths" contradicts truths of other religions. Various philosophers argued over many different points and have not come to an agreement. The nature of the world is such that a smart person can build a very robust teaching of truth and deny the validity of other teachings. If a teaching is just a coherent collection of logical truths, then what is the use of it? Furthermore different philosophers can argue with equal believability their own unique views. So, no certainty here. Scholastic teachings of Buddhism are not irrefutable, just see all the different (and in some cases contradictory) philosophical points adopted by different schools. Ultimately, IMHO, what matters is "where does the teaching leads"? Dhamma leads to cessation of Dukkha. IMHO this is better than simply knowledge of collection of facts. While Dhamma does teach certain things (anatta for example), the whole purpose is to let go of craving and realize cessation through following N8P. With metta, Alex #113509 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Feb 13, 2011 11:05 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. nilovg Hi Howard, Op 13-feb-2011, om 19:43 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Ken O: > after > Buddha finsih speaking sutta. There is no attainment of jhanas > --------------------------------------------------- > I consider that an irrelevancy. > There is no attainment of jhanas WHEN? Attainment of jhanas is a part > of mental cultivation and is one factor of the 8-fold noble path, > but there > is no need for it to occur close in time to awakening. ------- N: Before, I quoted about the Buddha speaking to thode who had never heard the Dhamma, giving a gradual discourse. Those people attained enlightenment, no mentioning of jhaana attainment first. And why not? Jhaana has as goal temporary calm, being away from sense pleasures and being involved in them. Vipassanaa has as goal right understanding of naama and ruupa appearing at this moment and only this leads to eradication of defilements. ------- Nina. #113510 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Feb 13, 2011 11:15 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing nilovg Dear Alex and Ken H, Op 14-feb-2011, om 3:34 heeft kenhowardau het volgende geschreven: > > A: And the Buddha avoided saying "anatta as characteristic". He > is nowhere directly quoted of saying anattalakkhana. But he does > talk about anattasanna (perception/recognition of anatta). ------ N: It has been explained in the commentary that this kind of sa~n~naa accompanies insight. I quote from the Sangitiisutta and co. and co. to the Mahaa- raahulovadasutta: -------------- N: In the co. it has been repeated that the sa~n~naa has arisen (upanna) together with ~naa.na, and thus, it is conditioned by insight. It is not merely remembrance of the word impermanence. Kh Sujin: < Anicca sa~n~naa remembers the impermanence of realities that arise and fall away. We hear the word impermanence and we remember it but we do not realize the characteristic of aniccaa. There is niccaa sa~n~naa when we recognize a person who is standing and do not realize the arising and falling away of dhammas. Vipassanaa~naa.na realizes the characteristics of the realities that appear as they are. At that moment sa~n~naa remembers and does not forget the characteristic of aniccaa. > ------- Nina. #113511 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Feb 13, 2011 11:27 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A Question: What are the Direct Causes of Kamma?/Nina nilovg Hi Howard, Op 12-feb-2011, om 16:56 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Yet I cannot pick up on what causal conditions are present when the > volition occurs but missing otherwise. I think it is important to > pick up on > this, for otherwise it deceptively seems that the volition "occurs > on it's > own," which would make it a kind of "self". I would like to know what > Abhidhamma teaches as the detectable (experiential) basis for > volition. I > consider this a very practical and important matter. -------- N: Could you elaborate somewhat more why you find this question important? Volition accompanies each citta, but I think you refer to kusala cetanaa and akusala cetanaa of the intensity of kamma? Cetanaa cetasika is conditioned by the citta and cetasikas it accompanies. In the case of akusala volition, it is supported by all akusala cetasikas, such as lack of shame for akusala, lack of fear of its consequences, ignorance, restlessness, udhacca, and many others. Also akusala citta arises conditioned by latent tendencies which have been accumulated from moment to moment, by akusala performed in the past: natural strong dependent-condition. Lifting the finger, I do not think it helps to understand conditions. Cittas arise and fall away so fast, impossible to trace them. When someone hits another person, there are countless akusala cittas arising and falling away. Countless processes with akusala javanacittas. We cannot catch them, but just know: they arise because of their own conditions and are non-self, no person who can control them. Knowing this helps to understand the true nature of realities. And is this not our aim? ------ Nina. #113512 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 12:04 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? sarahprocter... Dear Howard, Ken H & Ken O & all, Just my own further reading on the Dvayatanupassana in Sn as quoted by Howard #108192 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > H: > Reality vs Unreality > > > /See how the world together with the devas has self-conceit for what is not-self. Enclosed by mind-and-body it imagines, 'This is real.' Whatever they imagine it to be, it is quite different from that. It is unreal, of a false nature and perishable. Nibbana, not false in nature, that the Noble Ones know as true. Indeed, by the penetration of the true, they are completely stilled and realize final deliverance./ > > (From the Dvayatanupassana Sutta) > ----------- > > KH: One thing we know for sure is that dhammas are real. :-) So I am wondering what the words "it is unreal" mean in that quote. > > I suspect the sutta is using "unreal" "false by nature" and "perishable" as synonyms. <...> .... S: " 'Anattani attamaani.m. passa loka.m sadevaka.m'; Nivi.t.tha.m naamaruupasmi.m, 'ida.m saccanti' ma~n~nati." Norman's translation: to which I've inserted the Pali above and other notes: " 'See the world together with the devas [passa loka.m sacevaka.m], which thinks that there is self in non-self'[anattani attamaani.m] [and which is] entrenched [S: dict: established, devoted to] in name-and-form [nivi.t.tha.m naamaruupa]. It thinks [S: thinks wrongly, ma~n~natti], 'This is true'[ida.m saccanti]." Next lines: 'Yena yena hi ma~n~nanti, tato ta.m hoti a~n~nathaa; Ta~nhi tassa musaa hoti, mosadhamma~nhi ittara.m. Norman's translation: "In whatever way [the world-dwellers] think it, it turns out other than that. For it is false[musaa] to it[self]. Whatever is transitory [S:ittara - short-lived] indeed has a false nature [mosadhamma]." S: I think it's stressing the vipallasas, the perversions of perception as further explained in the following verses, here from Ireland's on-line translation: "See how the world together with the devas has self-conceit for what is not-self. Enclosed by mind-and-body it imagines, 'This is real.' Whatever they imagine it to be, it is quite different from that. It is unreal, of a false nature and perishable. Nibbana, not false in nature, that the Noble Ones[1] know as true. Indeed, by the penetration of the true, they are completely stilled and realize final deliverance. "Forms, sounds, tastes, scents, bodily contacts and ideas which are agreeable, pleasant and charming, all these, while they last, are deemed to be happiness by the world with its devas. But when they cease that is agreed by all to be unsatisfactory. By the Noble Ones, the cessation of the existing body[2] is seen as happiness. This is the reverse of the outlook of the whole world. "What others call happiness, that the Noble Ones declare to be suffering. What others call suffering, that the Noble Ones have found to be happiness. See how difficult it is to understand the Dhamma! Herein those without insight have completely gone astray. For those under the veil (of ignorance) it is obscured, for those who cannot see it is utter darkness. But for the good and the wise it is as obvious as the light for those who can see. Even though close to it, the witless who do not know the Dhamma, do not comprehend it. "By those overcome by attachment to existence, those who drift with the stream of existence, those in the realm of Mara, this Dhamma is not properly understood. Who other than the Noble Ones, are fit to fully understand that state, by perfect knowledge of which they realize final deliverance, free from defilements?"[3] ... "Notes 1.The Noble Ones or ariya are the Buddhas and their disciples. 2.The "existing body" (sakkaya) is a term for the five aggregates as objects of grasping. 3.Anusava; the defilements or asava, literally "out-flows," are dissipations of energy in the form of sensual desire, becoming (the perpetuation of existence), views and ignorance and are the same as the four "floods" mentioned earlier. One who has destroyed the defilements (khinasava) is another name for an arahant or Perfected One." ... > KO: lets look at the sutta closely. < not-self. Enclosed by mind and body it imagines "this is real".>> This is real > is refering to self conceit taking not-self as self. Then it start to imagine > this self is real. So that is why the subsequent statement, < imagine it to be, it is quite different from that.<...> .... S: Yes, on and on in samsara, we take what is not-self for self, what is suffering for pleasurable and what is impermanent for permanent. Obscured by ignorance and blinded by wrong view, we fail to see the Truth that only a Buddha can reveal. So, even now, just namas and rupas arising and falling away that are anicca, dukkha and anatta. This is the truth, anything else is false. Thanks for sharing the sutta and your reflections. Metta Sarah ====== #113513 From: "selamat rodjali" Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 12:15 am Subject: Javana in the First citta vithi in Tadanuvattika-manodvara-vithi nana_palo Dear Dhamma friends, Yesterday our group in my hometown discussed this subject. There was a question related to the first citta vithi process that has paramattha as an object (let say sight object) in tadanuvattika-manodvara-vithi processes. The question was: "what kind of citta are those in the javana citta of that first vithi in tadanuvattika-manodvara-vithi?" Kindly please need insight from all of you. Anumodana. Selamat rodjali, Bogor Indonesia Powered by Happiness Energy #113514 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 12:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Javana in the First citta vithi in Tadanuvattika-manodvara-vithi nilovg Dear Selamat, so good to hear from you. I am glad your group is still active. Op 14-feb-2011, om 9:15 heeft selamat rodjali het volgende geschreven: > Yesterday our group in my hometown discussed this subject. There > was a question related to the first citta vithi process that has > paramattha as an object (let say sight object) in tadanuvattika- > manodvara-vithi processes. > > The question was: "what kind of citta are those in the javana citta > of that first vithi in tadanuvattika-manodvara-vithi?" > > -------- N: First there is a sense-door process of cittas that has a ruupa which is a sense object (say colour) as object, and then in the immdiately following mind-door process (tadanuvattika-manodvara- vithi) the cittas have the same sense object, and also the javanacittas are similar to those in the preceding sense-door process. Thus, if these were akusala cittas rooted in lobha, also the javana cittas of the following mind-door process are akusala cittas rooted in lobha. Does this answer your question? Nina. #113515 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 12:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? sarahprocter... Hi Ken H (& Pt), --- On Thu, 27/1/11, Ken H wrote: >> 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. ---------- K:>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. :-) .... S: :-) Yes, even wrong view can arise. Remember how many of those wrong views mentioned in the Brahmajala relate to the taking of jhanas for nibbana. ... >KH: You're just a couple of know-it-alls. :-) ... S: :-) ... >>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. (?) .... S: As they weren't sotapannas, they couldn't develop insight until next re-born in a human realm with an opportunity to hear the teachings of a Buddha. .... >> 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: I hope Pt will join in further with more of his reflections! ... --------------- >s:Thinking, speculating with curiosity? What's the citta now? ------------- K:>That's a good way of ending any conversation. DSG's equivalent of Amen. :-) ... S: So much of our everyday chatter is just curiosity.... everyday, sama lobha, isn't it? I forget if I mentioned that yesterday I had a little chat with my mother trying to explain what cittas are. It's helpful for me to bring these terms back to the real basics at this moment. Hope you're having some good surf! I still haven't used my surf-board in the garage here, but lots of swimming. Metta Sarah ====== #113516 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 1:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? nilovg Dear Sarah and Ken H, Op 14-feb-2011, om 9:51 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > K:>That's a good way of ending any conversation. DSG's equivalent > of Amen. :-) ------ N: I like this remark. Kh Sujin always, always brings us back to the present moment. The only way to develop understanding. ------- > ... > S: So much of our everyday chatter is just curiosity.... everyday, > sama lobha, isn't it? > > I forget if I mentioned that yesterday I had a little chat with my > mother trying to explain what cittas are. It's helpful for me to > bring these terms back to the real basics at this moment. ------ N: How good. You may bring in Survey , the beginning about citta. It is very basic. Ch 7, the beginning, p. 51. With your added explanations. For example: ------ Nina. #113517 From: Ken O Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 2:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. ashkenn2k Dear Nina Honestly, I felt it is extremely difficult to explain to jhanas believers there are dry insightors and to dry insightors that there jhana practioners. Buddha taught different ways to reach the goal and I dont understand why this is so difficult to accept. Ken O #113518 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 2:22 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 3. Items 7 and 8. nilovg Dear Han, Op 4-feb-2011, om 16:05 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > (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 nikkhameyyaati 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). > -------- N: The Visuddhimagga Ch XXII, 91 adds: <(VII through non-suppression, and (VIII) through non-abolition, can all be abandoned because a given mundane or supramundane knowledge, when it arises, nullifies a given one of these modes of being arisen.> As to item 7, it may be that jhaana is being cultivated and defilements are temporarily suppressed. However, they are not eradicated. There are still latent tendencies accumulated in the citta. These can condition the arising of defilements whenever there is an opportunity. Only the magga-citta only can eradicate latent tendencies. As to item 8, defilements that have not been eradicated can arise, even in the highest plane of existence. But the magga-citta can eradicate them. When the magga-citta has eradicated latent tendencies, there is no more soil for defilements to grow in. There is no longer opportunity for their arising. ****** Nina. #113519 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 2:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. nilovg Dear Ken O, Op 14-feb-2011, om 11:06 heeft Ken O het volgende geschreven: > Honestly, I felt it is extremely difficult to explain to jhanas > believers > there are dry insightors and to dry insightors that there jhana > practioners. > Buddha taught different ways to reach the goal and I dont > understand why this is > so difficult to accept. -------- N: Some people think that jhaana attainment is absolutely necessary and quote tests where the Buddha praised jhaana and emphasized the value of jhaana. Those who attain jhaana can have jhaana as base for insight. But it is important not to take for jhaana what ressembles jhaana but which is not. Pa~n~naa can understand even jhaanacitta as a conditioned dhamma, non-self. And insight of all dhammas should still be developed. If this is neglected the goal cannot be reached. But if people think that enlightenment can be reached only by jhaana they have difficulty to accept that insight has to be developed as well and they cannot accept that there are also people who develop only insight. We have to understand that people are not the same. We all have different accumulations. ***** Nina. #113520 From: Ken O Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 3:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. ashkenn2k Dear Nina you are right, insight is impt especially to the jhanas practitioners who at time believe concentration leads to insight. That is only be true if they comprehend dhammas. It is stated in suttas that comprehenstion of dhamma is a factor in the development of jhanas. Without panna, how could concentration growth. When one understand (panna), one is not restless or rebel against the bad things and relish the good things, when one is not restless, one is not excited, when one is not excited, one is calm, when one is calm, one is concentrated Ken O > #113521 From: Ken O Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 3:08 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 3. Items 7 and 8. ashkenn2k Dear Nina and Han which part of the path of discrimination you are studying at so I could take a closer look. The study of latency points to the difference between Buddhism and the other schools at that time. It shows the how powerful and wonderful is Buddha wisdom. Jhanas are attained by different ascetics at that time but it only suppressed defilements and not eradicate them, hence they have to come back to the round of rebirths. But attainment of magga citta is the eradication of the underlying tendecies that condition the arising of defilements. cutting the underlying tendecies is the cutting of the defilements. Please continue to share I find this study very interesting. And thank you for sharing. Ken O > > -------- > N: The Visuddhimagga Ch XXII, 91 adds: <(VII through non-suppression, > and (VIII) through non-abolition, can all be abandoned because a > given mundane or supramundane knowledge, when it arises, nullifies a > given one of these modes of being arisen.> #113522 From: han tun Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 3:18 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 3. Items 7 and 8. hantun1 Dear Nina, [Nina]: The Visuddhimagga Ch XXII, 91 adds: <(VII through non-suppression, and (VIII) through non-abolition, can all be abandoned because a given mundane or supramundane knowledge, when it arises, nullifies a given one of these modes of being arisen.> As to item 7, it may be that jhaana is being cultivated and defilements are temporarily suppressed. However, they are not eradicated. There are still latent tendencies accumulated in the citta. These can condition the arising of defilements whenever there is an opportunity. Only the magga-citta only can eradicate latent tendencies. As to item 8, defilements that have not been eradicated can arise, even in the highest plane of existence. But the magga-citta can eradicate them. When the magga-citta has eradicated latent tendencies, there is no more soil for defilements to grow in. There is no longer opportunity for their arising. ------------ [Han]: Thank you very much. With your assistance I begin to understand more and more of the eight arisings. Previously, without your help, I could not understand anything. I am really very grateful to you. Now that I understand better, I can read Vism XXII paras 90 and 91 with appreciation. 90. And the three kinds, namely, (vi) arisen with apprehension of an object, (vii) arisen through non-suppression, and (viii) arisen through non-abolition, should be understood as included by (iv) arisen by having soil [to grow in]. 91. So as regard the kinds of 'arisen' stated, the four kinds, namely, (i) as actually occurring, (ii) as been and gone, (iii) by opportunity made, and (v) as happening, cannot be abandoned by any [of these four kinds of] knowledge because they cannot be eliminated by the paths. But the four kinds of 'arisen', namely, (iv) by having soil [to grow in], (vi) with apprehension of an object, (vii) through non-suppression, and (viii) through non-abolition, can all be abandoned because a given mundane or supramundane knowledge, when it arises, nullifies a given one of these modes of being arisen. Respectfully, Han #113523 From: Vince Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 3:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A Question: What are the Direct Causes of Kamma?/Nina cerovzt@... Dear Howard, you wrote: > Yes, I vaguely recall that. It seems to me that the volition per se, > i.e., the actual cetana (in Dhammic terms), is usually subliminal, and I > find it unsurprising that there is a temporal gap between the cetana and the > resultant effect. yes, it is :) Outside Dhamma teaching, some time ago I have read about the existence of an scientific demonstration of a doubling-time in the mind. It was discovered when using measurements of the planets behavior regarding our position. This scientific is a French man named Jean-Pierre Garnier Malet. He published his discovery in a serious scientific magazine, and later he become very interested in spiritual things from different approaches. In short, the observations differences of the movement of planets showed that one instant of our consciousness contains many different instants, and many of them remains imperceptible to us. In this way, we have the experience of a continuous time, despite there is a fast succession of intermitent instants and many of them remain unknown to us. Like photograms. He says these "losed" instants can explain the subliminal knowledge, an access to past or future, etc.. Well, maybe it can be an interesting view about the temporal gap. I don't know if what he says it's all right, although at least he departs from a checked fact... > What I am interested in mainly is the conditions producing the cetana. > Possibly among them are subliminal thinking and desire. Perhaps subliminal > thought and emotion (especially desire) are essential, with these engaging > a requisite energy (viriya) that supports cetana. Perhaps a subliminal > conditionality pattern along the lines of thinking ->emoting/desiring -> energy ->> cetana cycles back again and again, building in intensity, and should > the willing become strong enough (i.e., a threshold being reached), > resultant willed action occurs. yes... Maybe the difference can be explained because all that subliminal mechanism going before our conscious will. If the meeting of conditionants of the previous citta are enough to cause, just milliseconds before, what later arises as unavoidable. Then giving the illusion of "I do" believing that I make the choose to move the finger. It would mean the same moment of our own will is much more elaborated of what we feel. This part of the experience is fascinating :) best, Vince. #113524 From: han tun Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 3:40 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 3. Items 7 and 8. hantun1 Dear Ken O (Nina), We are discussing about latent tendencies, and arising of kilesas and their eradication. We started with the Abhisamayakathaa of Pa.tisambhidaamagga. Then we discussed Vibha"nga A.t.thakathaa which is called Sammohavinodanii-a.t.thakathaa, Sammappadhaanavibha"nga. Then we discussed Visuddhimagga Chapter XXII Purification by Knowledge and Vision, paragraphs 81 t0 91. Nina will give you more information. Kind regards, Han #113525 From: Vince Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 3:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sotapanna cerovzt@... Dear Sarah you wrote: > a)"According to the Comy., the sixteen defilements are finally abandoned by > the noble paths (or stages of sanctity) in the following order: > "By the path of stream-entry (sotapatti-magga) are abandoned: (5) > denigration, (6) domineering, (7) envy, (8) jealousy, (9) hypocrisy, (10) fraud. > "By the path of non-returning (anagami-magga): (2) ill will, (3) anger, (4) malice, (16) negligence. > "By the path of Arahatship (arahatta-magga): (1) covetousness and unrighteous > greed, (11) obstinacy, (12) presumption, (13) conceit, (14) arrogance, (15) vanity." I don't know... on my side I cannot see in these Suttas a mention about the sotapanna is unable to break precepts due to the presence of the rest. However it can be also a matter of interpretation. The way to focus the precepts it is also a personal matter, and maybe I'm wrong and still I cannot see it. Really I'm not sure about how to follow the point... I will think more in what you says. thanks so much for your references and thoughts best, Vince. #113526 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 12:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 2/14/2011 2:07:37 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, Op 13-feb-2011, om 19:43 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Ken O: > after > Buddha finsih speaking sutta. There is no attainment of jhanas > --------------------------------------------------- > I consider that an irrelevancy. > There is no attainment of jhanas WHEN? Attainment of jhanas is a part > of mental cultivation and is one factor of the 8-fold noble path, > but there > is no need for it to occur close in time to awakening. ------- N: Before, I quoted about the Buddha speaking to thode who had never heard the Dhamma, giving a gradual discourse. Those people attained enlightenment, no mentioning of jhaana attainment first. And why not? Jhaana has as goal temporary calm, being away from sense pleasures and being involved in them. Vipassanaa has as goal right understanding of naama and ruupa appearing at this moment and only this leads to eradication of defilements. ------- Nina. ================================ In my opinion, you make too little of jhana - as some others make too much. The Buddha defined right concentration to be the jhanas, and he taught elsewhere of jhanas as temporarily suppressing the hindrances, making the mind a malleable and useful tool, and cultivating the mind and preparing it for mindful examination of dhammas by weakening the ongoing, background force of the hindrances. The Buddha put forward right concentration as part of the 8-fold noble path, not an unappreciated stepchild. It was only one of eight, but an essential one, and not just a pleasant vacation spot. With metta, Howard Hindrances /Suppose there were a river, flowing down from the mountains — going far, its current swift, carrying everything with it — and a man would open channels leading away from it on both sides, so that the current in the middle of the river would be dispersed, diffused, & dissipated; it wouldn't go far, its current wouldn't be swift, and it wouldn't carry everything with it. In the same way, when a seeker has not abandoned these five obstacles, hindrances that overwhelm awareness and weaken discernment, i.e., sensual desire, ill will, sloth & torpor, restlessness & anxiety, and sceptical doubt, when s/he is without strength and too weak in discernment to understand what is for one's own benefit, to understand what is for the benefit of others, to understand what is for the benefit of both, then to realize a superior human state, a truly noble distinction in knowledge & vision: that is impossible/ (From the Avarana Sutta) ______________________ Samatha & Vipassana /There's no jhana for one with no discernment, no discernment for one with no jhana. But one with both jhana & discernment: he's on the verge of Unbinding./ (Dhammapada 372) #113527 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 12:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A Question: What are the Direct Causes of Kamma?/Nina upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 2/14/2011 2:28:01 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, Op 12-feb-2011, om 16:56 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Yet I cannot pick up on what causal conditions are present when the > volition occurs but missing otherwise. I think it is important to > pick up on > this, for otherwise it deceptively seems that the volition "occurs > on it's > own," which would make it a kind of "self". I would like to know what > Abhidhamma teaches as the detectable (experiential) basis for > volition. I > consider this a very practical and important matter. -------- N: Could you elaborate somewhat more why you find this question important? =========================== The sense of personal self is closely tied to willing and to the mistaken and incoherent notion of "free" will. There is the seeming of willing as random or self-caused, and this reinforces the sense of an actor. This is why I believe that a knowledge, theoretical, at least, if not experiential, of the causal conditions for will is important. When one comes to see the conditional nature of willing, one also sees its impersonality, and the heart is taken out of the illusion of personal self. With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #113528 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 6:03 am Subject: [dsg] What Would Be Revising 2? Re: Revising 1: Arising of Mundane Paññaa jonoabb Hi Robert E My turn to have a go at catching up. Week 1 at the new job is now behind me. Your break is over ;-)) (113217) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > ... > > J: 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. > =============== J: And when you do come across it you may find that it doesn't quite match your recollection of it ;-)) I'm fairly confident that the Buddha never said, in the context of the development of the path, "If you want to achieve Y, then do some Xing", or anything like it. > =============== > I disagree that his other teachings were already known. > =============== J: Well when I said it was the world of dhammas that the Buddha became enlightened to and taught about, I meant the whole of the teachings on insight/satipatthana, the 4 Noble Truths DO, etc. Attainments in the areas of samatha, sila and dana were already known (although not to the level of detail known by the Buddha). > =============== 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. > =============== J: I agree that reflection on anicca, dukkha, anattaa as regards the conventional world can have quite an impact on a person. But was that the path to release from samsara taught by the Buddha? I don't think it was (although I'm not sure whether you're saying that this kind of reflection regarding the conventional world is the actual path or is more in the natuer of preliminary or preparatory work; where do you stand on this point?). > =============== > 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. > =============== J: The number of conventional objects is infinite, whereas the number of kinds of dhammas that can be object of insight is finite and is relatively small in number. > =============== 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. > =============== J: I'm afraid I don't follow this. Sub-atomic particles can only be recognised and studied with the assistance of scientific instruments; otherwise there is only be a kind of 'thinking about' sub-atomic particles. In any event, this is not consistent with the way dhammas are described in such suttas as 'The All'. > =============== > 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. > =============== J: There's nothing of 'happenstance' about the way that hearing about the world of dhammas can condition a beginning understanding of that world, first at the intellectual level and then at a more direct level. To know more about the 'true nature of samsara' it's necessary to appreciate that the conventional world is not the world in the absolute sense. > =============== > 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. > =============== J: The problem is not that actuality is conceptualised about (since the enlightened being does this also), but that neither the actuality or the conceptualising is seen for what it is. > =============== > 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. > =============== J: What is the relationship between this 'correcting of perception' and panna? Which comes first, would you say? Jon #113529 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 6:08 am Subject: [dsg] What Would Be Revising 2? Re: Revising 1: Arising of Mundane Paññaa jonoabb Hi Robert E (113217) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > ... > 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." > =============== J: Your question assumes that since I'm not 'doing' meditation I must be 'doing' pariyatti ;-)) That assumption is a mistaken one (but you are quite correct in suggesting that if I was, then it'd be taking me away from the present moment ;-)) > =============== > 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: Yes, it's of course correct to say that the concept of 'monitor' is formed up on the basis of the visible object currently being experienced. But my point was that it's not possible to come to understand more about visible object by focussing on, or analysing or deconstructing, the conventional object known as monitor. > =============== > 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. > =============== J: The first part of the Anapanasati Sutta describes the persons present; from memory, they were all monks of some considerable attainment. > =============== > 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. > =============== J: The mention of counting breaths is quite some way into the section of the Vism. If you pay regard to all the preceding material, it is clearly not a beginning step. But more crucially, the Vism does not say that counting breaths leads to calming a restless mind and generating kusala. It mentions the counting of breaths as a stage of development, i.e., in one who is well on the way already. > =============== > > 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? > =============== J: Er, will have to go back and find your original post. Will get back to you after I've dug it up. You have a short respite on this one ;-)) Jon #113530 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 6:10 am Subject: Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Reflection on corpses jonoabb Hi Alex (113245) --- 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? > =============== J: It'd be easier if we have a specific passage to discuss. Do you have one we could look at? Thanks. > =============== > 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. > =============== J: Not sure what you mean by 'radical impermanence'. The impermanence spoken of by the Buddha was the impermanence of dhammas (khandhas, ayatanas, dhatus, etc). To my understanding of the theory, when dhammas are seen as they truly are, there is at first the erosion of wrong view about dhammas and later of the lurking desire for continued existence (bhava tanha). The development of insight does not necessarily bring a dramatic reduction in the desire for sense objects, but this too is gently eroded over time. Jon #113531 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 6:14 am Subject: Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Reflection on corpses jonoabb Hi Alex (113245) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hi Jon, RobertE, all, > ... > 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 ... 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, ... 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? > =============== J: You are I think drawing attention to the description of changeability in the physical body, is that correct? To my reading, the gist of the passage is in the preceding paragraphs. The first para. concludes with this: "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." This says, as I read it, that when hardness is seen as only hardness, dispassion towards hardness develops. And then likewise for cohesion (the liquid property). As I see it, the description of changeability in the physical body is supplementary to these important aspects of the teaching. Jon #113532 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 6:16 am Subject: Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Modes of Materiality jonoabb Hi Robert E (113249) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > ... > 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. > =============== J: Yes, but like many of your paraphrases of passages from the suttas, the statement "We should strive to eradicate the defilements" is an interpretation of what was said rather than an actual quote ;-)) > =============== 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. > =============== J: Well for a start, without the context of the sutta as a whole, there could be no chance of having any idea what was meant by that passage. But taking the passage at face value, it seems more like a description of a person who has gained some proficiency than a recommendation for a practice by a beginner who has yet to master the basics, wouldn't you say ;-)) > =============== > 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. > =============== J: In practice though it's not a matter of 'returning' to the sutta, since the commentaries are typically a phrase-by-phrase explanation of the sutta text. So one never actually 'leaves' the sutta. > =============== > 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? > =============== J: To me, it's not a matter of accepting or not accepting the commentaries as the final authority, but of identifying what the commentarial position is. > =============== > 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. > =============== J: Yes, and for this reason there are then the sub-commentaries to explain the commentaries. You see, they thought of everything ;-)) Jon #113533 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 6:20 am Subject: Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Reflection on corpses jonoabb Hi Robert E (113250) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > ... > 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. > =============== J: I think you've misunderstood my comment. I was not dismissing the passages you were referring to, but saying that there was more to them that you were suggesting. Just to recap (since you may well ask me to ;-)). We were discussing the following passage from the Satipatthana Sutta and its commentary: ***************** Sutta: [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'... Commy: "This has been stated: By the existence of these three: life [ayu], warmth [usma], consciousness [vianam], 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." ***************** There was then the following exchange between us: ***************** J: To my reading, the terms life [ayu], warmth [usma], consciousness [vianam], are references to dhammas. R: 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. ***************** So it's not a matter of me/the commentaries dismissing anything said by the Buddha, but rather a difference of interpretation. You would see the passage as a disquisition on the mortality of beings, while the commentaries see it as a teaching on understanding the true characteristic of arising dhammas. > =============== > > 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. > =============== J: As I've commented before, your understanding of the Buddha's word is equally an interpretation. It's not a case of your view being the Buddha's actual words and mine being an 'interpretation' (read 'putting words into the Buddha's mouth') ! ;-)) > =============== > > 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: But the Buddha didn't actually say that ("Our own body will wind up just like this corpse"). What he said was, "as if he were to see a corpse cast away in a charnel ground, 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'..." That is not an instruction to us to reflect on our own mortality. It's a description of how a person with well-developed insight reacts (automatically) to the situation described. In my view it's not the intention of this passage that we should try to emulate the monk being so described. > =============== > 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. > =============== J: As mentioned before, the Buddha himself made the connection by saying "in short the 5 aggregates of clinging are suffering" Jon #113534 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 6:22 am Subject: Satipatthana Sutta - Cemetary Contemplation (was, Re: A lovely dream ...) jonoabb Hi Alex (113383) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello Jon, all, > ... > 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. > =============== J: I didn't say that cemetery contemplation as taught by the Buddha was akusala. What I said was that for the likes of us any attempt at 'following' the description given in the suttas would inevitably involve a lot of akusala. This is because we do not have the developed level of panna to 'remain focussed on' a given object. > =============== > "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. > =============== J: Agreed. Nothing wrong per se with conventional speech, nor with conceptualising for that matter. Both may be either kusala or akusala depending on the accumulated tendencies of the individual. Jon #113535 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 6:25 am Subject: Re: should one try one's best? jonoabb Hi Robert E (113387) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > ... > > 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? > =============== J: In the context of kamma (as cause) and vipaka (as result), both are mental dhammas. Kamma is the mental factor of cetana, while vipaka is the consciousness that experiences an object through one of the sense-doors. > =============== > > 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...? > > :-) > =============== J: Yes, I'd be happy to. I'll dig something up for discussion and post it. I'm sure Nina will have written something on this on the list. There's also UP. Then there's an entry in Nyanatiloka's Buddhist Dictionary. Jon #113536 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 6:40 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 3. Items 7 and 8. nilovg Dear Han, Op 14-feb-2011, om 12:18 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > With your assistance I begin to understand more and more of the > eight arisings. Previously, without your help, I could not > understand anything. I am really very grateful to you. ----- N: I am grateful to you for starting this discussion. Otherwise I would just have read over the items without going in to them more deeply. I knew that discussions would help. While writing one thinks more about them. Nina. #113537 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 6:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Reflection on corpses nilovg Dear Jon, Rob E, Op 14-feb-2011, om 15:20 heeft jonoabb het volgende geschreven: > J: To my reading, the terms life [ayu], warmth [usma], > consciousness [vianam], are references to dhammas. > > R: 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:So it's not a matter of me/the commentaries dismissing anything > said by the Buddha, but rather a difference of interpretation. You > would see the passage as a disquisition on the mortality of beings, > while the commentaries see it as a teaching on understanding the > true characteristic of arising dhammas. -------- N: Following with attention your discussion. I am involved, having just seen the corpse of my sister's partner and tomorrow is the cremation. Just thinking about my own immortality is not enough. It is the teaching on understanding the true characteristic of arising dhammas, and this is what the Buddha taught for fortyfive years. I am thinking of Kh Sujin's:' just as this moment'. Citta that appears, or feeling, or ruupa, they all go, go, go. They appear just for a moment and then gone. This helps much more than contemplating: I also have to die. Because these are only words. But insight has to be developed of present dhammas, and this is so powerful that it can eventually lead to eradication of clinging to life. But as Jon also said; it is a gentle eroding. Nina. #113538 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 7:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: should one try one's best? nilovg Dear Jon and Rob E, Op 14-feb-2011, om 15:25 heeft jonoabb het volgende geschreven: > 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...? > > > > :-) > > =============== > > J: Yes, I'd be happy to. I'll dig something up for discussion and > post it. I'm sure Nina will have written something on this on the > list. There's also UP. Then there's an entry in Nyanatiloka's > Buddhist Dictionary. ------ N: See my studies on Visuddhimagga Ch XVII and Tiika. pt. just helped with the files where these are to be found. But it is not a matter of knowing the names of the links, it is not theory! Nina. #113539 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 8:33 am Subject: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing truth_aerator Dear Nina, all, >A: And the Buddha avoided saying "anatta as characteristic". He >is nowhere directly quoted of saying anattalakkhana. But he does >talk about anattasanna (perception/recognition of anatta). > ------ >N: It has been explained in the commentary that this kind of >sa~n~naa accompanies insight. >I quote from the Sangitiisutta and co. and co. to the Mahaa- >raahulovadasutta: What I've meant to say is that once one learns about anatta, etc, it should be used to eradicate tanha and avijja. IMHO theoretical acceptance is not enough. Views need to lead to actual results (cessation of unwholesome tendencies, development of good qualities, etc). When this perception (aniccasanna or anattasanna or dukkhasanna) arises, of course some sort of insight is there. When enough of them arise, real breakthrough can occur. IMHO. With metta, Alex #113540 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 9:24 am Subject: Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Reflection on corpses truth_aerator Hello Jon, all, >А: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. >================================================================== > J: Not sure what you mean by 'radical impermanence'. The >impermanence spoken of by the Buddha was the impermanence of dhammas >(khandhas, ayatanas, dhatus, etc). By radical impermanence what I've meant was the teaching of "trillions of dhammas per second". IMHO the point of Buddha's teaching was to remove all craving tanha. To remove craving you need to see the drawbacks of the object of craving. That trillions of dhammas arise and fall per second is not that painful by itself. But the body aging, becoming sick, loosing its vigor and vitality, experiencing more age related pain and degenerative diseases - that is painful and can serve a good reason not to be attached to the body. >A: 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? > > =============== > >J: It'd be easier if we have a specific passage to discuss. Do >you have one we could look at? Thanks. ex: "[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'..." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.010.than.html [1] "'The perception of the unattractive, when developed & pursued, is of great fruit, of great benefit. It gains a footing in the Deathless, has the Deathless as its final end':... [2] "'The perception of death, when developed & pursued, is of great fruit, of great benefit. It gains a footing in the Deathless, has the Deathless as its final end': http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an07/an07.046.than.html With metta, Alex #113541 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 9:38 am Subject: Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Reflection on corpses truth_aerator Hi Jon, all, > J: You are I think drawing attention to the description of >changeability in the physical body, is that correct? It compares the duration of existence, and other aspects as well. "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.'"..." Even external earth is impermanent, nothing to say about this body. This can create a lot of nibbida. Please note that the Buddha is not talking about momentariness (radical impermanence or khanikavada). With metta, Alex #113542 From: "selamat rodjali" Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 12:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Javana in the First citta vithi in Tadanuvattika-manodvara-vithi nana_palo Dear Nina, So eventhough the object is paramattha, the citta could be akusala? Is it right? Thank you Kind regards, Selamat <...>-- N: First there is a sense-door process of cittas that has a ruupa which is a sense object (say colour) as object, and then in the immdiately following mind-door process (tadanuvattika-manodvara- vithi) the cittas have the same sense object, and also the javanacittas are similar to those in the preceding sense-door process. Thus, if these were akusala cittas rooted in lobha, also the javana cittas of the following mind-door process are akusala cittas rooted in lobha. Does this answer your question? <...> #113543 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 5:11 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 sarahprocter... Hi Rob E & all, --- On Sun, 13/2/11, sarah abbott wrote: R:>I wonder if there is some discussion of what is considered "rite and ritual" somewhere...? I know meditation gets thrown in there by dear friend Ken H., and by others in looking at that category. ... S:> We all mean different things by "meditation". If it is bhavana - the development of right understanding, the development of samatha and vipassana, then it is not silabbataparamasa. If however we have an idea of "meditation" as being a particular posture, a particular technique, a particular form of activity as being the path, then it is silabbataparamasa, but we've discussed this before:-) There's a MN sutta I'd like to quote from for you, but it'll have to be later.... .... S: (later!) from my previous post #99295, this is what I was thinking of: From MN 77, Mahaasakuludaayi Sutta, ~Naa.namoli,Bodhi transl.: The Buddha: "But Udaayin, how many qualities do you see in me because of which my disciples honour, respect, revere, and venerate me, and live in dependence on me, honouring and respecting me?" "Venerable Sir, I see five qualities in the Blessed One because of which his disciples honour, respect, revere, and venerate him, and live in dependence on him, honouring and respecting him. What are the five? First, venerable sir, the Blessed One eats little and commends eating little.....Again, venerable sir, the Blessed One is content with any kind of robe and commends contentment with any kind of robe......content with any kind of almsfood.....content with any kind of resting place.....Again, venerable sir, the Blessed One is secluded and commends seclusion; this I see as the fifth quality of the Blessed One......because of which his disciples honour, respect, revere, and venerate him, and live in dependence of him, honouring and respecting him." "Suppose, Udaayin, my disciples honoured, respected, revered and venerated me, and lived in dependence on me, honouring and respecting me, with the thought: 'The recluse Gotama eats little and commends eating little.' Now there are disciples of mine who live on a cupful or half a cupful of food, a bilba fruit's or half a bilva fruit's quantity of food, while I sometimes eat the full contents of my almsbowl or even more. So if my disciples honoured me.....then those disciples of mind who live on a cupful of food...should not honour, respect, revere, and venerate me for this quality, nor should they live in dependence on me, honouring and respecting me." S: The same follows for the example of the robe, kind of almsfood, kind of resting place and finally seclusion: "Suppose, Udaayin, my disciples honoured, respected, revered, and venerated me, and lived in dependence on me, honouring and respecting me, with the thought: 'The recluse Gotama is secluded and commends seclusion.' Now there are disciples of mine who are forest dwellers, dwellers in remote resting places, who live withdrawn in remote jungle-thicket resting places and return to the midst of the Sangha once each half-month for the recitation of the Paatimokkha. But I sometimes live surrounded by bhikkhus and bhikkhuniis, by men and women lay-followers, by kings and kings' ministers, by other sectarians and their disciples. So if my disciples honoured me.....with the thought: 'The recluse Gotama is secluded and commends seclusion,' then those disciples of mine who are forest dwellers....should not honour, respect.....me for this quality, nor should they live in dependence on me, honouring and respecting me. Thus Udaayin, it is not because of these five qualities that my disciples honour, respect, revere, and venerate me, and live in dependence on me, honouring and respecting me. "However, Udaayin, there are five other qualities because of which my disciples honour, respect, revere and venerate me, and live in dependence on me, honouring and respecting me. What are the five?" S: The sutta then proceeds with a description of: 1. The Higher Virtue 2. Knowledge and Vision 3. The Higher Wisdom 4. The Four Noble Truths 5. The Way to Develop Wholesome States, beginning with the Four Foundations of Mindfulness. **** S: Also of relevance on "meditation" is another sutta in MN, which I've also quoted from before in #38683: MN 50, Maaratajjaniiya Sutta, refers to a group of ascetics with wrong view and practice: " 'These bald-pated recluses, these swarthy menial offspring of the Kinsman’s feet, claim: 'We are meditators, we are meditators!' and with shoulders drooping, heads down and all limp, they meditate, premeditate, out-meditate, and mismeditate. "'Just as an owl on a branch waiting for a mouse meditates, premeditates, out-meditates, and mismeditates, or just as a jackal on a river-bank waiting for fish meditates, premeditates, out-meditates, and mismeditates, or just as a cat by a door-post or a dust-bin or a drain, waiting for a mouse, meditates, premeditates, out-meditates, and mismeditates, or just as a donkey unladen, standing by a door-post or a dust-bin or a drain meditates, premeditates, out-meditates, and mismeditates, so too, these bald-pated recluses, these swarthy menial offspring of the Kinsman’s feet, claim: 'We are meditators, we are meditators!' and with shoulders drooping, heads down and all limp, they meditate, premeditate, out-meditate, and mismeditate.'" *** [The Pali for these terms used here are: jhaayanti, pajjhaayanti, nijjhaayanti, apajjhaayanti.] MN 108, Gopakamoggallaana Sutta, also uses the same terms in: "'What kind of meditation did the Blessed One not praise? Here Brahmin, someone abides with his mind obsessed by sensual lust, a prey to sensual lust, and he does not understand as it actually is the escape from arisen sensual lust. While he harbours sensual lust within, he meditates, premeditates, out-meditates, and mismeditates…'" S: This is a little long. Just enjoying having access to our texts whilst in Sydney for a short while longer! Metta Sarah ====== #113544 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 7:23 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing sarahprocter... Hi Howard (& Alex), I appreciate your joining in the thread. I know Alex has responded already. --- On Sat, 12/2/11, upasaka@... wrote: >P. S. Getting more serious, when I eat do you two get full? When I sleep, do you become rested? .... S: When we say "I eat" or "I sleep", there are many different dhammas as you know. Each one arises by conditions and in turn acts as a condition in many ways for other dhammas. The idea that there is anything other than these particular dhammas is an illusion. .... >Does my kamma lead to your vipaka? .... S: Kamma just leads to vipaka, again by kamma- and other conditions. When we refer to certain dhammas, certain moments of seeing or hearing, for example, as being mine or yours, it's just referring to particular sets or series of dhammas. Of course, we continue to use "I" and "you", names and labels for convenience. What is important is the understanding, not the label. .... >I think one needs to give a bit of thought to what one really means when saying that one shouldn't consider anything to be "I, me, or mine." It's not meaningless, of course, but the meaning is deep, and not simple, and if it is understood wrongly it can lead to quite absurd and false conclusions. ... S: I agree with this. However, it's the accumulated wrong view and ignorance which lead to the "absurd and false conclusions", surely? Metta Sarah =========== #113545 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 7:34 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Discussions in Bangkok with K.Sujin, Jan 2011(7) sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- On Sat, 12/2/11, Robert E wrote: >> S: I would say the emphasis is on sati-sampajanna, awareness with right understanding leading to vipassana, regardless of the nama or rupa appearing whilst engaged in anapanasati or any other time. > = = = = = = = R:>I'm interested in sati-sampajanna - would the right understanding be different from the awareness? It seems like clear mindfulness of the object would have right understanding, but maybe it is a separate quality...? ... S: Yes, sati is awareness and sampajanna is panna or right understanding (samma ditthi). Awareness is aware and right understanding understands. There can be awareness without understanding, such as at moments of kindness or generosity, but there cannot be any right understanding without awareness. Both are path factors that have to be developed. Only right understanding can know the characteristic of awareness and the characteristic of understanding when they are experienced. Pls ask anything further! .... >>S: ...Yes, the path is about detachment, "letting go", understanding what appears, rather than what we'd like to appear. R:> Yes, I like that point very much. Even just noticing that what is happening now is "not what you'd like to appear" is educational. It's funny to see that, even though you can't change 'what is,' you can get involved in wanting it to be different anyway. A strange quality of the mind. ... S: So gradually, panna (right understanding) can know the difference between awareness of what is experienced vs attachment which would like it another way or which clings to it. .... R:>Well that would really be special. I'll keep my green tea geared up for such an occasion to arise. :-) ... S: :-)) Metta Sarah ====== #113546 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 7:46 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Techno-dhamma discussion - meditation sarahprocter... Dear Alex, --- On Mon, 31/1/11, truth_aerator wrote: >>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!) ... A:> Well, it seems to me that meditation is better than doing something akusala. .... S: How does one judge what activity is kusala and what akusala? For example, you'd say that "meditation" as in sitting quietly, focussing on the breath or sensations is kusala and that washing dishes is akusala. What determines what is kusala and what is 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. .... S: Again, what is it that temporarily "suppresses the hindrances or defilements"? What is it that leads to the development of right view and the path according to the Buddha? ... A:>Even if samatha meditation was with wrong view (if such is even possible), ... S: Impossible! When wrong view arises, no kusala of any kind arises at such a time. Samatha (calm), only arises with kusala cittas. The idea of "doing samatha meditation" is wrong view. ... A:>...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. .... S: What suppresses the hindrances? Samatha with wring view? Right view is not concerned with waiting until "hindrances are knocked out". Right view has to know any reality appearing. This is why the first kind of citta to be known in the Satipatthana Sutta is citta with lobha. This is also why, as discussed, the path can only begin to develop in the human realm where wrong view arises, where attachment to all the senses arises and so on. If such kilesa (defilements) are not known when they arise, they can never be understood and eradicated. I agree that right view knows the wrong views and it is through the development of right view that samatha also develops. Metta Sarah ====== #113547 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Feb 15, 2011 1:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Javana in the First citta vithi in Tadanuvattika-manodvara-vithi nilovg Dear Selamat, Op 14-feb-2011, om 9:51 heeft selamat rodjali het volgende geschreven: > So eventhough the object is paramattha, the citta could be akusala? > Is it right? > > > -------- N: The object experienced in a sense-door process is always a paramattha dhamma, a ruupa. Visible object, sound, etc. are paramattha dhammas and usually clinging arises to these objects, already in a sense-door process. Because of ignorance it is not known that they are paramattha dhammas which fall away immediately. They seem to last. Nina. #113548 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue Feb 15, 2011 3:14 am Subject: Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? kenhowardau Hi Sarah, Thanks for the additional pointers on jhana absorption and the divine realms. So the reason the Buddha didn't visit his former jhana teachers was not that he couldn't communicate with them in their new realms, but because there were no sense objects there for them to learn about. ---------------- <. . .> S: So much of our everyday chatter is just curiosity.... everyday, sama lobha, isn't it? ---------------- KH: Sama lobha, that's a nice sounding name. I presume it means equanimous attachment. Innocuous enough but not the path, and therefore not safe. ------------------ > S: I forget if I mentioned that yesterday I had a little chat with my mother trying to explain what cittas are. ------------------ KH: They are easy to explain, aren't they, and at the same time almost impossibly hard. But your mother is in good hands. :-) ------------------------ <. . .> > S: Hope you're having some good surf! I still haven't used my surf-board in the garage here, but lots of swimming. ------------------------ KH: Not much actual board-riding lately due to my various difficulties. But I have bought a kayak, which is fun and good exercise. Ken H #113549 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Feb 14, 2011 11:50 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah (and Alex) - In a message dated 2/14/2011 10:23:13 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi Howard (& Alex), I appreciate your joining in the thread. I know Alex has responded already. --- On Sat, 12/2/11, upasaka@... wrote: >P. S. Getting more serious, when I eat do you two get full? When I sleep, do you become rested? .... S: When we say "I eat" or "I sleep", there are many different dhammas as you know. Each one arises by conditions and in turn acts as a condition in many ways for other dhammas. The idea that there is anything other than these particular dhammas is an illusion. ------------------------------------------------------- I don't claim that there is anything beside these. What I claim is that these arise and cease within streams of such, the dhammas in the streams being closely interrelated, with namarupic streams being distinguishable among themselves. It IS possible to distinguish you from Jon, for example, and it is not meaningless for you to speak of "I" and of "you" when talking to him. ------------------------------------------------------- .... >Does my kamma lead to your vipaka? .... S: Kamma just leads to vipaka, again by kamma- and other conditions. -------------------------------------------------------------------- You are ignoring the issue (as laid out in my paragraph above). When the Buddha said that each person is the inheritor of his/her own kamma, we wasn't being a fool. Would it have been proper for a scholar-disciple to have corrected him?!! ------------------------------------------------------------------- When we refer to certain dhammas, certain moments of seeing or hearing, for example, as being mine or yours, it's just referring to particular sets or series of dhammas. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Yes!! Of course!! Who says otherwise?? ------------------------------------------------------------------ Of course, we continue to use "I" and "you", names and labels for convenience. What is important is the understanding, not the label. It is more than convenience. It reflects fact. --------------------------------------------------------------- Yes. And what should be the understanding? It should include interrelationship. -------------------------------------------------------------- .... >I think one needs to give a bit of thought to what one really means when saying that one shouldn't consider anything to be "I, me, or mine." It's not meaningless, of course, but the meaning is deep, and not simple, and if it is understood wrongly it can lead to quite absurd and false conclusions. ... S: I agree with this. However, it's the accumulated wrong view and ignorance which lead to the "absurd and false conclusions", surely? ----------------------------------------------------------------- It is also a misapplication of certain facts by ignoring other facts. --------------------------------------------------------------- Metta Sarah ==================================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #113550 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Feb 15, 2011 12:11 am Subject: Freudian Slip Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing upasaka_howard Hi again, Sarah & Alex - In a message dated 2/15/2011 7:50:39 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, upasaka@... writes: When the Buddha said that each person is the inheritor of his/her own kamma, we wasn't being a fool. ================================== LOLOL! I wrote "we" instead of "he". I suppose that I unconsciously couldn't stand to even WRITE "he" and "fool" in the same sentence when speaking of the Buddha!! (It's interesting that the "h" key and the "w" key are not at all close on the keyboard, and yet I made the replacement!!) With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #113551 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Feb 15, 2011 6:45 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 3. Items 7 and 8. nilovg Dear Ken O Op 14-feb-2011, om 12:08 heeft Ken O het volgende geschreven: > which part of the path of discrimination you are studying ----- N: As Han answered: the abhisamaya kathaa. --------- K: But attainment of magga citta is the eradication of the underlying > tendecies that condition the arising of defilements. cutting the > underlying > tendecies is the cutting of the defilements. > > Please continue to share I find this study very interesting. And > thank you for > sharing. > > > ------- N: I appreciate your interest. You understood well. Nina. #113552 From: Ken O Date: Tue Feb 15, 2011 7:08 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 3. Items 7 and 8. ashkenn2k Dear Nina and Han I have difficulty trying to find abhisamaya kathaa as I tend to search for the English words than the Pali ones, could you help me by pointing out which chapter in Path of Discrimination. Many thanks Ken O #113553 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Feb 15, 2011 7:20 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 1. nilovg Dear Ken O, Op 15-feb-2011, om 16:08 heeft Ken O het volgende geschreven: > I have difficulty trying to find abhisamaya kathaa as I tend to > search for the > English words than the Pali ones, could you help me by pointing out > which > chapter in Path of Discrimination. > > > ------- This you can find in Ch 4, no 1, of the Latent Tendencies study. I quote part: The Path of Discrimination (Pa.tisambhidaamagga, Khuddaka Nikaaya), in Treatise XXIII, the section on Convergence(Abhisamaya Kathaa: penetration, at enlightenment) explains about the defilements that are to be eradicated by the noble eightfold Path. After dealing with the Path-factors and all the enlightenment factors it is said that convergence is in the sense of end, nibbaana which merges in the deathless is convergence. We then read: How then, is convergence that much only? No. At the moment of stream-entry path: there is convergence of seeing, which is right view (and so on).. knowledge of destruction in the sense of cutting off is convergence.... in the sense of end, nibbaana which merges in the deathless is convergence. How then, is convergence that much only? No. At the moment of the fruition of stream-entry: there is convergence of seeing, which is right view (and so on)... knowledge of non-arising in the sense of tranquillization is convergence... in the sense of end, nibbaana which merges in the deathless is convergence. How then, is convergence that much only? No. At the moment of the once-return path: there is convergence of seeing, which is right view (and so on)... How then, is convergence that much only? No. At the moment of the fruition of the once-return path: there is convergence of seeing, which is right view (and so on)... At the moment of the non-return path... at the moment of the fruition of the non-return path... at the moment of the arahant path... at the moment of the fruition of arahanship: there is convergence of seeing, which is right view (and so on)... knowledge of non-arising in the sense of tranquillization is convergence, in the sense of end, nibbaana which merges in the deathless is convergence. When the noble person abandons defilements, does he then abandon past defilements, abandon future defilements, abandon presently-arisen defilements? The commentary to the Pa.tisambhidaamagga gives the following explanations. It states that the venerable Saariputta wanted to separate convergence of Path and of Fruition. He wanted to answer to those who asked whether the noble person abandons past defilements, abandons future defilements, abandons presently-arisen defilements. This was an opportunity for him to correct those who objected. We read in the text of the Pa.tisambhidaamagga (11): [Suppose that] he abandons past defilements. If he abandons past defilements, he destroyed what has already been destroyed, causes to cease what has already ceased, causes to vanish what has already vanished, causes to subside what has already subsided. What is past, which is non-existent, that he abandons? He does not abandon past defilements. [Suppose that] he abandons future defilements. If he abandons future defilements, he abandons what has not been born, he abandons what has not been generated, he abandons what has not been arisen, he abandons what has not become manifest. What is future, which is non-existent, that he abandons? He does not abandon future defilements. [Suppose that] he abandons presently-arisen defilements. If he abandons presently-arisen defilements, then though inflamed with greed, he abandons greed, though corrupted by hate, he abandons hate, though deluded, he abandons delusion, though shackled, he abandons conceit, though misapprehending, he abandons wrong view, though distracted, he abandons agitation, though undecided, he abandons uncertainty, though having inveterate habits, he abandons underlying-tendency, dark and bright ideas (dhammas) occur coupled together, and there is development of a path that has defilement. He does not abandon past defilements and he does not abandon future defilements and he does not abandon presently-arisen defilements. This refers to medium defilements, pariyutthaana kilesa, defilements arising with the akusala citta. ----- Nina. #113554 From: "Swee Boon" Date: Tue Feb 15, 2011 8:42 am Subject: Re: A Question: What are the Direct Causes of Kamma?/Nina nidive Hi Howard, > Volition is mental, a cetasika. > Without prior physical contact, I can simply lift my finger due to volition. > What causes that volition? That is what I'm looking for. I believe that contact with the mind is the cause for that volition. That volition translates into contact with the body, causing the finger to be lifted. If someone has his finger cut off due to accident, he may have volition to move the missing finger, but due to his physical body limitation, that volition does not translate into contact with the body. Swee Boon #113555 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Feb 15, 2011 4:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Question: What are the Direct Causes of Kamma?/Nina upasaka_howard Hi, Swee Boon - In a message dated 2/15/2011 11:43:10 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, nidive@... writes: Hi Howard, > Volition is mental, a cetasika. > Without prior physical contact, I can simply lift my finger due to volition. > What causes that volition? That is what I'm looking for. I believe that contact with the mind is the cause for that volition. That volition translates into contact with the body, causing the finger to be lifted. If someone has his finger cut off due to accident, he may have volition to move the missing finger, but due to his physical body limitation, that volition does not translate into contact with the body. Swee Boon =============================== Thank you for this further explanation. But for further clarification I ask the following: What mental contact do you have in mind? Thinking? Recalling? With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #113556 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Feb 15, 2011 10:01 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Techno-dhamma discussion - meditation truth_aerator Dear Sarah, all, > A:> Well, it seems to me that meditation is better than doing >something akusala. > .... > S: How does one judge what activity is kusala and what akusala? For >example, you'd say that "meditation" as in sitting quietly, >focussing on the breath or sensations is kusala and that washing >dishes is akusala. What determines what is kusala and what is >akusala? When properly samatha-ing, one abandons 5 hindrances, and for the longer one abandons the hindrances, the better. Then with the mind temporary purified from 5 hindrances, one can review what one has learned, and consider the Dhamma, past defilements, etc. IMHO with all other factors being equal, considering Dhamma immediately after samatha is better than considering it with a mind overrun by restlessness, sensual desire, etc. Even if (this is doubtful) the samatha meditation itself had some wrong view in it, one doesn't contemplate Dhamma while in it. One contemplates Dhamma after emerging from samatha, with 5 hindrances still knocked out (depending on factors such as the power of samatha achieved). Contemplating Dhamma while washing dishes, or after washing dishes is different due to 5 hindrances being present. ================================================================== 1) When all other things are equal, considering the Dhamma (or reflecting on past defilements) while 5 hindrances are suppressed (such as by samatha meditation) is far more productive than considering Dhamma while the hindrances are fully active. BTW, according to Abhidhamma you can't consider defilements exactly when they occur because they always occur in an akusala citta, and akusala citta cannot have panna. So even by Abhidhamma, you examine with panna the *past*, never current, moment of citta. 2) If one can't knock out 5 hindrances at least temporarily, then what makes you think that you can uproot them permanently? It is like trying to claim that "even though I can't swim for 2 minutes, I will swim for 2 hours". With metta, Alex #113557 From: "selamat rodjali" Date: Tue Feb 15, 2011 1:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Javana in the First citta vithi in Tadanuvattika-manodvara-vithi nana_palo Dear Nina, Very clear. Thank you for your help. Kind regards, Selamat rodjali Powered by Happiness Energy -----Original Message----- From: Nina van Gorkom <...> N: The object experienced in a sense-door process is always a paramattha dhamma, a ruupa. Visible object, sound, etc. are paramattha dhammas and usually clinging arises to these objects, already in a sense-door process. Because of ignorance it is not known that they are paramattha dhammas which fall away immediately. They seem to last. <...> #113558 From: han tun Date: Tue Feb 15, 2011 2:10 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 3. Items 7 and 8. hantun1 Dear Ken O (Nina), [Ken O] I have difficulty trying to find abhisamaya kathaa as I tend to search for the English words than the Pali ones, could you help me by pointing out which chapter in Path of Discrimination. [Han] It is Treatise XXIII On Convergence (page 386) of The Path of Discrimination. We had discussed on paragraphs 2, 11, and 12. The following are the earlier messages, where you had kindly shown your keen interest. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/113015 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/113050 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/113052 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/113069 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/113139 Kind regards, Han #113559 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Feb 15, 2011 2:22 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The clansman who is a beginner : one of the ancient wise ones? epsteinrob Hi Ken O. I've been enjoying your comments. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > KO: anicca is simply impermanent, rise and fall. conditioned dhamma is > inherently impermanent. Hence one cannot say let my form be thus or let my form > not be thus. Or in the analysis of 4NT by Ven Sariputtra, one cannot wish that > death dont come to oneself etc. this is the nature of dhamma, rise and fall, > suffering and not self, inherent in all conditioned dhamma, Yes, that is my understanding too. Even a single citta rises and then falls away, and it is in that rising and falling that the citta demonstrates anicca as its characteristic. So anicca is demonstrated in the smallest single moment, and also in the longer timespans of birth and death, multiple lifetimes, etc. > >Yes, and anatta reflects the complete lack of self-hood or entity that pertains > > >to a dhamma. It is a negative assertion. > > KO: In Buddhism, sensual pleasure is always describe as vile, low or > disgusting. These to many modern people as negative due to societal > conditioning, but such assertation are important because it leads to ultimate > happiness which is Nibbana which does not have a self at all. I didn't mean negative in that sense. I meant "negative" in the sense of "negating," that anatta does not mean that something is there, but that something is not there. Ken H. describes anatta as a "positive characteristic of dhammas," meaning it is an actual characteristic that can be discerned. I am saying that it is a characteristic of absence rather than presence. Anatta means that a dhamma is not self or part of self. The "not" is the characteristic and there is no such thing as an "anatta" that can be directly see, except in the absence of self. Hope that makes sense. > >I believe that things have characteristics, but you have to ask 'what is a > >characteristic?' Is it inherent? Is it static, like a mole on someone's face? Is > > > >it a function? Is a characteristic constrained by what we can identify? Is it > >the same every time? If vittaka strikes object A, does it behave exactly the > >same way when it strikes object B? Obviously every time there is a new set of > >conditions, all the functions and characteristics, while similar, are slightly > >different to accommodate a new object, new set of conditions, new combination of > > > >factors. It's a mistake, in my opinion, to overdue the idea of "inherent > >characteristics" to the point where we change them into static ideals, instead > >of recognizing investigating what happens in different circumstances. To say > >something has this characteristic or this function is general. How that applies > > >to a particular situation is specific to a particular set of conditions - at > >least that's what makes sense to me. And those conditions are unique each time > >they arise. > > KO: To a certain extent, conditions could be unique each time they arise but > the basic characteristic of dhamma of this uniquity always remain the same. > Just like the sciencetific elements table, the elements are basic and their > mixing produce unique situations. Just like when we are craving, it is always > accompanied by pleasure or indifferent. But there are different shades of > strength of craving and feelings that arise with it which this shades that > condition uniquity of experience of craving. Still the basic block remains the > same, craving and feelings (though there are many other factors) I agree with your analysis here, and think that you put it well. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #113560 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Feb 15, 2011 2:24 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. epsteinrob Hi Ken O. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Howard and Rob E > > There are references in suttas of monks being enlighted without jhanas. In the > > Aditta-pariyaya sutta, one thousand monks attain enlightment immediately after > Buddha finsih speaking sutta. There is no attainment of jhanas I think in those cases we should realize that there was a special factor that may have helped to enlighten those monks without the need for jhana - the Buddha was there! ;-) Can you imagine the effect that had on a monk's development? Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #113561 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Feb 15, 2011 2:29 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: should one try one's best? epsteinrob Hi Ken O. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Rob E > > > >Well, that is my question. Several folks here are saying that only intention is > > >kamma, and that actions are neither kusala or akusala in themselves. I have been > > > >saying that actions also are kusala or akusala, not just mental state or > >intention. If killing is *always* bad, no matter what the intention, then the > >*act* is akusala, not only the intention. That is what we have been arguing > >about. > > KO: To me, intention is not easy to identify as a dhamma because it could be > vittaka or chanda (wish to do or purpose). We cannot say intention is kamma as > it is a different dhamma but they are right to say that actions or kamma are > neither kusala or akusla. Why because kamma is will or an act, that act is > dependent on the kuasala or aksuala cetasikas that accompanied it. Similiarly > to vittaka and chanda, it depends on the cetasikas that accompanied it. Can you explain a little more about how kamma is not intention but is "will or an act?" Also, I understand what you said about kusala and akusala cetasikas determining the quality of the act; that makes sense. But I wonder why certain acts, such as killing, etc., are *always* akusala if it is only dependent on accompanying cetasikas. I'm still struggling with that idea. Buddha said not to drink alcohol. He didn't say "alcohol is okay with kusala cetasikas." Can you explain this? Thanks. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #113562 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue Feb 15, 2011 4:45 pm Subject: Re: wisdom and doing kenhowardau Hi Howard and Sarah, Interrupting briefly: --------- <. . .> > > S: The idea that there is anything other than these particular dhammas is an illusion. > H: I don't claim that there is anything beside these. -------- KH: That's a good start. ---------------------- > H: What I claim is that these arise and cease within streams of such, ---------------------- KH: (!) But isn't a stream "something besides"? If a stream really existed it would have to be classified as "other than" a single-moment dhamma wouldn't it? ------------------------------- > H: the dhammas in the streams being closely interrelated, with namarupic streams being distinguishable among themselves. It IS possible to distinguish you from Jon, for example, ------------------------------- KH: Whether you call "Jon" "I" and "you" namarupic streams, sentient beings, abiding entities or concepts-of-self, it's all the same thing. ------------------------------------------------------ > H: and it is not meaningless for you to speak of "I" and of "you" when talking to him. ------------------------------------------------------ KH: It is not meaningless in the conventional sense, but conventional meaning is immaterial to satipatthana. In satipatthana, dhammas are indistinguishable from each other; they contain no concept of "Jon" "I" "you" etc, or anything pertaining thereto. And that's the sort of understanding we should be working on. There is no point in trying to find links between dhammas and concepts. There aren't any! Ken H #113563 From: Vince Date: Tue Feb 15, 2011 7:11 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A Question: What are the Direct Causes of Kamma?/Nina cerovzt@... Dear Howard, Nina.. you wrote: >H: Perhaps a subliminal conditionality pattern along the lines of thinking >->emoting/desiring -> energy ->> cetana cycles back again and again, building >in intensity, and should > the willing become strong enough (i.e., a threshold >being reached), > resultant willed action occurs. [..] > N: Could you elaborate somewhat more why you find this question > important? Volition accompanies each citta, but I think you refer to kusala > cetanaa and akusala cetanaa of the intensity of kamma? I wonder if Howard asked about manosañcetanā?. I was reading the explanation of volition in "The Conditionality of Life (Nutriment-Condition)", and I don't understand this: "Without contact, citta and cetasikas could not experience any object, thus, contact supports them" and later it says: "volition, manosañcetanā, this is cetanā cetasika which accompanies all eightynine types of citta" From the first sentence, it seems there is not volition while there is not contact. From the second sentence, if there is delay between the finger's movement and the conscious choosing to move it, It would mean there is a first citta knowing the object and a following citta "reviewing" the previous one?. Can somebody clarify this point? Here a link to the text: http://www.zolag.co.uk/conditions/html_node/Nutriment_002dCondition.html#Nutrime\ nt_002dCondition "As to the mental nutriment which is contact, phassa, this is a cetasika which contacts the object so that citta and the accompanying cetasikas can experience it. Without contact citta and cetasikas could not experience any object, thus, contact supports them, it is a mental nutriment for them[..]. As to the mental nutriment which is volition, manosañcetanā 5, this is cetanā cetasika which accompanies all eightynine types of citta, thus it can be of the jāti which is kusala, akusala, vipāka or kiriya. It coordinates the tasks of the citta and cetasikas it accompanies, and it maintains and supports them; thus, it conditions them by way of nutriment-condition. It also conditions the rūpa produced by citta by way of nutriment-condition. As we have seen, cetanā conditions the associated dhammas also by way of conascent kamma-condition, sahajāta kamma-paccaya (see Ch 11). [..] Thus, at each moment the three mental nutriments of contact, volition and citta support and maintain the dhammas arising together with them, and the rūpa produced by them, by way of nutriment-condition." best #113564 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Feb 16, 2011 1:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A Question: What are the Direct Causes of Kamma?/Nina nilovg Hi Howard, Op 14-feb-2011, om 14:56 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I would like to know what > > Abhidhamma teaches as the detectable (experiential) basis for > > volition. I > > consider this a very practical and important matter. > -------- > N: Could you elaborate somewhat more why you find this question > important? > =========================== > The sense of personal self is closely tied to willing and to the > mistaken and incoherent notion of "free" will. There is the seeming > of willing > as random or self-caused, and this reinforces the sense of an > actor. This is > why I believe that a knowledge, theoretical, at least, if not > experiential, of the causal conditions for will is important. ------- N: Yes, good point. People think of free will, but the question is: which one? Since volition cetasika arises and falls away with each citta. -------- > H:When one comes to see the conditional nature of willing, one also > sees > its impersonality, and the heart is taken out of the illusion of > personal > self. > > ------- N: One cannot select kusala volition one wishes to have, beyond control. This does not mean that there cannot be a change from akusala to kusala. I use an old post I wrote before: < We read in the (Expositor p. 100): As to the word 'bent on' , the Pali has: pari.naamita, bend to, change into. There can be a change from akusala to kusala if one understands the right conditions to be cultivated. An abundance of right reflection is also a condition for kusala. We need good friends who give us stimulating talks.> N: When I first came to Kh Sujin's house I did not like flies. We watched them eating some crumbs and Kh Sujin said; 'let them enjoy this'. This changed my attitude towards insects. They also have cittas, feelings. I even started to like snakes, and we had them in our garden. This as an example that one's attitude can be changed from akusala to kusala. ------- Nina. #113565 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Feb 16, 2011 1:35 am Subject: the commentaries. nilovg Dear Rob E, I just came across a text about the weight of the commentaries that has been discussed before. Rob K quoted this one. The Commentaries hold great weight in the Theravada. IB Horner (past president of the Pali text Society) writes ""The prime object of every Commentary is to make the meanings of the words and phrases in the canonical passages it is elucidating abundantly clear, definite, definitive even....This is to preserve the Teachings of the Buddha as nearly as possible in the sense intended, and as conveyed by the succession of teachers, acariyaparama. Always there were detractors, always there were and still are "improvers" ready with their own notions. Through friends and enemies alike deleterous change and deterioration in the word of the Buddha might intervene for an indefinite length of time. The Commentaries are the armour and protection against such an eventuality. AS they hold a unique position as preservers and interpreters of true Dhamma, it is essential not only to follow them carefully and adopt the meaning they ascribe to a word or phrase each time they commnet on it. They are as closed now as is the Pali canon. No aditions to their corpus or subtractions from it are to contemplated, and no commentary written in later days could be included in it.""endquote Horner. pxiii Clarifier of the Sweet Meaning" PAli Text Society 1978. ****** Nina. #113566 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Feb 16, 2011 2:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. nilovg Hi Howard (and Kevin at end), Op 14-feb-2011, om 14:41 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > in my opinion, you make too little of jhana - as some others make too > much. > The Buddha defined right concentration to be the jhanas, and he taught > elsewhere of jhanas as temporarily suppressing the hindrances, > making the > mind a malleable and useful tool, and cultivating the mind and > preparing it > for mindful examination of dhammas by weakening the ongoing, > background > force of the hindrances. The Buddha put forward right concentration > as part > of the 8-fold noble path, not an unappreciated stepchild. It was > only one of > eight, but an essential one, and not just a pleasant vacation spot. --------- N: Each person is so different, with different accumulations. We never know what inclinations someone else accumulated in the past. For those who have accumulations for jhaana, they can have concentration to the level of jhaana, and this is right concentration, concentration that is kusala. However, to be right concentration of the eightfold Path when it is still mundane (and then not all eight factors arise together, there being no siila factors or only one of these at a time) the object is naama or ruupa. Right concentration of the eightfold Path has to arise together with right understanding of the eightfold Path. When the Path is lokuttara, right concentration is of the level at least of the first jhaana, and this means, of the level of the first jhaana also for those who did not develop mundane jhaana. When the Buddha spoke about right concentration as the four jhaanas he thought of those who had developed jhaana. He did not say, as we have often repeated: everyone has to develop jhaana. When people talk about jhaana it is good to realise; are they in jhaana now? Why not be aware of what appears now, even if it is thinking about jhaana and wondering about sutta texts. Otherwise one thinks of the future all the time. Jhaana may be in the future, who knows? I quote some of Sarah's renderings of Bgk discussions: Samatha: Instead of thinking of developing samatha without any understanding, how about having metta more and more in daily life? If you don't have metta, but want to develop samatha, what's the use? There are many, many opportunities for metta now. If one knows the citta at this moment, one knows what samatha is. If one doesn't know, samatha cannot develop. Only panna knows, not "I" who tries to develop it without knowing anatta, without understanding the citta now. Is there attachment now? If we're not sure, it shows that we're not like those who really knew and saw the danger of sensuous objects. "Probably" - not the moment of developing samatha. So now there are moments of calm. Having such moments is not enough, there must be development. Why does one want more and more kusala without knowing the akusala? Samatha development means knowing the citta. It's very, very difficult. That's why Sariputta praised Moggallana for his skills. There has to be understanding of both samatha and vipassana - kusala from the beginning. Just wanting and wanting to focus on an object is not samatha. Sarah: 2. Some of Kevin's recent points discussed : Wishing to be calm is not samatha at all, it's wanting to gain something, not seeing the danger of anatta. Calm through understanding leads to more calm. Not understanding the meaning of samatha - all kusala is calm. Calm or not calm, a reality that can be known. He doesn't know that panna can arise and know any reality at any time. All realities can be the object of right understanding. Who can stop the moment of samatha? Who can plan to sit or select an object? The dhammas involved are already conditioned. For example, who is thinking about seeing while seeing has arisen and fallen away? Many moments like this all day, no self that can select an object. ------- N: This shows that samatha can arise because of conditions, but that nobody can select it. BTW an aside (my eye fell on a text discussed before): Before we discussed that through insight one understands: everybody is the owner of his kamma (kammassakata ~naa.na) and Kh Sujin said this is understood from the first stage of tender insight. Then one understands already that a reality such as seeing is the result of kamma and that nobody can change it. ****** Nina. #113567 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Feb 16, 2011 12:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Sarah) - In a message dated 2/15/2011 7:51:12 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard and Sarah, Interrupting briefly: --------- <. . .> > > S: The idea that there is anything other than these particular dhammas is an illusion. > H: I don't claim that there is anything beside these. -------- KH: That's a good start. ------------------------------------------------- Whew! Gee, thanks! (I guess most folks like it and speak approvingly when someone says something they agree with! ;-) ----------------------------------------------- ---------------------- > H: What I claim is that these arise and cease within streams of such, ---------------------- KH: (!) But isn't a stream "something besides"? If a stream really existed it would have to be classified as "other than" a single-moment dhamma wouldn't it? -------------------------------------------------- Are you pretending to not know what I mean? Sarah isn't afraid to speak of groups. The Buddha wasn't afraid to speak of aggregates. The streams are conventionally designated collections of dhammas that are interrelated among themselves more closely and essentially than to other dhammas. They are not delusional as would be unicorns, for example. Please don't pretend that this is nonsense, for to do so would be nonsense. --------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------- > H: the dhammas in the streams being closely interrelated, with namarupic streams being distinguishable among themselves. It IS possible to distinguish you from Jon, for example, ------------------------------- KH: Whether you call "Jon" "I" and "you" namarupic streams, sentient beings, abiding entities or concepts-of-self, it's all the same thing. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- You're being sloppy with thought and language when you say that. It's analogous to saying that all cars (or even all vehicles) are the same thing, largely consist of similar parts. Moreover, if you didn't distinguish between you and me or between you and Sarah (and so on), you wouldn't be having these conversations. So, please stop the B.S., Ken. ------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------ > H: and it is not meaningless for you to speak of "I" and of "you" when talking to him. ------------------------------------------------------ KH: It is not meaningless in the conventional sense, but conventional meaning is immaterial to satipatthana. ------------------------------------------------------- ALL speaking is conventional, including talk of dhammas. --------------------------------------------------------- KH (continuing): In satipatthana, dhammas are indistinguishable from each other; they contain no concept of "Jon" "I" "you" etc, or anything pertaining thereto. ------------------------------------------------------------ You are mixing reality with concept right now, Ken. In reality itself, there is nothing at all to speak of. A korean Son master, Seung Sahn, was correct when he said "Open mouth already a mistake !" ---------------------------------------------------------- KH: And that's the sort of understanding we should be working on. --------------------------------------------------------- What happened to no "we," no "should," and no "working on," Ken?? Does it now suit you to speak this way? ------------------------------------------------------- KH: There is no point in trying to find links between dhammas and concepts. There aren't any! --------------------------------------------------------- Then why are you talking???? Of COURSE there are links! For starters, dhammas themselves, as separate, self-existent entities, are (fallacious) concepts. Secondly, even the actual experienced qualities that they point to are the basis for all our thinking and conceptualizing. ------------------------------------------------------- Ken H =================================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #113568 From: Ken O Date: Wed Feb 16, 2011 8:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. ashkenn2k Dear Rob E You are right to say Buddha had an effect on his listeners and bring them to enlightenment. I would like to explain more on whether there are dry insightors. To talk about dry insightors, we have to talk about jhanas attainers of wisdom. The standard stock formulae for jhanas are 1st to 4th Jhanas, then the mind is directed to knowledge of pasts live, 2nd knowledge of reappearance and appearance of living beings and 3rd knowledge of the destruction of taints. Or some other suttas will show to the level of formless jhanas. Now when one wish to attain jhanas, then the mind should be concentrated and not distracted. That is the 1st question. Though there are Arahants who are known to enter jhanas while listening to Buddha. So how do these 1000 monks become enlighted after listening to Buddha discourse if there are a need for to enter jhanas. Even if they have practise jhanas with their previous teachers, they still need to enter concentration to be in jhanas because in our stock formulae as seen in the sutta, one need to go through 1st to 4th, then able to attain the three knowledges. So how are they able to do it when they are listening to Buddha discourses. http://www.mahindarama.com/e-tipitaka/Majjhima-Nikaya/mn-56.htm Maybe that is not convincing. this is an interesting sutta on the admirable householder Upali Then the Blessed One gave the householder Upali the gradual Teaching starting with giving gifts, becoming virtuous, about the heavenly states, the dangers of sensuality, the vileness of defiling things, and benefits of giving up. Then the Blessed One knew that the mind of the householder Upali was ready, malleable, free of hindrances, lofty and pleased and the Blessed One gave the special message of the Enlightened Ones: Unpleasantness, its arising, its cessation and the path to the cessation of unpleasantness. Like a pure, clean cloth would take a dye evenly. In that same manner, the dustless, stainless eye of the Teaching arose to the householder Upali, seated there itself. Whatever rises has the nature of ceasing. The householder Upali, then and there mastered that Teaching, knew and penetrated it. Doubts dispelled become self confident attained that state where he did not want a teacher, any more, in the Dispensation of the Blessed One (* 1). He said. ‘Venerable sir, we will go now, there is much work to be done.’ ‘Househoder, do as you think it fit.’ that is about dry insightors, yes some may argue he may have learn jhanas from the Jains who he supported previously. But if one is insisted on such notions, then there is nothing much I can say. Buddha ways are not confine to one method to develop and reach Enlightment. Cheers Ken O >I think in those cases we should realize that there was a special factor that >may have helped to enlighten those monks without the need for jhana - the Buddha > >was there! ;-) Can you imagine the effect that had on a monk's development? > > >Best, >Robert E. #113569 From: Ken O Date: Wed Feb 16, 2011 8:08 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 1. ashkenn2k Dear Nina and Han In my humble opinion, without the explanation by both of you in discussion this topic, I would not have give much thought to convergence and the last paragrah is about eradication of the latency of defilements. I would not say convergence is a good word to describe abhisamaya, but there is not much to replace it either. Maybe it should used a few words like convergence to enlightment rather than convergence Just my thoughts, so what is next in the dicussion, I am waiting happily for the next one. Ken O #113570 From: Ken O Date: Wed Feb 16, 2011 8:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The clansman who is a beginner : one of the ancient wise ones? ashkenn2k Dear Rob E > >I didn't mean negative in that sense. I meant "negative" in the sense of >"negating," that anatta does not mean that something is there, but that >something is not there. Ken H. describes anatta as a "positive characteristic of > >dhammas," meaning it is an actual characteristic that can be discerned. I am >saying that it is a characteristic of absence rather than presence. Anatta means > >that a dhamma is not self or part of self. The "not" is the characteristic and >there is no such thing as an "anatta" that can be directly see, except in the >absence of self. Hope that makes sense. > KO: yes Ken H is right that anatta is a charactersitic of dhamma and not in the situation due to the absence of self. It is suble difference but an important difference. that is why Buddha say his dhamma is visible, be directly known. In order to directly known, one has be able to experience. To experience it then there must be a presence and not an absence. Maybe this is not a good logical analysis to explain why anatta is a characteristic of dhamma and not an absence of a self. And another way, in the first place, there is no self that exist so how is there an absence of self. This could not have happen. there must be a presence before we could say there is an absence. There is another way to look at it, it the sequence of explaining of not self in dhanmas where it starts with impermanence, then to suffering then to not me, not I and not myself. all this sequence is on dhamma. Even then with the three descriptions, I have yet find a good way to explain the this difference so that people could understand better. Ken O #113571 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Feb 16, 2011 4:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The clansman who is a beginner : one of the ancient wise ones? upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 2/16/2011 11:52:53 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn2k@... writes: And another way, in the first place, there is no self that exist so how is there an absence of self. This could not have happen. there must be a presence before we could say there is an absence. ================================== That's not so, Ken. There never were elephants in my house. There are none now. There is and has always been an absence of elephants. What IS true is that there must be a presence before we could truly speak of a cessation/an ending of presence/an absenting. An absence and an absenting are two different things, the first being a quality/characteristic and the second an event. With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #113572 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Feb 16, 2011 11:27 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. truth_aerator Dear KenO, RobertE, All, >KO: There are references in suttas of monks being enlighted without >jhanas. In the Aditta-pariyaya sutta, one thousand monks attain >enlightment immediately after Buddha finsih speaking sutta. There >is >no attainment of jhanas That sutta didn't tell us that they have had parents or ever had a need to answer call of nature. Does that mean that they never had parents or natural urge after eating or drinking? We have to take each sutta in its proper context, and don't forget that it deals only with specific things. Generally speaking, the suttas in 4 Nikayas (from which the above sutta is taken) deal with what the Buddha has said. They do not focus much on a what a certain person did over the years, decades and lifetimes prior to meeting the Buddha and becoming awakened. Maybe some of those people just had a very intensive meditation retreat or dhutanga practice and were *READY* prior to hearing the sutta. Some may have read probably 100-1000+ suttas and didn't become stream enterer... I hope this shows that there are other factors involved than just hearing the sutta (which is VERY important). Sure, one can become awakened while hearing the sutta. One of those requirements is not to be overpowered by kilesas at that time. Concentration or ascetic practice counter act the kilesas. The stronger the concentration attained, the more kilesas it can temporary counteract. The stronger your kilesas, the stronger the countermeasure require. Some people may have had relatively few kilesas and thus didn't need much. Many other people have a lot of kilesas and may need A LOT (the higher concentration the better) of concentration to restrain the kilesas for wisdom to stand a chance. The Adittapariyaya Sutta focuses on the teaching of the Buddha to 1,000 Bhikkhus, when they attained Arahatship. That particular teaching was what was recorded and subsequent awakening of the monks. You can't include absolutely everything in every single sutta. So different suttas talk about different PARTS of the path. What we need to do is to glue many suttas together to get a complete picture. Just because the sutta doesn't mention the parents of those monks, it doesn't mean that those monks didn't have parents. Same with Jhanas, or at least dhutanga practices. Those who know the teaching would realize that you can't perfect panna (to attain Arhatship) until you perfect samadhi. With metta, Alex #113573 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Feb 16, 2011 8:44 pm Subject: Re: wisdom and doing kenhowardau Hi Howard, ---- <. . .> > > > H: What I claim is that these arise and cease within streams of such, > > > > KH: (!) But isn't a stream "something besides"? If a stream really existed it would have to be classified as "other than" a single-moment dhamma wouldn't it? > > > H: Are you pretending to not know what I mean? ---- KH: I am saying I know what you mean, and I disagree with it. There is something crucially different between what you are saying and what others here are saying. You know that yourself, that is why you strongly object to certain statements and stress the existence of streams. So let's not pretend that we are all saying basically the same thing. We aren't. ----------------------- > H: Sarah isn't afraid to speak of groups. The Buddha wasn't afraid to speak of aggregates. ----------------------- KH: Sarah agrees with that we can talk about streams of dhammas for conventional purposes. And I suppose streams can be called "groups" in that context. The five aggregates that the Buddha spoke about can also be called "groups" but that is an entirely different use of the word. The five aggregates are not streams. They are presently arisen, conditioned dhammas that have been classified for teaching purposes into five groups. ------------------------------- > H: The streams are conventionally designated collections of dhammas that are interrelated among themselves more closely and essentially than to other dhammas. They are not delusional as would be unicorns, for example. Please don't pretend that this is nonsense, for to do so would be nonsense. ------------------------------- KH: The presently arisen dhammas were preceded by the previously arisen dhammas, which were preceded by . . . . And so on back into the infinitely distant past. And that is all there is to a stream. It is a history, a story: it is not a reality. The only realities are the presently arisen dhammas. ------------------------------- > H: the dhammas in the streams being closely interrelated, with namarupic streams being distinguishable among themselves. It IS possible to distinguish you from Jon, for example, ------------------------------- KH: Of course it is possible to distinguish one historical story from another. But that is not satipatthana, it is not a way of understanding ultimate reality. ------------------- > > KH: Whether you call "Jon" "I" and "you" namarupic streams, sentientbeings, abiding entities or concepts-of-self, it's all the same thing. > > > H: You're being sloppy with thought and language when you say that. ------------------ KH: Sloppy with punctuation, maybe. :-) -------------------------- > H: It's analogous to saying that all cars (or even all vehicles) are the same thing, largely consist of similar parts. Moreover, if you didn't distinguish between you and me or between you and Sarah (and so on), you wouldn't be having these conversations. So, please stop the B.S., Ken. -------------------------- KH: I am not saying anything analogous to all vehicles being the same: I am not saying that all streams (historical stories) are the same. I am saying all dhammas are without ownership. They lack anything that pertains to a self. ------------------------------------------- <. . .> > > KH: In satipatthana, dhammas are indistinguishable from each other; they contain no concept of "Jon" "I" "you" etc, or anything pertaining thereto. > > > H: You are mixing reality with concept right now, Ken. In reality itself, there is nothing at all to speak of. A korean Son master, Seung Sahn, was correct when he said "Open mouth already a mistake !" ------------------------------------------- KH: In ultimate reality there is an immeasurable wealth of things to speak of: namely, conditioned dhammas and nibanna. The Buddha spent forty five years talking about them. ------------------------------- > > KH: And that's the sort of understanding we should be working on. > H: What happened to no "we," no "should," and no "working on," Ken?? Does it now suit you to speak this way? ------------------------------ KH: I have never tried to speak any other way. Dhamma study is the most valuable thing in the world. ----------------- > > KH: There is no point in trying to find links between dhammas and concepts. There aren't any! >> > H: Then why are you talking???? Of COURSE there are links! For starters, dhammas themselves, as separate, self-existent entities, are (fallacious) concepts. ----------------- KH: Now we are crossing into Nagarjuna territory or Mahanayana territory (I don't know which), and you can count me out. I am interested only in Abhidhamma the study of absolute (separate, self-existent) conditioned realities. Ken H #113574 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Feb 16, 2011 10:11 pm Subject: Re: notes from Bangkok with A.Sujin 3b epsteinrob Hi Ken O. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > > Dear Rob E > > I am most happy to disccuss with you on the body comtemplation in the sutta or > the crossing the flood usiing the commentarian texts. though I dont think I > have the commentarian text on crossing the flood but do have the body > comtemplation. There is nothing wrong about the commentarian text, it is the > way it is interpret by us that is the cause of the diverse views. Well I hope that is true; it's a good thought. > Jon and Ken H don't believe in meditation so talking them is not going to be > helpful. IMHO, they are pure vipassana practitioners or the dry insightors > ways. Yes, that appears to be their view. For myself, I don't think that there is really volition either. It is the result of conditions; but I differ from thinking this means you can't do anything. Sure, it is all coming from conditions, but when the conditions arise to do an activity, the activity can still be done, with the understanding that no one is in control of it. If Buddha said "practice diligently," hearing that is a condition for practice to arise. That is how I see it anyway. > It is like in the case of the sutta where it shows the differences of > the dry insightors and jhanas practitioners. There are samantha bhavana (jhanas > as a basis of insight) though not easy to attain but in reality it is still > possible to attain, maybe not in this life but it sets the stage for future > lifes. they dont believe in methods or instructions. At times refering to such > actions as accumulated behaviour. Alias, if one does not start doing it in the > previous lifes, how could it be possible to be accumulate. Just my views. I agree. > there are indeed two different ways of learning the dhammas conventional or > ultimate as explain by Nina, each suited for different type of human beings. So > if ultimate realities is not your cup of tea, then conventional reality could be > used. Ultimately, it is the understanding of anatta that matters. And > comprehending ultimate realities IMHO helps in the understanding of > anatta tremenduously and to me what we learn as ultimate reality now is the > conventional understanding of the realities. to go to the level of vipassana, > one must start conventional. That makes sense to me. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #113575 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Feb 16, 2011 10:23 pm Subject: Re: Sangiiti Corner epsteinrob Hi Connie, and Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nichicon cp wrote: > > Hi Rob E, All, > re: 113443 > Nina's the one who does all the work reading & translating the Commentaries and Sub-Commentaries. I don’t translate anything, but just match the Rhys Davids, Walshe and Olds translations of the Sutta with the Pali. I like the ‘listening’, too. > best wishes, > connie Thanks for pointing this out Connie. I like to see the comparisons of the different translations; and thanks to Nina for translating so much important material. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #113578 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Wed Feb 16, 2011 11:51 pm Subject: Re: wisdom and doing rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > So let's not pretend that we are all saying basically the same thing. We aren't. > > ----------------------- > > H: Sarah isn't afraid to speak of groups. The Buddha wasn't afraid to speak of aggregates. > ----------------------- > > KH: Sarah agrees with that we can talk about streams of dhammas for conventional purposes. And I suppose streams can be called "groups" in that context. > > The five aggregates that the Buddha spoke about can also be called "groups" but that is an entirely different use of the word. The five aggregates are not streams. They are presently arisen, conditioned dhammas that have been classified for teaching purposes into five groups. > > ------------------------------- > > H: The streams are conventionally designated collections of dhammas that are interrelated among themselves more closely and essentially than to other dhammas. > They are not delusional as would be unicorns, for example. Please don't pretend that this is nonsense, for to do so would be nonsense. > ------------------------------- Dear Ken and Howard Abhidhammattha Sangaha: Ch VI, BODHI:guide to #6 "The life-span of a citta is termed, in the Abhidhamma, a mind-moment (cittakkha.na). This is a temporal unit of such brief duration that, according to the commentators, in the time it takes for lightning to flash or the eyes to blink, billions of mind-moments can elapse. Nevertheless, though seemingly infinitesimal, each mind-moment in turn consists of three sub-moments - arising (uppaada), presence (.thiti), and dissolution (bhanga). Within the breadth of a mind-moment, a citta arises, performs its momentary function, and then dissolves, conditioning the next citta in immediate succession. Thus, through the sequence of mind-moments, the flow of consciousness continues uninterrupted LIKE THE WATERS IN A STREAM ."" robert #113579 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed Feb 16, 2011 11:55 pm Subject: The Good Friend! bhikkhu5 Friends: How is a Friend Good? The Blessed Buddha once explained: Who is welcoming and friendly, Generous, open and unselfish, A guide, an instructor, a leader, Such one will gain much honour! Digha Nikya 31 The friend who is a helping companion, The friend both in happiness and misery, The friend who gives good & sound advice, The friend who really cares & understands... These four, the clever knows as good Friends! These 4 heroes, one should cherish devotedly, as a mother nurses her own only child. Digha Nikya 31 If one finds a wise and intelligent friend, who lives a good, correct & fully pure life, Then, overcoming all obstacles, one should always keep his joyous and alert company... Dhammapada 328 <...> Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samhita _/\_ * <...> #113580 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Feb 17, 2011 6:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. nilovg Dear Rob E and Ken O, Op 16-feb-2011, om 17:01 heeft Ken O het volgende geschreven: > Like a pure, clean cloth would take > a dye evenly. In that same manner, the dustless, stainless eye of > the Teaching > arose to the householder Upali, seated there itself. Whatever rises > has the > nature of ceasing. The householder Upali, then and there mastered > that Teaching, > knew and penetrated it. Doubts dispelled become self confident > attained that > state where he did not want a teacher, any more, in the > Dispensation of the > Blessed One (* 1). He said. Venerable sir, we will go now, there > is much work > to be done. Househoder, do as you think it fit. ------ N: Yes, usually after a passage of hearing a gradual discourse we read that the listener attained enlightenment. It may happen that the Buddha spoke to someone who had never heard the Dhamma before. But he was ready for it. No mentioning of previous jhaana practice. How could there be opportunity for it? When we read in some suttas that right concentration is the four jhaanas, it may be that this is referring to the lokuttara Path where people who had practised jhaanas could experience nibbaana with samaadhi of the level of even the fourth jhaana. As I said, lokuttara citta is always accompanied by samaadhi of the level of at least the first stage of mundane jhaana, because the object experienced is nibbaana. Thus, imho, this does not mean that mundane right concentration is the same (and always) as one of the four stages of mundane jhaana. It could not be, because the object has to be a present naama or ruupa. How else could insight be developed and the three characteristics be realised of conditioned realities? I would like to ask Sarah to check this with Kh Sujin next time. Because often such questions as Howard asked come up. The sutta could be an exhortation to people who could develop jhaana to continue so that they could have lokuttara cittas accompanied by jhaana factors of the different stages. This is an attainment higher than the attainment of those with dry insight. And as the teachings declined there were no longer arahats with the four discriminations and with lokuttara cittas accompanied by jhaana factors. ****** Nina. #113581 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Feb 17, 2011 6:32 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 1. nilovg Dear Ken O, Op 16-feb-2011, om 17:08 heeft Ken O het volgende geschreven: > I would not say convergence is a good word to describe abhisamaya, > but there is > not much to replace it either. Maybe it should used a few words like > convergence to enlightment rather than convergence ------- N: You are right, a difficult term. The Thai uses the word for enlightenment (tratseru). But since I quote I do not change words. Nina. #113582 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Feb 17, 2011 1:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 2/16/2011 11:44:47 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, ---- <. . .> > > > H: What I claim is that these arise and cease within streams of such, > > > > KH: (!) But isn't a stream "something besides"? If a stream really existed it would have to be classified as "other than" a single-moment dhamma wouldn't it? > > > H: Are you pretending to not know what I mean? ---- KH: I am saying I know what you mean, and I disagree with it. --------------------------------------- Apparently you do NOT know what I mean. ------------------------------------- There is something crucially different between what you are saying and what others here are saying. You know that yourself, that is why you strongly object to certain statements and stress the existence of streams. So let's not pretend that we are all saying basically the same thing. We aren't. ----------------------- > H: Sarah isn't afraid to speak of groups. The Buddha wasn't afraid to speak of aggregates. ----------------------- KH: Sarah agrees with that we can talk about streams of dhammas for conventional purposes. And I suppose streams can be called "groups" in that context. The five aggregates that the Buddha spoke about can also be called "groups" but that is an entirely different use of the word. The five aggregates are not streams. They are presently arisen, conditioned dhammas that have been classified for teaching purposes into five groups. ------------------------------- > H: The streams are conventionally designated collections of dhammas that are interrelated among themselves more closely and essentially than to other dhammas. They are not delusional as would be unicorns, for example. Please don't pretend that this is nonsense, for to do so would be nonsense. ------------------------------- KH: The presently arisen dhammas were preceded by the previously arisen dhammas, which were preceded by . . . . And so on back into the infinitely distant past. And that is all there is to a stream. It is a history, a story: it is not a reality. The only realities are the presently arisen dhammas. ----------------------------------------------- Who says otherwise? Not I. (Except I go further and consider even dhammas when viewed as separate entities to also be matters of convention and not "realities".) ----------------------------------------------- ------------------------------- > H: the dhammas in the streams being closely interrelated, with namarupic streams being distinguishable among themselves. It IS possible to distinguish you from Jon, for example, ------------------------------- KH: Of course it is possible to distinguish one historical story from another. But that is not satipatthana, it is not a way of understanding ultimate reality. ------------------- > > KH: Whether you call "Jon" "I" and "you" namarupic streams, sentientbeings, abiding entities or concepts-of-self, it's all the same thing. > > > H: You're being sloppy with thought and language when you say that. ------------------ KH: Sloppy with punctuation, maybe. :-) -------------------------- > H: It's analogous to saying that all cars (or even all vehicles) are the same thing, largely consist of similar parts. Moreover, if you didn't distinguish between you and me or between you and Sarah (and so on), you wouldn't be having these conversations. So, please stop the B.S., Ken. -------------------------- KH: I am not saying anything analogous to all vehicles being the same: I am not saying that all streams (historical stories) are the same. I am saying all dhammas are without ownership. They lack anything that pertains to a self. --------------------------------------------------- Really? It sounds to me that you are saying something else, namely that distinctions among people are without basis in reality, and that the matter of interrelationship is best ignored. -------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------- <. . .> > > KH: In satipatthana, dhammas are indistinguishable from each other; they contain no concept of "Jon" "I" "you" etc, or anything pertaining thereto. > > > H: You are mixing reality with concept right now, Ken. In reality itself, there is nothing at all to speak of. A korean Son master, Seung Sahn, was correct when he said "Open mouth already a mistake !" ------------------------------------------- KH: In ultimate reality there is an immeasurable wealth of things to speak of: namely, conditioned dhammas and nibanna. The Buddha spent forty five years talking about them. ------------------------------- > > KH: And that's the sort of understanding we should be working on. > H: What happened to no "we," no "should," and no "working on," Ken?? Does it now suit you to speak this way? ------------------------------ KH: I have never tried to speak any other way. Dhamma study is the most valuable thing in the world. -------------------------------------------------- ??????? You are replying to something other than my question. ------------------------------------------------- ----------------- > > KH: There is no point in trying to find links between dhammas and concepts. There aren't any! >> > H: Then why are you talking???? Of COURSE there are links! For starters, dhammas themselves, as separate, self-existent entities, are (fallacious) concepts. ----------------- KH: Now we are crossing into Nagarjuna territory – or Mahanayana territory (I don't know which), and you can count me out. ---------------------------------------------------- So, don't discuss an issue: Just try to frighten others by using scary names!! ;-) Hey, Ken, Christianity and Judaism (and other religions) speak of compassion and loving kindness. So, please, don't ever speak of karuna and metta, because to do so would be "crossing into Judeo-Christian territory"! --------------------------------------------------- I am interested only in Abhidhamma – the study of absolute (separate, self-existent) conditioned realities. -------------------------------------------------- Hmm! Only Abhidhamma, huh? What of the Sutta Pittaka? Too many "stories"? ------------------------------------------------ Ken H ============================== With metta, Howard Dhammas are Empty /Form is like a glob of foam; feeling, a bubble; perception, a mirage; fabrications, a banana tree; consciousness, a magic trick — this has been taught by the Kinsman of the Sun. However you observe them, appropriately examine them, they're empty, void to whoever sees them appropriately./ (From the Phena Sutta) #113583 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Feb 17, 2011 2:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing upasaka_howard Hi, Robert (and Ken) - In a message dated 2/17/2011 2:54:45 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, rjkjp1@... writes: Dear Ken and Howard Abhidhammattha Sangaha: Ch VI, BODHI:guide to #6 "The life-span of a citta is termed, in the Abhidhamma, a mind-moment (cittakkha.na). This is a temporal unit of such brief duration that, according to the commentators, in the time it takes for lightning to flash or the eyes to blink, billions of mind-moments can elapse. Nevertheless, though seemingly infinitesimal, each mind-moment in turn consists of three sub-moments - arising (uppaada), presence (.thiti), and dissolution (bhanga). Within the breadth of a mind-moment, a citta arises, performs its momentary function, and then dissolves, conditioning the next citta in immediate succession. Thus, through the sequence of mind-moments, the flow of consciousness continues uninterrupted LIKE THE WATERS IN A STREAM ."" robert ================================== Thanks for this quotation, Robert! BTW, nice to hear from you. :-) With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #113584 From: Ken O Date: Thu Feb 17, 2011 9:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. ashkenn2k > Dear Rob E and Ken O, > Op 16-feb-2011, om 17:01 heeft Ken O het volgende geschreven: > > > Like a pure, clean cloth would take > > a dye evenly. In that same manner, the dustless, stainless eye of > > the Teaching > > arose to the householder Upali, seated there itself. Whatever rises > > has the > > nature of ceasing. The householder Upali, then and there mastered > > that Teaching, > > knew and penetrated it. Doubts dispelled become self confident > > attained that > > state where he did not want a teacher, any more, in the > > Dispensation of the > > Blessed One (* 1). He said. ‘Venerable sir, we will go now, there > > is much work > > to be done.’ ‘Househoder, do as you think it fit.’ > ------ > N: Yes, usually after a passage of hearing a gradual discourse we > read that the listener attained enlightenment. It may happen that the > Buddha spoke to someone who had never heard the Dhamma before. But he > was ready for it. No mentioning of previous jhaana practice. How > could there be opportunity for it? > When we read in some suttas that right concentration is the four > jhaanas, it may be that this is referring to the lokuttara Path where > people who had practised jhaanas could experience nibbaana with > samaadhi of the level of even the fourth jhaana. As I said, lokuttara > citta is always accompanied by samaadhi of the level of at least the > first stage of mundane jhaana, because the object experienced is > nibbaana. Thus, imho, this does not mean that mundane right > concentration is the same (and always) as one of the four stages of > mundane jhaana. It could not be, because the object has to be a > present naama or ruupa. How else could insight be developed and the > three characteristics be realised of conditioned realities? KO: that is something which I differ from DSG and I am not directing at you. I used to think that panna could only arise in nama and rupa until I went back to the basic of the kusala mind process and restudy how it works. In Abhidhamma, citta can take any objects and panna can arise with kausala citta. I have yet met any text or commentariain books that say panna cannot arise with citta that have concepts. In fact, some of the commentarian texts supported using concepts as a tool and even for certain kusala behaviour the objects of the kusala cittas are concepts. So I dont know where is this inference of nama and rupa came from except for vipassana stage which I agreed. Citta takes any object and panna can arise with citta that takes concept as an object that is how one learn dhamma from listening to Buddha or reading the sutta etc. Even Upali learning starts with listening to Buddha. At the moment of listening, it is concept. Aside to the dry insightors topic There are another good example of lay follower who become enlighted by listening to Buddha. For eg in DN 3 Ambattha Sutta And as Pokkharasati sat there, the Lord delivered a graduated discourse on generosity, on morality and on heaven, showing the danger, degradation and corruption of sense-desires, and the profit of renunciation. And when the Lord knew that Pokkharasati’s mind was ready, pliable, free from the hindrances, joyful and calm, then he preached a sermon on Dhamma in brief : on suffering, its origin, its cessation, and the path. And just as a clean cloth from which all stains have been removed receives the dye perfectly, so in the Brahmin Pokkharasati, as he sat there, there arose the pure and spotless Dhamma-eye, and he knew : “Whatever things have an origin must come to cessation.” Ken O #113585 From: Ken O Date: Thu Feb 17, 2011 10:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: notes from Bangkok with A.Sujin 3b ashkenn2k Dear Rob E >Yes, that appears to be their view. For myself, I don't think that there is >really volition either. It is the result of conditions; but I differ from >thinking this means you can't do anything. Sure, it is all coming from >conditions, but when the conditions arise to do an activity, the activity can >still be done, with the understanding that no one is in control of it. If Buddha > >said "practice diligently," hearing that is a condition for practice to arise. >That is how I see it anyway. KO: I would say dhamma and not conditions. Before anyone could be a Buddha, one of the conditions is chanda (purpose or desire to do). The DSGer interpretation of the doing an activity is always bound to be self. Or when there is a control, there is a self. As I said earlier to you, it is how we interpret the commnetarian texts especially on the understanding of anatta. Anatta in the Not Self sutta can be interpreted differently, there is no control in dhamma which is intepreted by DSGers or in my humble interpretation meant the nature of the dhamma cannot be control. So to me, dhamma can be directed but the nature of dhamma cannot be directed as it is bound to be impermenant, dukkha and anatta. There is dhamma for direction or purpose or course of action like viriya, kamma, vittaka and chanda. If direction or purpose or course of action are all bound up with self, then there is no salvation as they would be all be akusala, therefore how could those in olden times, when one need to go to listen to Buddha which is a course of action. What you say an activity can be done with no one is control is possible and real. It is true if one understands anatta at the moment of the activity because it is a natural tendency in our mind to think there is a self that dong an activity. So I keep exhorting the understanding of dhamma as the foremost in any Buddhist practise Ken O #113586 From: Ken O Date: Thu Feb 17, 2011 10:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: should one try one's best? ashkenn2k Dear Rob E > >Can you explain a little more about how kamma is not intention but is "will or >an act?" KO: I felt I should explain kamma. Kamma in Abhidhamma as IMHO has these functions, to co-ordinate the other cetasikas, to accumulate and to will. kamma is dependable on akusala or kusala cetasikas that arise in with it. So when there is killing, kamma must arise with dosa. for eg killing is a bodily actions and not a mental action though the cetasikas that arise is dosa. It is this dosa that accompany the citta that condition the body rupa (intimation) to act in such a way through the bodily door. In the Expositor, when a aksuala kamma is done by the bodily door like killing, stealing, false speech, the mental thoughts like illwill, covetuous and wrong view is negligible. Likewise, during aksuala committed by mental door, the bodily door is negligible. To me, there is a logic to it as well, which result should kamma produce if there are two punishment to one action, if we include the mental door kamma being counted together with akusala kamma that are commited through the bodily door. >Also, I understand what you said about kusala and akusala cetasikas determining >the quality of the act; that makes sense. But I wonder why certain acts, such as > >killing, etc., are *always* akusala if it is only dependent on accompanying >cetasikas. I'm still struggling with that idea. Buddha said not to drink >alcohol. He didn't say "alcohol is okay with kusala cetasikas." Can you explain >this? Thanks. KO: Honestly I have no answer for this. It is something we have to accept with faith that such actions are accompany by such aksuala cetasikas. Ken O #113587 From: "Ken H" Date: Thu Feb 17, 2011 4:18 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing kenhowardau Hi Howard, ----- <. . .> > > KH: And that is all there is to a stream. It is a history, a story: it is not a reality. The only realities are the presently arisen dhammas. > > > H: Who says otherwise? Not I. (Except I go further and consider even dhammas when viewed as separate entities to also be matters of convention and not "realities".) ----- KH: In this case, to go further *is* to say otherwise. --------------- <. . .> > > KH: I am not saying anything analogous to all vehicles being the same: I am not saying that all streams (historical stories) are the same. I am saying all dhammas are without ownership. They lack anything that pertains to a self. > > > H: Really? It sounds to me that you are saying something else, namely that distinctions among people are without basis in reality, and that the matter of interrelationship is best ignored. ----------------- KH: Distinctions among people do not exist in absolute reality. The Buddha said, for example, "Whoever sees this Dhamma sees me." That must mean whoever has right understanding of one of the realities that are arising now understands everything that composes a Buddha. There is no difference between my dhammas, your dhammas, a snail's dhammas or a Buddha's dhammas. ----------------------- > > > H: What happened to no "we," no "should," and no "working on," Ken?? Does it now suit you to speak this way? > > > > > KH: I have never tried to speak any other way. Dhamma study is the most valuable thing in the world. > > > H: ??????? You are replying to something other than my question. ----------------------- KH: I think that question has been asked on DSG two thousand times over the past decade. In trying to avoid excessive repetition I may have made my reply a little obscure. :-) We can understand that there is no control and that the Dhamma is therefore a description rather than a prescription. But that doesn't mean we have to act out (formally practice) what it must be like to have no control. We just go about our normal daily lives, and that will naturally include Dhamma study *if* we believe the Dhamma to be important. -------------- <. . .> > H: Hmm! Only Abhidhamma, huh? What of the Sutta Pittaka? Too many "stories"? -------------- KH: First things first! :-) Ken H #113588 From: "Ken H" Date: Thu Feb 17, 2011 4:24 pm Subject: Re: wisdom and doing kenhowardau Hi Robert K and Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Robert (and Ken) - > > In a message dated 2/17/2011 2:54:45 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, > rjkjp1@... writes: > > Dear Ken and Howard > > Abhidhammattha Sangaha: Ch VI, BODHI:guide to #6 > <. . .> > Thus, through the sequence of mind-moments, the flow of consciousness continues uninterrupted LIKE THE WATERS IN A STREAM ."" > robert > > ================================== > Thanks for this quotation, Robert! BTW, nice to hear from you. :-) -------- Ditto from me, Robert, but some comments would be helpful. Howard and I both like the quote, we just understand it differently. Ken H #113589 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Feb 18, 2011 2:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A Question: What are the Direct Causes of Kamma?/Nina nilovg Dear Vince, Op 16-feb-2011, om 4:11 heeft Vince het volgende geschreven: > I was reading the explanation > of volition in "The Conditionality of Life (Nutriment-Condition)", and > I don't understand this: > > "Without contact, citta and cetasikas could not experience any > object, thus, > contact supports them" > > and later it says: > > "volition, manosañcetanā, this is cetanā cetasika which > accompanies all > eightynine types of citta" > > From the first sentence, it seems there is not volition while there > is not contact. ------ N: Let us put it more clearly: without contact citta and cetasikas including volition could not experience any object. ------- > V: > From the second sentence, if there is delay between the finger's > movement and > the conscious choosing to move it, It would mean there is a first > citta > knowing the object and a following citta "reviewing" the previous > one?. > > Can somebody clarify this point? ------- N: As you quote: "Thus, at each moment the three mental nutriments of contact, volition and citta support and maintain the dhammas arising together with them, and the rūpa produced by them, by way of nutriment-condition." As to the ruupa originated by citta and cetasikas: this can be any ruupa in the body, and we do not have to think of moving a finger here. There is no finger in the ultimate sense. What we call body are many groups of ruupa originated by kamma, or citta, or temperature or nutrition. These are all over the body. Also those originated by citta. They arise and fall away extremely fast. When we think of a finger it seems to stay. When we think of movement it seems quite a time that this takes place. No, this is not reality. Anyway, I find this conventional example not so helpful to explain conditions. It does not work. We should not see it this way: citta orders a ruupa to move. Whatever occurs, occurs by conditions and impossible to trace what citta is doing what, they are much too fast. No time to think: first there is this citta then that. Nina. #113590 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Feb 17, 2011 11:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 2/17/2011 7:18:44 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, ----- <. . .> > > KH: And that is all there is to a stream. It is a history, a story: it is not a reality. The only realities are the presently arisen dhammas. > > > H: Who says otherwise? Not I. (Except I go further and consider even dhammas when viewed as separate entities to also be matters of convention and not "realities".) ----- KH: In this case, to go further *is* to say otherwise. -------------------------------------------------------- But not in the sense that you meant. You meant that I take streams to be individual realities of their own. I do not. -------------------------------------------------------- --------------- <. . .> > > KH: I am not saying anything analogous to all vehicles being the same: I am not saying that all streams (historical stories) are the same. I am saying all dhammas are without ownership. They lack anything that pertains to a self. > > > H: Really? It sounds to me that you are saying something else, namely that distinctions among people are without basis in reality, and that the matter of interrelationship is best ignored. ----------------- KH: Distinctions among people do not exist in absolute reality. The Buddha said, for example, "Whoever sees this Dhamma sees me." That must mean whoever has right understanding of one of the realities that are arising now understands everything that composes a Buddha. There is no difference between my dhammas, your dhammas, a snail's dhammas or a Buddha's dhammas. ------------------------------------------------------------- That was not the Buddha's meaning here at all. He was speaking of the Buddhadhamma, his teaching. ------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------- > > > H: What happened to no "we," no "should," and no "working on," Ken?? Does it now suit you to speak this way? > > > > > KH: I have never tried to speak any other way. Dhamma study is the most valuable thing in the world. > > > H: ??????? You are replying to something other than my question. ----------------------- KH: I think that question has been asked on DSG two thousand times over the past decade. In trying to avoid excessive repetition I may have made my reply a little obscure. :-) We can understand that there is no control and that the Dhamma is therefore a description rather than a prescription. But that doesn't mean we have to act out (formally practice) what it must be like to have no control. We just go about our normal daily lives, and that will naturally include Dhamma study *if* we believe the Dhamma to be important. ------------------------------------------------------------- Uh, uh. You wish to be allowed to speak in a certain way while criticizing others for the very same thing. In any case, the bottom line is that ALL speech is conventional, and ALL thinking is conventional. -------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- <. . .> > H: Hmm! Only Abhidhamma, huh? What of the Sutta Pittaka? Too many "stories"? -------------- KH: First things first! :-) ---------------------------------------------------------------- I guess you meant " ;-) " rather than" :-) ". What could you mean other than a joke in speaking of the Abhidhamma as a "first thing," taking precedence over the suttas? -------------------------------------------------------------- Ken H ===================================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #113591 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Feb 18, 2011 12:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Robert) - In a message dated 2/17/2011 7:25:08 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Howard and I both like the quote, we just understand it differently. ================================== I don't think you know how I understand it, Ken. With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #113592 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Feb 18, 2011 5:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. nilovg Dear Ken O, Op 17-feb-2011, om 18:53 heeft Ken O het volgende geschreven: > KO: that is something which I differ from DSG and I am not > directing at you. > I used to think that panna could only arise in nama and rupa until > I went back > to the basic of the kusala mind process and restudy how it > works. In Abhidhamma, citta can take any > objects and panna can arise with kusala citta. I have yet met > any text or > commentariain books that say panna cannot arise with citta that > have concepts. ----- N: No problem. Different levels of pa~n~naa. Pa~n~naa can arise with citta that thinks of concepts, why not? But it is different with pa~n~naa of the level of satipa.t.thaana, or insight knowledge. This kind of pa~n~naa is developed in order to see directly naama and ruupa as impermanent, dukkha, anattaa. Concepts do not have these three characteristics. One can think of a table falling apart, but this is not the same as penetrating the characteristic of impermanence. ----- > K: In fact, some of the commentarian texts supported using concepts > as a tool > and even for certain kusala behaviour the objects of the kusala > cittas are > concepts. So I dont know where is this inference of nama and rupa > came from > except for vipassana stage which I agreed. Citta takes any > object and panna can arise with citta that takes concept as an > object that is > how one learn dhamma from listening to Buddha or reading the sutta > etc. Even > Upali learning starts with listening to Buddha. At the moment of > listening, it > is concept. > ------- N: Yes, you are right, agreed. There is no problem. ----- Nina. #113593 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Feb 18, 2011 8:44 am Subject: You too should exert yourself... truth_aerator Dear Sarah, Jon, KenH, all, ""Monks, I have known two qualities through experience: discontent with regard to skillful qualities[1] and unrelenting exertion. Relentlessly I exerted myself, ..." "You, too, monks, should relentlessly exert yourselves, [thinking,] 'Gladly would we let the flesh & blood in our bodies dry up, leaving just the skin, tendons, & bones, but if we have not attained what can be reached through human firmness, human persistence, human striving, there will be no relaxing our persistence.' You, too, in no long time will reach & remain in the supreme goal of the holy life for which clansmen rightly go forth from home into homelessness, knowing & realizing it for yourselves in the here & now." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an02/an02.005.than.html ================================================================== In first part of the sutta it says that we should not be content with wholesome qualities that we have, and do not be content with current level of exertion. Increase them. And =================================================================== "As with his teeth clenched and his tongue pressed against the roof of his mouth he is beating down, constraining, and crushing his mind with his awareness, those evil, unskillful thoughts are abandoned and subside. With their abandoning, he steadies his mind right within, settles it, unifies it, and concentrates it." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.020.than.html ==================================================================== It does sound like Buddha taught effort and "discontent" with current lack of achievement. With metta, Alex #113594 From: Ken O Date: Fri Feb 18, 2011 8:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. ashkenn2k Dear Nina >----- >N: No problem. Different levels of pa~n~naa. Pa~n~naa can arise with >citta that thinks of concepts, why not? >But it is different with pa~n~naa of the level of satipa.t.thaana, or >insight knowledge. This kind of pa~n~naa is developed in order to see >directly naama and ruupa as impermanent, dukkha, anattaa. Concepts do >not have these three characteristics. One can think of a table >falling apart, but this is not the same as penetrating the >characteristic of impermanence. KO: this thinking of falling apart is the first start of the understanding of impermanance. to train one self in satipatthana level, that will be impossible without conventional understanding of dhamma which are concepts. satipathana level is possible only during vipassana level or what you said directly understand nama and rupa, so is one practising something could only happen at vipassana level or practising right now at conventional level which are all conceptuals of real nama and rupa or nimittas of nama and rupa. What is the dhamma we experience now is conventional and not direct knowing, so can one say that concepts cannot be used for development of understanding of dhamma into satipatthana level or vipassana level. Concept does not have the characterisitics does not mean concepts cannot help in the understanding until one reach vipassana, there are many instance of them as development in Buddha bhavana. Ken O #113595 From: Ken O Date: Fri Feb 18, 2011 8:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] You too should exert yourself... ashkenn2k Dear Alex I admire your persistent after all these years of saying there is exertion to the DSGers who believe in otherwise. To me you are not wrong that Buddha did exhort his disciples, he aroused their effort or energy, or at times describe as deligence in the suttas. Since there are dhammas for exertion to arise, so I dont see any reason why there cannot be any exertion by his disciples. Exertion or viriya is neutral, it can arise with kusala or akusala. Honestly, I will not be bother to convince them to on these texts because their interpretaion is different. It only bring about a chain of email debating on whether there is self or not self just to share my views and carry on debating. Cheers Ken O #113596 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 18, 2011 4:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. sarahprocter... Hi Ken O, Always glad to see you active! --- On Fri, 18/2/11, Ken O wrote: You wrote (to Nina), >KO: that is something which I differ from DSG and I am not directing at you. I used to think that panna could only arise in nama and rupa until I went back to the basic of the kusala mind process and restudy how it works. In Abhidhamma, citta can take any objects and panna can arise with kausala citta. I have yet met any text or commentariain books that say panna cannot arise with citta that have concepts. .... S: Just curious, can you quote from (not give your paraphrase from!) any DSG message which says that "panna cannot arise with citta that have concepts" or something very similar. I don't remember ever having read anyone say this - especially not any long-time "regulars". Thx in advance Sarah ======= #113597 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 18, 2011 4:33 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 1. sarahprocter... Hi Ken O, (Nina & Han), --- On Thu, 17/2/11, Ken O wrote: >In my humble opinion, without the explanation by both of you in discussion this topic, I would not have give much thought to convergence and the last paragrah is about eradication of the latency of defilements. ... S:Like you, I'm appreciating the discussion and Nina's & Han's (and now your) contributions on this topic. ... K:> I would not say convergence is a good word to describe abhisamaya, but there is not much to replace it either. Maybe it should used a few words like convergence to enlightment rather than convergence ... S: Like you, I find "convergence" for abhisamaya to be misleading. The Buddhadatta dictionary gives "realization; penetration" for the term which are more clearer imho. As we know, Nanamoli used many strange translation terms in "The Path of Discrimination". Keep up your good questions! Metta Sarah ====== #113598 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 18, 2011 4:43 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: : insight. links. sarahprocter... Dear Nina, --- On Fri, 11/2/11, Nina van Gorkom wrote: >> Thank you, Nina. I hope your sister is doing okay; I know it is a > difficult time. ------ >N: Thank you for your kind words, we are just back from a visit to her. Her partner is lying in a coffin on the top floor of their appartment building for people who want to say goodbye to her. It gives one rather a blow to see the corpse lying there, everything so dead still. Naama and ruupa, but I did not say anything about this to my sister. Next week the cremation. ... S: Pls let us know how it went (I thought of you this week) and how your sister manages. My mother has lots of friends dying and lots of funerals. One this week of a dear friend which she was sorry to miss. A couple of days ago we had news of another one, actually quite a young friend, who had a very tough last few months. On the same day, she heard about the marriage plans of another friend. We discussed how there's always good and bad, gain and loss - the 8 worldly conditions and had a little more chat about "the citta now". This comes up from time to time now. When we have bad memories or worry about the future or are so concerned about a news item or a friend - it's just "the citta now". Why disturb ourselves so much, worrying about this or that? Nama and rupa as you say. .... >You spoke about addiction to DSG in the midst of personal problems, like your Father. True, it helps to read messages and think of answers when feeling low, and feeling low is dosa, I know. .... S: Rob E's comments were helpful. Yes, reflecting on dhamma, thinking of answers to help others is so useful. We forget our own "feeling low". At other times, there's bound to be more "feeling low" - just conditioned dhammas, nothing to be concerned about. Not "me" or "you"! I know Lodewijk will also be a great support to everyone at this time too! Our regards to him as usual and from my mother to you both. She's having a lovely holiday here:). Metta Sarah ========== #113599 From: SARAH CONNELL Date: Fri Feb 18, 2011 4:55 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 1. dhammasanna Hi Sarah, Ken O, Nina and Han, With regard to the term abhisamaya, my Rhys Davids/Stede Pali-English dictionary shows meanings: coming by completely; insight into; comprehension; realization; clear understanding; grasp; penetration. I agree that convergence is misleading. I guess to avoid another confusion I will have to start using my middle name as well as my first. May you be well and happy and always smiling, Sarah Jane ________________________________ From: sarah abbott > S: Like you, I find "convergence" for abhisamaya to be misleading. The Buddhadatta dictionary gives "realization; penetration" for the term which are more clearer imho. As we know, Nanamoli used many strange translation terms in "The Path of Discrimination".