#115000 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu May 12, 2011 6:19 am Subject: Re: part 1 to Ken O - was: Bkk - with K.Sujin Mar 2011 (2) was: concep... Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > Consider a whirlpool in a river. It can be conceptually separated off > from the river-as-a-whole due to its functioning as a distinguishable > phenomenon. However, there are the following facts: > 1) It is not an individual thing, for it is merely an aggregate of > simpler elements of water and other things interrelated in a particular manner > and acting in concert, and simply thought of as an individual thing, > 2) It has no precise boundaries, beginnings, and endings, and is hence > "ungraspable," and > 3) It does not exist apart, separate from, and independent of, the > rest of the river, being, in fact, merely an inseparable aspect of the river. > The bottom line is that "a whirlpool in a river" is not in reality an > individual or separate phenomenon. Thanks, Howard. I think that is a good metaphor for the interrelatedness of all arising phenomena, including us 'people!' Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #115001 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu May 12, 2011 6:23 am Subject: Re: [dsg] How is wisdom accumulated epsteinrob   Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > N: We cannot know all this in exact detail, and why should we? By > knowing that there are accumulated inclinations that play their part > in our life we begin to see what it means that whatever is > experienced at this moment is a conditioned dhamma. The aim of all > this study is having less clinging to a self. Well, it seems that there is a lot of effort put into explaining and understanding how the arising and cessation of cittas and cetasikas take place, showing the process by which conditioned experiences happen. If there is a place where the explanation does not account for what is supposed to happen, that is a gap in understanding. It may be fine to just let that go, but on the other hand the whole reason for all the explanations is that it is hard to let go of an illusion if you don't see the reality in some way. The mind has to be convinced that the explanation accounts for our experiences. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #115002 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu May 12, 2011 6:30 am Subject: Re: How is wisdom accumulated Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > We already know that sort of thing, and therefore there is no need for further explanation. The Dhamma just has to explain that accumulations apply citta, not to a permanent self. That's the part we don't already know. I think that is pretty funny, Ken, that when it comes to explanations of dhammas you would say that it is wholly other and does not relate to conventional reality at all, but when there is an explanation missing, and accumulations cannot really be properly accounted for, you go back to the conventional explanation and say that takes care of it. Conventional reality really doesn't apply to this particular problem at all, because in conventional reality we have structures that are obviously capable of accumulating and carrying things forward, such as the brain, physical structures, memory centers and the like. There are no such structures in the dhamma theory that would allow a tendency to be latent and yet be passed on by momentary dhammas. To me, it looks like this is an area in dhamma theory that cannot be easily accounted for, and that is why it is missing. How can a citta pass on an accumulation, no less a latent one that is not active but hangs around in each momentary dhamma, passed on without doing anything, waiting to arise at some later time? That question challenges the nature of single cittas arising and falling in momentary independence and yet at the same time creating continuity by passing all sorts of things on. If no one can explain how that is done, I think it's a problem with the explanatory model being used. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #115003 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu May 12, 2011 6:32 am Subject: [dsg] Re: what is "direct" understanding? Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > S: Anytime is the right time for right understanding and awareness to arise. That means now! First, however, there has to be a very clear understanding of what the dhammas are that can be known - not movies, tai chi, postures, computers or beings! I'm sure that is true. On the other hand, imagine if we were stuck in delusion without t'ai chi or tv. How would we pass the time? :-) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #115004 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu May 12, 2011 6:34 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Why a sotapanna would never intentionally kill a being: KK March 2011 Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: ...So my understanding of this subject has a high degree of dsg contribution. I may go back to arguing about parts of it again sometime soon, but I'm glad I at least understand part of it. > .... > S: I appreciate the way you read and consider so carefully. Now, at least, you can argue with the "pesky" Rob E (and any others) when arguing what you wrote:-) :-) Yes, arguing with myself is always a dicey proposition. I usually lose! Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #115005 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu May 12, 2011 6:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] How is wisdom accumulated Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > "Spk (commentary): this refers to a moment when there is no occurrence of > [wholesome and unwholesome] volition of the three planes, and no > occurrence of the mental fabrications of craving and views. 'but one still > has a tendency': by this the underlying tendencies are included because > they have not been abandoned here in the resultants of the three > planes........As long as the underlying tendencies exist, they become a > condition for the kammic consciousness, for there is no way to prevent its > arising." > > The texts refer to three levels of defilements which are: > > 1.viitikkama kilesa (coarse defilements of the degree of unwholesome kamma > patha) > > 2.pariyutthaana kilesa (medium defilements which commonly arise throughout > the day) > > 3.anusaya kilesa (subtle defilements that are latent or lie dormant and > are only eradicated at the four stages of enlightenment. > > It really means that nothing is ever lost - the wisdom, greed, likes, > dislikes and so on are accumulated and condition more of the same when the > conditions are right. The anusayas just refer to the tendencies to > sensuous greed, hate, wrong views, doubt. Conceit, craving for existence > and ignorance. As we know, these states can arise strongly 'out of the > blue' and this is because of the 'dormant' tendencies for them.< > > S: Similarly with wholesome tendencies - these are also accumulated and "lie dormant" when they don't arise in each citta. I appreciate all of this good information and enjoyed reading it. There may not be any explanation for exactly how a citta is able to carry forward an accumulation which is latent and somehow is passed on even though it is not active, but at least I am understanding the passage and accumulation and eventual arising of defilements based on these tendencies, at least in a conventional way. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #115006 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu May 12, 2011 6:49 am Subject: [dsg] Re: anusaya revisited Hi Nina, and Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > N: The Pali uses all the time : anuseti, it is dormant in. This is > also strange, unless it is explained. Very hard to find a satisfying > word. I had to choose a term and thought that inhere in is closest to > anuseti. In the text it is explained in many quotes what is meant by > this. > As to sammohavinodanii, this translation is not wrong: So long as the > latent tendency to greed has not been abandoned there will be > conditions for the arising of greed with the akusala citta (medium > defilement) to experience that desirable object. I may just be using my imagination, but I am starting to form an idea of how a "latent tendency" may exist in the citta, based on all this discussion lately. I see from this post that the "tendency" arises to cling to the object when the object is present. So the object in a sense activates the tendency, even though the tendency is not a characteristic of the object itself, but is a characteristic of the citta. It seems that rather than the tendency being a "thing unto itself" that is accumulated or that has a space in a citta, it may be more like the way the citta is shaped by the tendency of the last citta, in other words it is influenced or conditioned by the same tendency in the previous citta and so it is shaped and formed in that same way when the previous citta falls away. So that citta is going to be prepared or open to having the same reaction of clinging or craving when that same object of clinging arises for the next citta. I hope that makes some degree of sense - it is just my way of starting to understand how this works. So again, it's not like there is a "latent tendency" that is a "something" that is lurking around within the citta. It is just a "tendency," a way that the citta is primed to behave when the right stimulus hits it. It is like all of your friends convinced you over and over again that tea with sugar is the best drink in the world and so when you are offered some tea the desire for sugar is going to arise from all that past conditioning towards craving. All the times you were told and convinced and conditioned to want sugar with your tea are like the momentary passing on of the tendency or conditioning from one citta to the next and each time it gets stronger. Or when you see the sugar near the tea you will cling and want to keep it around and put it in the tea. But you won't really think or care about it until the tea is served, or you see the sugar nearby. It remains "latent" until then. Anyway, that is how I am coming to see it at present. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = tjere #115007 From: "hmmmm" Date: Wed May 11, 2011 9:19 pm Subject: Question about Angulimala Dear Friend, I just joined this group today and I look forward to learning from the discussions that happen here. I have been reading on Buddhism of late, and I find it very appealing--to the heart and mind. But just yesterday I came across the story of Angulimala, who had murdered many people, but had, on becoming a bhikkhu, become--so the story said--an arahant or boddhisattva. This story did not make full sense to me, and this is why I am writing to you. If he had committed so many crimes, how come his karma was washed away and he became a boddhisattva in that very same life? Surely, according to the law of karma, that appears impossible as he needed to 'pay' for those crimes and merely becoming a monk--even at the hands of the Buddha--could not wash that karma away? I would be grateful if you could be so kind as to answer this query. I am sorry to take up your time. Love and regards Yoginder Sikand [Shimla, India] #115008 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu May 12, 2011 11:35 am Subject: Dear Nina, all, Thank you for your reply. In Nettipakarana (Of sutta pitaka) these two kasinas are clearly mentioned to be Vipassana. In pali you can check at Netti page 89 Space Kasina: akasakasinam Consciousness Kasina: vinnanakasinam 8 of 10 kasinas are samatha. Those last two are Vipassana. Now, I wonder, how can they be used for vipasssana? With metta, Alex #115009 From: "Ken H" Date: Thu May 12, 2011 12:07 pm Subject: Re: How is wisdom accumulated Hi Robert E, ----- <. . .> > > KH: We already know that sort of thing, and therefore there is no need for further explanation. The Dhamma just has to explain that accumulations apply to citta, not to a permanent self. That's the part we don't already know. > RE: I think that is pretty funny, Ken, that when it comes to explanations of dhammas you would say that it is wholly other and does not relate to conventional reality at all, but when there is an explanation missing, and accumulations cannot really be properly accounted for, you go back to the conventional explanation and say that takes care of it. ---- KH: It would be funny if it were the case. But matters relating to dhammas are not "wholly other" and I have never thought they were. We all know what seeing is, for example, but we don't all know that seeing is performed by a citta, not by a person. We all know what a visible object is. It is a reality that can be contacted by seeing. We just don't know the meaning of "reality" as distinct from "concept". We even know what a *desirable* visible object is, and we can distinguish between desirable, undesirable and desirable-neutral objects of all kinds. The same applies to 'greed' 'aversion' 'pleasant feeling' 'unpleasant feeling' and most of the other dhammas. We know what we are talking about, but we don't know the true nature of what we are talking about. The Dhamma doesn't bother to reinvent the wheel. It only tells us things we don't already know but desperately need to know. --------------------- > RE: Conventional reality really doesn't apply to this particular problem at all, because in conventional reality we have structures that are obviously capable of accumulating and carrying things forward, such as the brain, physical structures, memory centers and the like. ---------------------- KH: I am sure there are many conventional theories that try to explain latent tendencies. I doubt any of them are widely agreed upon, but that is besides the point. The point is that we already know what is *meant* by latent tendency. ---------------------------- > RE: There are no such structures in the dhamma theory that would allow a tendency to be latent and yet be passed on by momentary dhammas. ---------------------------- KH: I am sure it is all explained by the various paccaya (conditions) that are listed in the Abhidhamma. (Nina has mentioned natural strong dependence condition.) It will become clearer as right understanding in general becomes clearer. ---------------- RE: To me, it looks like this is an area in dhamma theory that cannot be easily accounted for, and that is why it is missing. ---------------- KH: Fear not! It is all there. :-) ------------------------------ > RE: How can a citta pass on an accumulation, no less a latent one that is not active but hangs around in each momentary dhamma, passed on without doing anything, waiting to arise at some later time? That question challenges the nature of single cittas arising and falling in momentary independence and yet at the same time creating continuity by passing all sorts of things on. If no one can explain how that is done, I think it's a problem with the explanatory model being used. ----------------------------- KH: Looking out my window, I might wonder how this fine, sunny day can be passing on accumulations for wet, cloudy days in the future. But it is! :-) Ken H #115010 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu May 12, 2011 6:20 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Question about Angulimala Dear Yoginder Sikand, Welcome to DSG and thank you very much for introducing yourself a little and for your helpful question. I noticed that you live in Shimla - some of us visited your lovely spot in India a few years ago. It must be really beautiful at this time of year up in the mountains! As you rightly suggest, usually the kamma of such terrible murders as those committed by Angulimala will have terrible consequences by way of vipaka (results of kamma) in the next and subsequent lives, including rebirth in hell planes. In the case of Angulimala, he was able to understand and penetrate the Teachings when he met the Buddha and to become fully enlightened, an arahat. An arahat has severed the links of samsara. For the arahat there is no more becoming, no more rebirth. The old kamma (from previous lives) continues to bring its results during the present life, but after the end of that life, no kamma can bring any more results. The job has been done. At the end of that present life, there is no more consciousness at all. Does this answer your question? Please let me know if there is more you'd like elaborated on. I'd also be glad to hear more about your life in Shimla. Do you have other Buddhist friends that you discuss the Dhamma with? Did you study Buddhism in school and college? Should we address you as Yoginder or Sikand? Metta Sarah --- On Wed, 11/5/11, hmmmm wrote: > Dear Friend, >I just joined this group today and I look forward to learning from the discussions that happen here. I have been reading on Buddhism of late, and I find it very appealing--to the heart and mind. But just yesterday I came across the story of Angulimala, who had murdered many people, but had, on becoming a bhikkhu, become--so the story said--an arahant or boddhisattva. #115011 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu May 12, 2011 6:31 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: anusaya revisited Dear Nina (& Han), --- On Wed, 11/5/11, Nina van Gorkom wrote: >S:Again, I find the translation from the Sammohavinodanii confusing > here: > "Ettha sattaana.m raagaanusayo anuseti (here inheres the beings' > inherent tendency to greed); in that desirable object beings' > inherent tendency to greed in the sense of its being unabandoned > inheres..." > > Again, I think there may well be confusion in the translation, > because the anusaya does not "inhere" in the desirable object - it > inheres in the citta (and accompanying cetasikas) to (the > experiencing of) that desirable object. ------ N: The Pali uses all the time : anuseti, it is dormant in. This is also strange, unless it is explained. Very hard to find a satisfying word. I had to choose a term and thought that inhere in is closest to anuseti. In the text it is explained in many quotes what is meant by this. .... S: I find either "is/lies dormant in" or "inheres in" fine - not strange. ... >As to sammohavinodanii, this translation is not wrong: So long as the latent tendency to greed has not been abandoned there will be conditions for the arising of greed with the akusala citta (medium defilement) to experience that desirable object. .... S: Yes, we all agree on that. The translation is not wrong, but if it had "to that desirable object", rather than "in that desirable object beings' inherent tendency to greed", it would be less confusing in my opinion. .... >N:I am sitting for hours over this text each day! ... S: Smiling - even during these hours, there are the experiences during the various sense doors, the thinking, the attachment and so on! Awareness anytime!! We know it's difficult, that's why we're all trying to add our few cents' worth:-) Patience, courage and good cheer!! Metta Sarah ===== #115012 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu May 12, 2011 6:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sotapanna Dear Vince, You included some good quotes in your comments to Lukas: --- On Mon, 9/5/11, Vince wrote: >"For a person who knows & sees things as they actually are, there is no need for an act of will, 'May I feel disenchantment.' It is in the nature of things that a person who knows & sees things as they actually are feels disenchantment." AN 11.2 .... S: When there is right understanding of dhammas, there is detachment, there is right effort and the other path factors already. There's no need to 'do' anything with a false idea of Self that can 'do' anything. Keep adding more helpful quotes! Metta Sarah ===== #115013 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu May 12, 2011 6:40 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: How is wisdom accumulated Dear Ken H, Op 12-mei-2011, om 4:07 heeft Ken H het volgende geschreven: > We all know what seeing is, for example, but we don't all know that > seeing is performed by a citta, not by a person. We all know what a > visible object is. It is a reality that can be contacted by seeing. > We just don't know the meaning of "reality" as distinct from > "concept". > > We even know what a *desirable* visible object is, and we can > distinguish between desirable, undesirable and desirable-neutral > objects of all kinds. > > The same applies to 'greed' 'aversion' 'pleasant feeling' > 'unpleasant feeling' and most of the other dhammas. We know what we > are talking about, but we don't know the true nature of what we are > talking about. ------ N:What you say here should be taken note of. We know the names of realities, but not their true nature right at the moment they appear. Even when we do not mention to ourselves the names of realities, there is no direct awareness and understanding of them. First the difference between naama and ruupa should be directly understood at the first stage of insight. Naama has to be known as truly naama, not mixed with ruupa, and ruupa should be known as ruupa. This is basic before the different characteristics of realities such as lobha and dosa can be understood more clearly when they appear one at a time. ------- Nina. #115014 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu May 12, 2011 6:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: anusaya revisited Dear Sarah, Op 12-mei-2011, om 10:31 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > We know it's difficult, that's why we're all trying to add our few > cents' worth:-) Patience, courage and good cheer!! ------- N: Thank you for the encouragement. No, it is not several hours a day but at times more than an hour. Inhere in, inhere to: the Thai has all the time: sleeps in... as translation of anuseti + ablative. ------ Nina. #115015 From: "sarah" Date: Thu May 12, 2011 7:18 pm Subject: Re: Discussions in Bangkok with K.Sujin, Jan 2011(7) Hi Pt, I miss your contributions now you're so busy with your work! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/wheel409.html#fn-25 > > > > A treatise of paramis > > The wisdom born of meditation may be divided into two groups. > > ... > > > The second comprises > > the five purification â€" purification of view, purification by overcoming doubt, > > purification by knowledge and vision of what is and what is not the path, > > purification by knowledge and vision of the way, and purification by knowledge > > and vision. The first four of these are mundane, the last is supramundane. > > ... > > > But here, because it is > > intended for the great bodhisattvas, it should be explained making compassion > > and skillful means the forerunners. One further distinction must also be made: > > here insight (vipassanaa) should be developed only as far as purification by > > knowledge and vision of the way, without attaining purification by knowledge and > > vision.[25]> .... > pt: So, do I understand correctly here that the commentary is saying that a bodhisattva will develop insight along the insight knowledges framework but will stop short of the last stage of purification by knowledge and vision amd will not go there until the very last life? I ask becuase I think the consensus here previously was that a bodhisattva will not develop along any insight knowledges at all until the very last life when they will all happen. Thanks. .... S: (I've deleted BB's note about how "the bodhisattva-aspirant must stop short of this attainment", because it's not part of the quote and is misleading, I think. Who can "stop short" of any attainemnt if all the conditions, all the "ingredients" are in place for enlightenment to occur? I've raised this same passage with K.Sujin and she's explained that satipatthana is developed to the extent that when all the paramis of the Bodhisatta are fulfilled, the stages of insight and enlightenment will occur in rapid succession, as if instantly. If insight had been developed to sa"nkhaarupekkhaa ~naa.na (adaptation or conformity knowledge) and anuloma ~naa.na (change-of-lineage knowledge), it would be impossible for enlightenment not to occur. I think we'd have to look at the Pali for the passage above. Metta Sarah ====== #115016 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu May 12, 2011 7:54 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] How is wisdom accumulated Dear Ken O, --- On Thu, 21/4/11, Ken O wrote: > KO:  lets see what the commentary actually written pg 57 and 58 of the Expositor the translation of Atthasalinii <>  >KO:So you missed out the important first sentence that accumulattion means that which is accumulated by kamma an corruptions .... S: What are the corruptions if not the akusala mental states which accumulate and accumulate until kamma-patha takes place which conditions rebirth and other vipaka cittas. There are 3 rounds. Without the accumulations of kusala and akusala, there'd be no further kamma or vipaka. "Or leading to accumulation are those states....." - in other words, all kusala and akusala, even jhana cittas accumulate and arrange the bricks of birth and death. .... >S: Sankhara khandha - all the cetasikas "form up" or accumulate along with cetana: >From Vism. XIV,131: >"Now it was said above, 'Whatever has the characteristic of forming >should be understood, all taken together, as the formations aggregate' >(par.81). And here too, what is said to have the characteristic of >forming is that which has the characteristic of agglomerating.57 What is >that? It is formations themselves, according as it is said, 'They form >the formed, bhikkhus, that is why they are called formations' >(S.iii,87)." >------------------------------ >"Note 57. ' "The characteristic of agglomerating" means the >characteristic of adding together (sampi.n.dana); then they are said to >have the function of accumulating, for the dhammas in the formations >aggregate are so described because volition is their basis' (Pm.484). " ... >KO: this is talking about accumulation where it leads to rebirth (that is the condition for the other aggregates), that is why they said volition is their basis. .... S: Vism. XIV,131 gives a description of the 50 cetasikas which are sankhara khandha. These all "form up", accumulate. This is what "forming up" means. It says in 132: "They have the characteristic of forming. Their function is to accumulate." It also says that "their proximate cause is the remaining three [immaterial] aggregates. It is referring to kusala, akusala and kiriya cetasikas, dependent on the citta and other cetasikas they arise with. Even the function of the kiriya sankhara khandha cetasikas of the arahats is to accumulate, accompanied by cetana, but no new kamma. No further rounds of kamma and vipaka. .... >>S: At this moment as we read and consider, there are tendencies accumulating. >>Are they kusala or akusala? .... >KO:  There are only negative tendecies .... S: Really? No kusala of any kind accumulating now as you reflect on the Dhamma or show kindness to those around you? Whenever kusala arises, the tendency is accumulated. ... >KO: pg 209 The Dispeller of Delusion II <<2292 In the description of svakara ("have good qualitites") because there is no inherent tendecy called "good"  therefore "of good inherent tendency " (kalyaanusaya) is not said.  The rest should be understood in the opposite way to that already stated>> >so how are your good tendecies going to accumulate then .... S: Of course there is no anusaya that is called "good" - we cannot refer to "good anusaya" because it would be an oxymoron, just as we cannot refer to "good hatred" or "good attachment". As discussed many times, we can read about asaya-anusaya however. Here, asaya refer to all good as well as bad latent tendencies. If good states, such as wisdom, can never accumulate and if there is no tendency accumulated for such, then it would be impossible to ever become enlightened! Angulimala would just continue to have nothing but evil accumulate, bringing its results and the same would apply to us all. Metta Sarah ====== Ken O #115017 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu May 12, 2011 10:03 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] How is wisdom accumulated Dear Rob E, Op 11-mei-2011, om 22:23 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > If there is a place where the explanation does not account for > what is supposed to happen, that is a gap in understanding. It may > be fine to just let that go, but on the other hand the whole reason > for all the explanations is that it is hard to let go of an > illusion if you don't see the reality in some way. The mind has to > be convinced that the explanation accounts for our experiences. ------- N: To a certain extent, yes. But we cannot know everything, all details. For example, in the case of the operation of kamma, we cannot know everything, that is the field of the Buddhas. Meanwhile, I just heard (on a Thai recording) and read with interest about twelve kinds of ahosi kamma. Quite some details, but the goal is: less clinging to a self. Nina. #115018 From: "leere_welt" Date: Thu May 12, 2011 10:11 pm Subject: Re: Question about Angulimala Hello Yoginder Sikand/all, according to my understanding, his karma wasn't "washed away". He also had to face the consequences like everyone else. If I walk 1000 steps in the wrong direction and become aware of my mistake, I can turn around and walk back the 1000 steps and then move on in the right direction. To walk back can be hard work and while doing this I directly face the consequences of my mistake (of walking in the wrong direction), since I have to make a lot of extra steps because of it. This simile is certainly not 100 % correct, but the point is that the "spiritual path" can spare us a lot of later trouble. Because if we don't walk back the "1000 wrong steps" early enough we will later suffer the consequences in a different way, namely as "being at the wrong place", for example in hell. Best wishes, M. #115019 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri May 13, 2011 2:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] How is wisdom accumulated Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob E, > Op 11-mei-2011, om 22:23 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > > > If there is a place where the explanation does not account for > > what is supposed to happen, that is a gap in understanding. It may > > be fine to just let that go, but on the other hand the whole reason > > for all the explanations is that it is hard to let go of an > > illusion if you don't see the reality in some way. The mind has to > > be convinced that the explanation accounts for our experiences. > ------- > N: To a certain extent, yes. But we cannot know everything, all > details. For example, in the case of the operation of kamma, we > cannot know everything, that is the field of the Buddhas. > > Meanwhile, I just heard (on a Thai recording) and read with interest > about twelve kinds of ahosi kamma. Quite some details, but the goal > is: less clinging to a self. I will keep that in mind. :-) I know it is easy to get attached to the explanations. However, if that recording is on the dsg site, I would like to hear it. Is it available at a particular date? Or do you have it off-line? I am interested in those details about kamma if I can read or hear it somehow. Thanks, Robert E. = = = = = = = #115020 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri May 13, 2011 2:24 am Subject: Re: Question about Angulimala Hello Leere Welt, all, Kamma results can be attenuated, and some of it cut off, but it can never be burned off "1 for 1" at the same rate that it was made. According to orthodox understanding, we have done an infinite or almost amount of Kamma in the countless Aeons and are still doing it in the present. So it would not be possible to burn it off at the same rate it was made. It is a Jain idea of non-reactive awareness burning it off. Buddha proposes a quantum leap that can cut off most of the Kamma. IMHO. With metta, Alex #115021 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri May 13, 2011 2:13 am Subject: Re: How is wisdom accumulated Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > > > Hi Robert E, > > ----- > <. . .> > > > KH: We already know that sort of thing, and therefore there is no need for further explanation. The Dhamma just has to explain that accumulations apply to citta, not to a permanent self. That's the part we don't already know. > > > RE: I think that is pretty funny, Ken, that when it comes to explanations of dhammas you would say that it is wholly other and does not relate to conventional reality at all, but when there is an explanation missing, and accumulations cannot really be properly accounted for, you go back to the conventional explanation and say that takes care of it. > ---- > > KH: It would be funny if it were the case. But matters relating to dhammas are not "wholly other" and I have never thought they were. You have said it was a completely different world from what we see and understand through concept, and that there is no relation between the conventional world and the paramatha world, and you have said so on innumerable occasions. You have said that the rules, laws and understandings that seem to pertain to the conventional world and to conventional objects are of the status of a "hallucination" and have no relation to actual reality at all. Since there are no objects, no actions and only individual qualities perceived by individual cittas, I don't see how a conventional explanation of "latent tendencies" would apply to paramatha dhammas at all, or in any way. Do you see a continuum now between how tendencies seem to function in ordinary life and how they are carried from one individual citta to the next? > We all know what seeing is, for example, but we don't all know that seeing is performed by a citta, not by a person. We all know what a visible object is. It is a reality that can be contacted by seeing. We just don't know the meaning of "reality" as distinct from "concept". > > We even know what a *desirable* visible object is, and we can distinguish between desirable, undesirable and desirable-neutral objects of all kinds. > > The same applies to 'greed' 'aversion' 'pleasant feeling' 'unpleasant feeling' and most of the other dhammas. We know what we are talking about, but we don't know the true nature of what we are talking about. First of all, I don't see how you can say that "we know what we are talking about" and at the same time say that we "don't know what it's nature is." If we don't know the nature of what something is, then we don't know anything about it. If I see an image on tv and I think it is a real person then I am pretty terribly deluded aren't I? In what way do I know what I am talking about if I am talking about a 2-dimensional image on the screen as if it were a real, three-dimensional person that I can touch and relate to? Similarly, if I think that there are bodies, people, things, cars, science, technology, events and actions taking place all the time, when all there really is are cittas, then I am completely deluded, and don't have the slightest idea what I am talking about. So I think you are completely wrong in this idea that you can "know what you are tlkaing about" while having no idea what it really is. I am allowed to see conventional and paramatha on a continuum, because I believe that the paramatha view of reality is really just a more refined breakdown of conventional reality seen more correctly and that one can cultivate and gradually gain a more and more correct vision of what is being seen. But you have spoken against this view of a continuum between conventional reality and direct discernment, and so I think it is off limits for you to make that connection. As soon as it suits you, you will once again say that they have no connection at all, I predict. > The Dhamma doesn't bother to reinvent the wheel. It only tells us things we don't already know but desperately need to know. Well I just wish you would make up your mind. You have said many times that the Dhamma is a total reinvention of the wheel, and that in fact what we think is the wheel is a total illusion with no connection to reality. So I think the wheel is reinvented from whole cloth in dhamma theory. There is no music in dhamma theory, only individual 'heard objects' with no tone or rhythm; there is no car in dhamma theory, only hardness, color and motion, seen one at a time with no conglomerated object being formed. It is indeed "wholly other," reinvented, and totally separate from conventional reality. Please tell me how "car" and "individual qualities" of hardness, color and motion have any relation to one another. That has been my side of the argument, which you have fought against. Are you on my team now? > --------------------- > > RE: Conventional reality really doesn't apply to this particular problem at all, because in conventional reality we have structures that are obviously capable of accumulating and carrying things forward, such as the brain, physical structures, memory centers and the like. > ---------------------- > > KH: I am sure there are many conventional theories that try to explain latent tendencies. I doubt any of them are widely agreed upon, but that is besides the point. They are largely agreed upon. We can see the memory center in the brain; we know how habits are registered and formed through formation of neural patterns, and behavioral conditioning in psychology, etc., etc. They are agreed upon in the scientific community with no problem. > The point is that we already know what is *meant* by latent tendency. You mean in the most gross, general way, which doesn't really inform us about anything? That is a grand departure from the meticulous detail of Abhidhamma and commentary. I guess you just don't care anymore. > ---------------------------- > > RE: There are no such structures in the dhamma theory that would allow a tendency to be latent and yet be passed on by momentary dhammas. > ---------------------------- > > KH: I am sure it is all explained by the various paccaya (conditions) that are listed in the Abhidhamma. (Nina has mentioned natural strong dependence condition.) It will become clearer as right understanding in general becomes clearer. Well we'll just have to wait until that comes around I guess. No need to discuss anything or raise any questions. It's all in the future. > ---------------- > RE: To me, it looks like this is an area in dhamma theory that cannot be easily accounted for, and that is why it is missing. > ---------------- > > KH: Fear not! It is all there. :-) Prove it. > ------------------------------ > > RE: How can a citta pass on an accumulation, no less a latent one > that is not active but hangs around in each momentary dhamma, passed on without doing anything, waiting to arise at some later time? That question challenges the nature of single cittas arising and falling in momentary independence and yet at the same time creating continuity by passing all sorts of things on. If no one can explain how that is done, I think it's a problem with the explanatory model being used. > ----------------------------- > > KH: Looking out my window, I might wonder how this fine, sunny day can be passing on accumulations for wet, cloudy days in the future. But it is! :-) That is mythological, Ken. There is no such thing as "accumulating wetness or cloudiness" that isn't there yet. Conditions just keep shifting and changing in a continuous field of what is actually there. There is no "future rainy day" being accumulated. But I appreciate the casualness of your thought process. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #115022 From: "Lukas" Date: Fri May 13, 2011 3:11 am Subject: Re: Question about Angulimala Hi Yoginder, I can give some notes on Angulimala, but you need to check it cause mostly I've heard it from a second hand. >Y: But just yesterday I came across the story of Angulimala, who had murdered many people, but had, on becoming a bhikkhu, become--so the story said--an arahant or boddhisattva. L: I think it's good to hear commentaries on that. They surely will give more details on Angulimala motivations and behaviours. >Y: This story did not make full sense to me, and this is why I am writing to you. If he had committed so many crimes, how come his karma was washed away and he became a boddhisattva in that very same life? L: He became an Arahat. Actually Angulimala(as I remember) wasn't a bad guy at all. He had extreme accumulations for right understanding. He comitted those crimes not because of anger, but due to wrong teachings he came up with. Dont know the details but his previous teacher told him that if he kill 1000 people he will be liberated.(or something like that). So there was only slight curtain of ignorance in him. Then when he did killed 999 people he met Buddha. Then he listened to the Buddha discourse and due to that the slight curtain of ignorance present in him fall down and he become an Arahant. Another good example is Milarepa who also killed some guys and then got liberated. But this is Mahajana story. >Y: Surely, according to the law of karma, that appears impossible as he needed to 'pay' for those crimes and merely becoming a monk--even at the hands of the Buddha--could not wash that karma away? L: But right understanding(panna) can wash up everything. Angulimala got liberated. During his Arahatship he had a lot of unpleasant vipaka cause people abused him and beat him. But there was no anger or ill-will in him. Just compassion to every person that abused him. Maybe anyone can provide a commentaries to the case of Angulimala? Best Lukas #115023 From: "connie" Date: Fri May 13, 2011 7:28 am Subject: ahosi kamma dear Nina, thanks for mentioning ahosi kamma! what book?? that would be quite some detail to me :) please and thank-you very much connie 115017 Re: [dsg] How is wisdom accumulated ...is the field of the Buddhas. Meanwhile, I just heard (on a Thai recording) and read with interest about twelve kinds of ahosi kamma. Quite some details, but the goal is: less clinging to a self. Nina. #115024 From: "leere_welt" Date: Fri May 13, 2011 5:40 am Subject: Re: Question about Angulimala Hello Alex, I agree, but you obviously misinterpreted my answer to Yoginder. My intention was to show that the outcome of one's "walking in the wrong direction" can be "felt" differently dependent of one's effort (or lack of it) of "walking in the right direction" afterwards. You certainly remember the simile where the Buddha talks about how a lump of salt (bad kamma) can make a small amount of water (good kamma) unpalatable but has no such effect if there is a lot of water (good kamma), like in a river. I think there is also another utterance of him where he says that a lot of "fresh" good kamma can change how the outcome of past bad kamma is experienced. I wanted to say a similar thing but it seems that I confused you with my "1000 steps back and forth". Best wishes, M. #115025 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri May 13, 2011 3:44 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ahosi kamma Dear Connie, Op 12-mei-2011, om 23:28 heeft connie het volgende geschreven: > thanks for mentioning ahosi kamma! what book? -------- N: In the commentary to Anguttara NIkaaya Book of the threes, nidaanasutta, and this is all in Thai. When I have finished revising anusayas I will give a summary of this. Kh Sujin relates all this to daily life, no theory. In short, ahosi kamma is kamma that was performed. I used to be confused when reading Manual of Abhidhamma. I have to wait with Sangiitisutta. I am also taking a break the week after next week. Nina. #115026 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri May 13, 2011 3:48 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] How is wisdom accumulated Dear Rob E, Op 12-mei-2011, om 18:16 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > Meanwhile, I just heard (on a Thai recording) and read with interest > > about twelve kinds of ahosi kamma. Quite some details, but the goal > > is: less clinging to a self. > > I will keep that in mind. :-) I know it is easy to get attached to > the explanations. However, if that recording is on the dsg site, I > would like to hear it. Is it available at a particular date? Or do > you have it off-line? I am interested in those details about kamma > if I can read or hear it somehow. ------- N: I really appreciate your interest. See my answer to Connie, it does not exist in English. Later on, when time allows :-)) Nina. #115027 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri May 13, 2011 8:50 am Subject: Contact Causes Craving! Friends: Contact causes Feeling causes Craving causes Suffering! This have I heard. At this time the Blessed One was living in a Brick-House. Then while being all alone, the Blessed Buddha spoke this deep Dhamma: In dependence on the eye and the forms, visual consciousness arises... In dependence on the ear and the sounds, auditory consciousness arises... In dependence on the nose and the odours, olfactory consciousness arises... In dependence on the tongue and flavours, gustatory consciousness arises... In dependence on the body and the touches, tactile consciousness arises... In dependence on the mind and the thoughts, mental consciousness arises... The meeting of these three phenomena, is Contact (phassa)... Conditioned by this contact, then feeling comes into being. Conditioned by this feeling, then craving arises. Conditioned by this craving, then clinging emerges. Conditioned by this clinging, the process of becoming is initiated. Conditioned by becoming, rebirth of the next moment & a next life happens. Conditioned by this recurring birth, ageing, decay, sickness, & death arrive! Such is the cause of this conditioned origin of an accumulation of suffering! In dependence on the eye and forms, then visual consciousness arises... In dependence on the ear and sounds, then auditory consciousness arises... In dependence on the nose and odours, then olfactory consciousness arises... In dependence on the tongue and flavours, gustatory consciousness arises... In dependence on the body and touches, then tactile consciousness arises... In dependence on the mind and thoughts, then mental consciousness arises... The meeting of these three phenomena, is Contact (phassa)... Conditioned by contact feeling arises. But by the complete stilling, & ceasing of that same craving, thereby comes the instantaneous cessation of clinging! The ending of clinging ceases becoming. The ending of becoming ceases birth. The ending of birth ceases ageing, sickness, death, sorrow, pain & much panic! That is the cause of the conditioned ceasing of this entire mass of suffering! Now a certain Bhikkhu was then standing listening to the Blessed One. The Blessed One saw him standing there listening and said to him: Did you hear that Dhamma explanation, bhikkhu? Yes, Sir! Learn that Dhamma exposition, Bhikkhu, remember it, make it as if your own, master it, since that Dhamma is advantageous, fundamental and essential to all of the Noble life...! <...> Source: The Grouped Sayings by the Buddha. Samyutta Nikâya. Book II 74-5 The section on Causation 12. Thread on Natika: 45. http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/index.html Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samâhita _/\_ * <....> #115028 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri May 13, 2011 7:06 pm Subject: Hi Rob E, --- On Wed, 20/4/11, Robert E wrote: > Calm is his mind. > Calm is his speech. > Calm is his action. > So is the tranquillity; > So is the serenity; > of one freed by the insight > of right understanding... > Dhammapada 96< R:>Thank you for repeating those quotes, Sarah, they are very nice. It's hard for me to read those without thinking of the peace and lack of thought that exists in the jhanas. It makes me think that jhana and the final cessation of proliferations that comes to the arahant have a very strong similarity and relationship. ..... S: The calm of insight is far "higher" because it develops with an understanding of dhammas as anatta. This is why it is only purified through such insight. Without it, there is bound to be attachment to jhana states and becoming. ... >Those quotes also remind me that 'right understanding' is a state of silence, rather than one of thought. That is very interesting. .... S: I would say, silence for the kilesa (defilements) which are very 'noisy' for most of the day. Right understanding doesn't mean not thinking, just not thinking unwisely. Metta Sarah ======= #115029 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri May 13, 2011 7:15 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Question about Angulimala Dear M., Welcome to DSG! --- On Thu, 12/5/11, leere_welt wrote: >according to my understanding, his karma wasn't "washed away". He also had to face the consequences like everyone else. ..... S: I think that what is meant is that after becoming an arahat, at the end of that life, there is the attaining of parinibbana and no further results of kamma which will be experienced. The job is done, there is no more becoming. Why not introduce yourself a little to the group? Where do you live? Can we address you by your given name? I look forward to reading your further comments on any of the threads. Metta Sarah ====== #115030 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri May 13, 2011 7:20 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Self-view & Computer Rage Hi Antony, --- On Sat, 30/4/11, antony272b2 wrote: > > Antony: I'm experiencing a phobia of intense fear bordering on terror that I'll get permanent RSI if I force the keyboard or mouse to complete something on the computer. ... <...> >Antony: Could the terror be moral dread (ottappa)? ... S: What you describe is not the wholesome ottappa which arises with all kusala cittas. Ottappa arises with calm, non-attachment, non-aversion, equanimity and so on. What you describe is dosa conditioned by thinking about various concepts with unhappy feeling. Is there any fear now? If not, forget it and understand what is conditioned now. Metta Sarah ====== #115031 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri May 13, 2011 7:31 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ahosi kamma Dear Connie, Nina & Rob E, --- On Fri, 13/5/11, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > thanks for mentioning ahosi kamma! what book? -------- >N: In the commentary to Anguttara NIkaaya Book of the threes, nidaanasutta, and this is all in Thai. When I have finished revising anusayas I will give a summary of this. Kh Sujin relates all this to daily life, no theory. In short, ahosi kamma is kamma that was performed. I used to be confused when reading Manual of Abhidhamma. .... S: In the meantime, we also had a few discussions on this topic before. In #74146 I quoted from the Psm and wrote the following: > >C: Path of Purification, xix, 14: Herein, kamma is fourfold: to be > experienced here and now, to be experienced on rebirth, to be experienced > in some subsequent becoming, and lapsed kamma.<..> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/69928 >S: I believe 'lapsed kamma' is not a good translation. As I mentioned before (and as you heard on tape). K.Sujin always corrects this and says 'ahosi kamma' just means 'past kamma': See the 'to the bailiff post': http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/69994 Time to look at Ps ii.78 in more detail as partially quoted in the Vism ref, X1X, 14: Patisambhidamagga ii. 78, Treatise V11 - On Action (Kammakathaa) (PTS, Nanamoli transl., Pali inserted): "There has been action (Ahosikamma.m), there has been action-result (ahosikammavipaako); there has been action(ahosikamma.m), there has been no action-result (naahosikammavipaako). There has been action (Ahosikamma.m), there is action-result (atthikammavipaako); there has been action (ahosikamma.m), there is no action-result (naatthikammavipaako). There has been action (Ahosikamma.m), there will be action-result (bhavissatikammavipaako); there has been action (ahosikamma.m), there will be no action-result (nabhavissatikammavipaako). There is action (atthikamma.m), there is action-result (atthikammavipaako); there is action (atthikamma.m), there is no action-result (natthikammavipaako. There is action (atthikamma.m), there will be action-result (bhavissatikammavipaako); there is action (atthikamma.m), there will be no action-result (vabhavissatikammavipaako). There will be action (Bhavissatikamma.m), there will be action-result (bhavissatikammavipaako); there will be action (bhavissatikamma.m), there will be no action-result (nabhavissatikammavipaako). [and so on as for all the above., but profitable action (ahosi kusala.m kamma.m) etc. and profitable action result (ahosi kusalasasa kammassa vipaako) etc for all 6 cases, then with .unprofitable action (ahosi akusala.m kamma.m) etc. and unprofitable action result (ahosi akusalassa kammassa vipaako) etc., followed by: There has been represhensible action (ahosi saavajja.m kamma.m) for all 6 cases...... ....unreprehensible action (anavajja.m).......dark action (ka.nha.m) ....bright action (suka.m)....action productive of pleasure (sukhundriya.m)...of pain (dukkhundriya.m).....action resulting in pleasure(sukhavipaaka.m)....in pain (dukkhavipaaka.m) for all 6 cases above.]" ******** S: We went through this text in Bangkok. As KS pointed out, ahosikamma refers to 'past' action, as opposed to present or future action. It clearly indicates such ahosi kamma may or many not a) have brought results, b)be bringing results now or c)bring results in future. So, I think she seems to be correct when she stresses that 'lapsed' or 'inoperative kamma' is not an adequate translation or understanding of ahosi kamma. Of course, the Pali term also simply points to 'past'!< ..... Metta Sarah ====== #115032 From: "sarah" Date: Fri May 13, 2011 7:45 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing Hi Ken H (& Rob E), #113827 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > As I see it, an inherent characteristic exists irrespectively of whether or not it is observed. Therefore, (taking a conventional example) I believe iron possesses its magnetic property irrespectively of whether a magnetic field is currently acting upon it. > > In the same way, I believe that a dhamma possesses its anatta property irrespectively of whether the idea of atta has ever occurred to anyone. .... S: Leaving aside the conventional example, this is correct. As we read in AN 3s, whether a Tathagata appears or not, all conditioned dhammas are anicca, dukkha and anatta as Nina quoted. .... > Take anicca, for example. I have always thought that a conditioned dhamma fell away *because it possessed the anicca characteristic*. But I suspect I have been wrong about that. Maybe it is conditioned by other dhammas to fall away. .... S: You're correct. It is the inherent nature of conditioned dhammas to fall away as soon as they've arisen. .... > > It's a similar story with dukkha. I have always assumed conditioned dhammas were ultimately repulsive because they bore the dukkha characteristic. But maybe they are repulsive because they are judged by panna to be repulsive (in view of their impermanence). (?) .... S: Again they are inherently unsatisfactory because they arise ad fall away. .... > > I genuinely could be persuaded. If I am, however, I might stop referring to anicca dukkha and anatta as *inherent* characteristics. Wouldn't it be better to just call them characteristics? .... S: They are the "inherent characteristics" of conditioned dhammas. .... > > Or, better still, I could call them the three basic *facts* of existence, as does one of my Buddhist books. .... S: A little wishy-washy there:-) They are the *facts* of such dhammas, all such dhammas. What is meant by "existence" here? Metta Sarah ===== #115033 From: "sarah" Date: Fri May 13, 2011 7:52 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Reflection on corpses Dear Ken O, > >Most of the chanda arising in the day (including most of the chanda we take for > >being kusala chanda) is in fact akusala chanda. > > > >What about now? Kusala or akusala chanda (interest)? Only right understanding can know. > > KO:  definitely, are you saying during one vow to be a Buddha, right > understanding does not arise.  .... S: If we just vow now to be a Buddha, is there any right understanding arising or just wishful vowing? .... >KO: Are you saying those meditate in the ancients > days do not have right understanding?   .... S: It depended. Those who were ariyans definitely had a lot of accumulated right understanding. Devadatta had right understanding of samatha bhavana when he attained jhanas before this was all lost, but no vipassana understanding. Metta Sarah ======= Reply | Messages in this Topic (351) #115034 From: "sarah" Date: Fri May 13, 2011 8:07 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Discussions in Bangkok with K.Sujin, Jan 2011(7) Hi Rob E, #113761 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > >S: In the context of the Satipatthana Sutta, sati and sampajanna refer to the awareness and understanding of realities (dhammas), i.e. satipatthana. Sati and sampajanna are also developed in samatha bhavana, but in this case, they have different objects - concepts. > > > > So, for example, there can be wise reflection on the Dhamma with sati and sampajanna and this is samatha bhavana. In order to be the sati and sampajanna of satipatthana, the object has to be a nama or a rupa - one of the 4 foundations of mindfulness - rupas, cittas or cetasikas. > >R: I am guessing that rupas = 1st foundation and that citta and cetasika are...3 and 4? If that is the case then 2 would be vedana. Is vedana classified as a mental formation, or where does "feeling" fit in? ... S: The rupas of the body are included in the 1st and 4th foundations, vedana (feelings) are included in the 2nd and 4th foundations, cittas are included in the 3rd and 4th foundations. All conditioned dhammas are included in the 4th foundation - all khandhas. Vedana refers to all feelings. These are mental and arise with every single citta at every moment. I'll keep this brief, but pls ask more if you wish to have it clarified. Also lots and lots in 'Useful Posts' under "Satipatthana Sutta and commentaries". .... >> I'm also interested in how you would further define the fourth foundation? It seems like it is a complex level of satipatthana, involving aspects of Dhamma. It's always been a confusing level for me. .... S: It is referring to all conditioned dhammas under different classifications. Whether we talk about the hindrances, the khandhas or the path, for example, these are just different conditioned namas and rupas which can be known when they appear. Satipatthana always begins at this moment with the understanding of what is experienced now. Metta Sarah ===== #115035 From: "leere_welt" Date: Fri May 13, 2011 8:50 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Question about Angulimala Hello Sarah, I'm sorry in case the lack of an "introduction" was a mistake. I'm from Germany and try to understand and follow the Buddha's teaching for many years now. If acceptable I would like to stay anonymous (with regard to my name). > --- On Thu, 12/5/11, leere_welt wrote: > >according to my understanding, his karma wasn't "washed away". He also had to face the consequences like everyone else. > ..... > S: I think that what is meant is that after becoming an arahat, at the end of that life, there is the attaining of parinibbana and no further results of kamma which will be experienced. The job is done, there is no more becoming. I fully agree. Best wishes, M. #115036 From: "Lukas" Date: Fri May 13, 2011 10:11 pm Subject: Re: Question about Angulimala Hi M. I think it's like just move on, no need to 1000 steps back. The problem is(it considers especially me) that we think to much about all that things. > I wanted to say a similar thing but it seems that I confused you with >my "1000 steps back and forth". Best Lukas #115037 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri May 13, 2011 10:44 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ahosi kamma Dear Sarah, Op 13-mei-2011, om 11:31 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > So, I think she seems to be correct when she stresses that 'lapsed' > or 'inoperative kamma' is not an adequate translation or > understanding of ahosi kamma. Of course, the Pali term also simply > points to 'past'!< ------- N: Exactly. And these are the twelve kinds. Kh Sujin added a few explanations I will mention later on. ----- Nina. #115038 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat May 14, 2011 12:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Are space kasina and conscious kasina samatha or vipassana? Dear Alex, Op 12-mei-2011, om 3:35 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > In Nettipakarana (Of sutta pitaka) these two kasinas are clearly > mentioned to be Vipassana. In pali you can check at Netti page 89 > > Space Kasina: akasakasinam > Consciousness Kasina: vinnanakasinam > > 8 of 10 kasinas are samatha. Those last two are Vipassana. > > Now, I wonder, how can they be used for vipasssana? ------- N: I checked the English translation, the Guide. It is very short, no explanation. If they are objects of vipassanaa they have to be understood as elements devoid of self. Space would be the conditioned space that is in between the groups of ruupa. If one considers this, there is no idea of a whole coherent body. How frail it is, all these groups of ruupa with space in between. As to vi~n~naa.na kasina: the cittas are objects of insight. There is no citta that lasts, it is gone immediately. These are my own ideas. Nina. #115039 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat May 14, 2011 3:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] How is wisdom accumulated Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: ...I am interested in those details about kamma > > if I can read or hear it somehow. > ------- > N: I really appreciate your interest. See my answer to Connie, it > does not exist in English. Later on, when time allows :-)) I spent a few minutes trying to learn Pali the other week but it seemed pretty complicated. :-) Some day if I have time I will try to learn something, but I'm already overwhelmed so it may be a while... Meanwhile, I will wait. I appreciate all the difficult translating that you do... Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - #115040 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat May 14, 2011 4:03 am Subject: [dsg] Re: what is "direct" understanding? Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Rob E, > > --- On Wed, 20/4/11, Robert E wrote: > > > Calm is his mind. > > > Calm is his speech. > > > Calm is his action. > > > So is the tranquillity; > > > So is the serenity; > > > of one freed by the insight > > > of right understanding... > > > Dhammapada 96< > > > > R:>Thank you for repeating those quotes, Sarah, they are very nice. It's hard for me to read those without thinking of the peace and lack of thought that exists in the jhanas. It makes me think that jhana and the final cessation of proliferations that comes to the arahant have a very strong similarity and relationship. > ..... > S: The calm of insight is far "higher" because it develops with an understanding of dhammas as anatta. This is why it is only purified through such insight. Without it, there is bound to be attachment to jhana states and becoming. Thank you for pointing that out - I think it is very clear that jhana without insight - an awakened mind to understand the subtle characteristics of the jhana - the serenity of jhana is not only temporary but bound to eventually lead back to more clinging; but I think it is also very clear that the jhanas are a most special object of insight. I have recently seen in quoted - from sutta or commentary, I don't remember - how the jhana leaves in its wake a state of calm and serenity after which it is much more conducive a state for experiencing high insight in relation to that very still state. So the jhanic serenity and suppression of defilements works in tandem with mindfulness to achieve a very deep level of insight. I think it is this combination done correctly that the Buddha especially praised. Everyday moments of insight are not to be denied, but the it seems that the sustained moments of insight in relation to deeply pacified khandas in jhana cannot be underestimated in the advanced stages of the path. > >Those quotes also remind me that 'right understanding' is a state of silence, rather than one of thought. That is very interesting. > .... > S: I would say, silence for the kilesa (defilements) which are very 'noisy' for most of the day. Right understanding doesn't mean not thinking, just not thinking unwisely. One would be very content with cessatin of the defilements, whatever else may or may not be there. I relate to your description of the 'noise' of defiled thoughts throughout the day. Anyone would appreciate a vacation from greed, hatred, delusion, attachment and suffering of all kinds both great and subtle, and the thoughts that feed them. May we all have such a nice vacation soon! Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - - - - - #115041 From: "Dieter" Date: Sat May 14, 2011 4:25 am Subject: Enlightenment from the light side Hi Dhammafriends, hope you enjoy (in case you haven't read it before) ;-) The Light Side of Enlightenment (Bhikkhu Sujato ..http://santifm.org/santipada/2010/the-light-side-of-enlightenment/) Buddhist light-bulb jokes... How many meditation teachers does it take to change a light bulb? Fifty. One to actually do the work, and forty-nine to offer reflections on it. How many joss-stick Buddhists does it take to change a light bulb? Why bother? Kwan Yin will do it for us. How many monks does it take to change a light bulb? They can't. There's no light bulbs in the Vinaya. How many vipassana meditators does it take to change a light bulb? No need. Just mindfully note: `darkness, darkness, darkness'. How many tantric adepts does it take to change a light bulb? Two; but they have to do it in full lotus posture. How many Nagarjunas does it take to change a light bulb? Since there's no Nagarjuna and no light bulb, how can there be any change? How many Buddhist scholars does it take to change a light bulb? An internationally respected committee of academics, after deliberating all night, conclusively failed to agree on the meaning of the word `light bulb'. Meanwhile, the sun came up. How many Zen masters does it take to change a light bulb? The peach blossoms fall softly on the warty old frog. How many Ajahn Brahms does it take to change a light bulb? The light bulb just has to get into jhana, then it'll glow by itself. How many Abhidhamma scholars does it take to change a light bulb? There are 20W light bulbs, 40W light bulbs, 80W light bulbs, 100W …200W… There are 6V light bulbs, 12V light bulbs, 120V light bulbs, 240V light bulbs… There are incandescent bulbs, fluorescent bulbs… There are clear light bulbs, pearled light bulbs, colored light bulbs… There are screw-in light bulbs, bayonet light bulbs… There are 20W light bulbs that are 6V, there are 20W light bulbs that are 12V…120V…240V… There are 40W light bulbs that are 6V…240V… 80W…100W…200W… There are 20W light bulbs that are 6V incandescent… There are 200W light bulbs that are 240V, florescent, colored, and bayonet. How many arahants does it take to change a light bulb? One. unquote with Metta Dieter #115042 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat May 14, 2011 4:43 am Subject: Re: wisdom and doing Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > > Hi Ken H (& Rob E), > > #113827 > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > As I see it, an inherent characteristic exists irrespectively of whether or not it is observed. Therefore, (taking a conventional example) I believe iron possesses its magnetic property irrespectively of whether a magnetic field is currently acting upon it. > > > > In the same way, I believe that a dhamma possesses its anatta property irrespectively of whether the idea of atta has ever occurred to anyone. > .... > S: Leaving aside the conventional example, this is correct. As we read in AN 3s, whether a Tathagata appears or not, all conditioned dhammas are anicca, dukkha and anatta as Nina quoted. > .... I have a feeling this is one of those debates that will continue from one lifetime to the next. I of course agree that all conditioned dhammas are anicca, dukkha and anatta. There is no problem with that as far as I am concerned. The eternal debate that I have with Ken is whether anatta is a *positive characteristic,* ie, something that can be experienced as *something,* or whether it is experienced as the realization of the lack of any self, being, entity, solid personality, individuality, permanent or substantial entity or any other form of centralized person. My point is that anatta is a term that means *there is no self,* and that is all it means. It does not mean that there *is* something called *anatta.* Anatta is not an existent structure, it is a realization, perception or understanding that there is no self. If it means something other than that, I beg you to please describe what else it is, because this argument seems to focus on a small point, but it is important to understand that these basic principles of Buddhism are not *things,* but understandings. It is true that one will never find a self in or behind any dhammas, because there is none, and that is what anatta means, so it is a characteristic of all things - no self. But there is not a *no self* in anything. It is not an alternative structure. Likewise, anicca *is* a characteristic of all things. But what it means is that things are not permanent but exhibit change from moment to moment. The fact that things are never the same from one moment to the next is part of the demonstration of anatta. If there were no anicca, anatta would also be impossible. An atta or self is dependent on having a stable entity that does not change and has control. Since all things are in a constant state of flux there is no possibility of a stable, permanent or any other form of entity that can be described as a self. > > Take anicca, for example. I have always thought that a conditioned dhamma fell away *because it possessed the anicca characteristic*. But I suspect I have been wrong about that. Maybe it is conditioned by other dhammas to fall away. > .... > S: You're correct. It is the inherent nature of conditioned dhammas to fall away as soon as they've arisen. > .... I just think saying that it falls away "because of the anicca characteristic" as if it has a special thing or button on it which causes it to fall away, can be very misleading. It falls away because of *anicca,* not because it's a characteristic. Maybe everyone agrees with this and I'm splitting hairs, but I don't think so. Anicca isn't a *thing* about dhammas, it's a condition that dhammas are subject to, which is that in the universe of samsara all things fall away immediately upon arising. It's not because of some nature of the dhamma that this is so, but because of the universe in which dhammas appear. All things in samsara are anicca. They are all temporary and constantly changing. That is why they fall away. > > It's a similar story with dukkha. I have always assumed conditioned dhammas were ultimately repulsive because they bore the dukkha characteristic. But maybe they are repulsive because they are judged by panna to be repulsive (in view of their impermanence). (?) > .... > S: Again they are inherently unsatisfactory because they arise and fall away. > .... > > > > I genuinely could be persuaded. If I am, however, I might stop referring to anicca dukkha and anatta as *inherent* characteristics. Wouldn't it be better to just call them characteristics? > .... > S: They are the "inherent characteristics" of conditioned dhammas. > .... > > > > Or, better still, I could call them the three basic *facts* of existence, as does one of my Buddhist books. > .... > S: A little wishy-washy there:-) They are the *facts* of such dhammas, all such dhammas. What is meant by "existence" here? Facts is nice in the sense that it doesn't attribute some sort of special thing to dhammas as individual entities, but just says 'this is the way things are, this is the way they function, this is what happens to them.' Characteristics tend to seem like possessions of that which has them, which would tend to make them like little people with this, that and the other thing that are "theirs." Dhammas possess nothing. They just objectively arise and fall according to the law. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #115043 From: A T Date: Sat May 14, 2011 7:28 am Subject: Some thoughts on Anatta and Path (Long) Dear All, Reading the suttas, I noticed a strange tension between what we call teaching of Self vs No Self, and no explicit teaching on what later came to be known “two truthsâ€, which is somewhat self contradictory and contradicts the suttas, btw. How can there be two truths about the same thing? In one type of analysis conventional truth is false from the POV of absolute truth. Absolute truth is false from conventional truth. 1.We know that Buddha on numerous occasions taught “Anatta†. “"Is [aggregate] permanent or impermanent?" — "Impermanent, venerable sir." — "Now is what is impermanent pleasant or painful?" — "Painful, venerable sir." — "Now is what is impermanent, what is painful since subject to change, fit to be regarded thus: 'This is mine, this is I, this is my self'"? — "No, venerable sir."†– SN 22.59 2.But Buddha also taught teachings of Atta, in Attavaggo Dhp XII such as “Self is the protector of Self†and that there is self-doing (as opposed to Makkhali Gosala’s teaching that there is no self that does anything). 3.Buddha has rejected ontological claims such as “all existsâ€, “all doesn’t exist†, “all is plurality†(SN12.48) and it is wrong attention to think “there is no self for me†(MN2). IMHO, to say that ultimately self doesn’t exist, but conventionally it does, it still to fall for ontological reification. Its existence is denied on ultimate level, but affirmed at conventional. This isn’t even ontological “middle pathâ€. It sounds like combination of both “existence and non-existence†(“atthitañceva natthitañcaâ€) – a polarity of views that Buddha rejected to be concerned with (SN12.15). The fact that within Buddhism there was so much debate for thousands of years regarding “two truths†signals me that this is just one of those thicket and wilderness of views, that is tangled and may not have an objective solution, hence is one of the reasons why the Buddha didn’t go there. There were enough clever philosophers whom nobody could logical beat at their own game. It is not difficult for clever philosopher to prove The Self or No Self, and if these things lie beyond experience, then they are not experienced and cannot be emperically proven. Thus irrelevant to the experiential problem of dukkha. Also even if someone claims to have percieved what they think is “Selfâ€, it is possible to counter it by saying that they haven’t seen far enough to see that this is not “Selfâ€. If someone claims to have percieved that “there is no Selfâ€, it is possible to counter it by saying that one didn’t see far enough to actually find it, one doesn’t have far enough vision that can encompass ALL reality, and not just a part of it that doesn’t have what one is looking for. As you see, it is too easy to wiggle out of any ontological position, or at least to put it in doubt. The Buddha in SN 44.10 (as it is translated) was directly asked by Vacchagotta if there is a Self. To that question the Buddha was silent. He explained His silence that to answer about is there or isn’t there a Self would be incorrect from the teaching of Anatta. Note: “There is no Self†is a speculative and unprovable metaphysical position was rejected by the Buddha. Anatta is not “there is no Selfâ€, but an emperical guideline for treating experience which is not Self. It is also very interesting that in the main suttas the Buddha didn’t say “characteristics (lakkhaṇa) of not-self/anicca/dukkhaâ€. Anattalakkhaṇa is mentioned only once as part of sutta title (anattalakkhaṇasuttaṃ that is also called Pañcavaggiya suttaṃ in another version of sutta-pitaka) . Tilakkhana is not found in sutta-pitaka except for 1 reference in Apadana and 6 times in AbhidhammamÄtikÄpÄḷi. But if we search for perception (or recognition) of anicca, dukkha, anatta (aniccasaññÄ, dukkhasaññÄ, anattasaññÄ) then we find plenty of them in the suttas. Perception of anicca/dukkha/anatta implies a usage, a method and the path, rather than simple ontological teaching (which is true also) of what is. Perhaps one is to actively apply “this is anicca†to every phenomena (ex: as taught in MN152) to develop the mind’s response to the sense data cognized by the faculties (indriya), rather than just accept the teaching as statement of truth, and leave it at that. If we use Anatta as intended, as an advanced strategy to let go of clinging rather than a dead-end metaphysical position, then the practical and experiential results will speak for themselves. One may not be able to prove it logically, but at least there is something experiential (absence of personal suffering) to show for it rather than mere words that are elegant in rhetoric and very sound in argumentation, but are just words. Buddha has focused on actions and their result (in terms of presence or absence of stress). Ultimately this is what matters. I’ve read a lot of philosophies. Recently I’ve read a big book about certain points that Tibetan Buddhist logicians have argued for over a thousand of years, the same issue that was argued for thousands of years in western philosophy. Ultimately it seems that logical reasoning is endless. The more theory you know, the more questions arise. The smarter and cleverer you are, the more errors you can see in those arguments. One logician can argue quite well for position “Xâ€, and another logician can argue just effectively for an opposite position, position “not-Xâ€. Which one to chose? Does it actually matter? The right view and ignorance is most commonly defined as: “"And what is right view? Knowledge with reference to stress, knowledge with reference to the origination of stress, knowledge with reference to the cessation of stress, knowledge with reference to the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress: This is called right view.†MN141 Not knowing about suffering, not knowing about the origin of suffering, not knowing about the cessation of suffering, not knowing about the way leading to the cessation of suffering — this is called ignorance.†- MN9 While Anatta is most definitely true, it has to be used properly, at a proper time, and never misinterpreted. Some could use metaphysical anatta teaching and have argued that “If there is no Self, then by whom is kamma is done, and what no self can affectâ€? Or to put it more directly, “if there is no Self, then there is no Killer and no victim that is killed. So what is so bad about killing?â€. Or some may say that since there is no control, one can’t stop unwholesome qualities from arising, so no need to counter act them. As SN44.10 sutta tells us, anatta teaching is not always appropriate for all. Buddha didn’t just teach “The Truthâ€, He taught what was needed at the most appropriate time. Skipping steps in order to “use the most advanced technique and cut all other problems at the core†can seriously backfire. At least the Buddha was able to untangle from this whole philosophical mess and find the path toward ultimate Happiness as cessation of ALL suffering (dukkha). This is something that experientally matters. Words are cheap, and everybody has their own ideas. But do they deliver the goods? It is possible that we should NOT take advanced teachings out of context and apply them indiscriminately without the sense of appropriateness and time. Maybe wisdom needs to be appropriate for the stage one at, and maybe one should try to use wisdom on the level of an Arahant to enter the path of stream entry. Before you polish the piece of wood, one needs to cut it using saw and do a lot of preliminary work before polishing with a very fine cloth. If one were to use the polishing cloth too early, it would be wasted. Maybe same is with no-control, etc. One shouldn’t infer that “since we need to get rid of Self view, we should not do anything for that would reinforce the idea of a Self that can do things.â€. A certain degree of wholesome sense of self is required. People who are not “self†conscious/reflexive enough, may not care enough to follow the Dhamma in the first place, It seems that some use classic late Mahayana (madhyamaka) argument against “a method†for NibbÄna. It goes like this. NibbÄna is unconditioned, thus how can it be caused by anything? So any type of practice, being conditioned, just creates more conditions and more of the same. Is insight caused by insight itself (x -> x), is insight caused by something else ( not x -> x ) or Is insight uncaused? If insight is caused by something else, then anything unrelated such as practicing or not practicing, even washing dishes or getting stoned could produce it. Thus no need for special practice or method. If it is uncaused, then there isn’t a cause to produce it, thus no method or practice is needed and everything is equally valid and killing or not killing wouldn’t have any influence one way or the other. If insight is caused by itself, then insight is ever present, such as, we all have Buddha Nature. We are all already awakened and were eternally so. Thus nothing can be done, and in fact nothing should be done because that would simply create more conditions while NibbÄna is unconditioned. This point that “insight being cause of insight†(x -> x) is absurd as it involves infinite regression, eternal possession, and no possibility of reaching it for those who don’t have it. Even a miracle (being other than insight) would not cause insight. So either one is fully awakened or one has no possibility of ever reaching it. A sad proposition indeed. Those who have it, don’t need to study (or do anything, they might as well be Muslims), and those who don’t can’t do anything ever. If we say that insight is caused by itself and other, then the problems of both options still are present. If we say that insight is uncaused, then nothing prior to insight can have anything to do with it. Killing ones parents or giving dÄna to Buddhas would equally be irrelevant for gaining or not gaining insight. The same logically fallacious arguments could be said about effort, concentration, right views, and so on. These points nullify the possibility of practice and basically state that we all (including Muslims, Athiests, Xtians, Hindus and all) are already awakened – which is obviously empirically false. Why would Buddha have to arise to teach us how to reach something that we already have and confuse people with talk about reaching NibbÄna? However these Mahayana (Madhymaka) points make a very crafty error. NibbÄna is not an effect. “It†is reached. N8P is path (magga), it is not a cause or condition (hetu, paccayo, etc) to create NibbÄna. Driving to another city or swimming to another shore doesn’t create the destination. It is only a way to get there. Thus conditioned nature of the N8P doesn’t modify NibbÄna in any way and N8P is the way, not the cause of it. Same about gathering wisdom and right view. The way there is gradual and is not perfect. One starts where one is. If one waits for the perfect opportunity, it may never come. Perfect opportunity presents itself only after one has done enough preliminary hard work. "And what is right view? Knowledge with reference to stress, knowledge with reference to the origination of stress, knowledge with reference to the cessation of stress, knowledge with reference to the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress: This is called right view. MN141 Not knowing about suffering, not knowing about the origin of suffering, not knowing about the cessation of suffering, not knowing about the way leading to the cessation of suffering — this is called ignorance.†- MN9 Right View involves a progressive skill at knowing (pariññÄta) stress, abandoning (pahÄtabba) its cause, experiencing (sacchikÄtabba) its cessation and developing the path (paá¹ipadÄ ariyasaccaṃ bhÄvetabba). Ignorance is not knowing and not doing these. Ignorance is gradually let go off as more skill in Right View is developed until ignorance is fully abandoned at Arhatship. Upanisa sutta (SN12.23) starts the path from ignorance to knowledge of liberation. Ignorance is eliminated fully only at Arhatship and it is the last fetter to be eliminated. Thus it is unreasonable to require a worldling to absolutely have no underlying ignorance in development and in right effort. It is a required condition to have ignorance in order to remove it. You can’t remove what doesn’t exist, but as long as ignorance exists your actions will be imperfect. Similar is with craving. Only at Arhatship it is completely removed. So if one has tendency for craving, one can’t remove it until Arahattamaggaphala. So one might as well use it whenever possible to remove craving as is taught in the suttas. “"This body comes into being through craving. And yet it is by relying on craving that craving is to be abandoned…"This body comes into being through conceit. And yet it is by relying on conceit that conceit is to be abandoned.†– AN 4.159 In MN117 it is said : “"One tries to abandon wrong view & to enter into right view: This is one's right effort. One is mindful to abandon wrong view & to enter & remain in right view: This is one's right mindfulness. Thus these three qualities — right view, right effort, & right mindfulness — run & circle around right view. So right effort does include trying to abandon the existing unwholesome qualities. If one is supposed to be totally perfect with no wrong views and wrong efforts, how is one supposed to develop right effort that abandons unwholesome qualities? One can be mindful to abandon wrong view & to enter & remain in right view – so no need to wait for perfect mindfulness before engaging in it. Perfections comes from proper practice. Ex: Maybe it is good to treat all that has occurred as “it has happened the only way it could ever happen given those conditions and it is all beyond control†to counter remorse & regret (or conceit) , but when it comes to right now or near to the future, a wholesome and responsible sense of self that cares for the outcomes should be used to attempt at restraining bad deeds and to do good deeds. The nature of the mind is such that it is going to do something, and if it is not going to do good – then it will do bad. IMHO restraining the kilesas is a good action. Another example: Teaching on Kamma and its results. One monk took the phrase (all things are stressful) out of context and indiscriminately inferred that even good kamma leads to stress (MN136). While it is true that ultimately all things are stressful, this is very advanced teaching that may backfire for some if used too early without the required preliminary steps being completed. Some may use this as an excuse not to do good kamma since it still leads to stress. What should not be forgotten is that the path is gradual, and it is not the usual case that one goes from 100% dukkha to 0% dukkha. Just like a person doesn’t get to the top of the staircase by skipping intermediate steps, same is here. There are intermediate steps that may be required to be stepped on in order to get to the top of the staircase. Good kamma is a peg with which one removes the dart of bad kamma. Then when bad kamma is removed by doing good kamma, one may eventually remove the conceit of self doing good kamma. So ultimately one no longer does any kamma. The Kamma for wisdom is to ask wise monks questions like “'What is wholesome, venerable sir? What is unwholesome? What is blamable? What is blameless? What should be cultivated? What should not be cultivated? What, by my doing it, will be long for my harm and suffering? Or what, by my doing it, will be long for my welfare and happiness?'†(MN135). Please take a note of this, and please keep in mind the down to earth practicality of such questions. One doesn’t start with metaphysical questions, but with practical questions. Eventually when a certain teaching has been used to the fullest, and when it has outlived its usefulness, a more advanced teaching could be used (that at the first glance may seem to reject the former teaching). It is interesting that the highest truth is not the metaphysical teaching, but experiential teaching of reaching NibbÄna. In Patodasuttaṃ (AN4.12.2 or AN 4.113) paramatthasaccaṃ (or paramasaccaṃ) is the experience of NibbÄna, and this experience is not the –idea- of NibbÄna, but actual non-verbal experience “with the bodyâ€. So the suttas do seem to teach that highest truth is not some metaphysical abstract teaching that is more factually true then some ordinary teaching, but that this is a direct “bodily†experience of NibbÄna. Pahitatto kÄyena ceva paramasaccaṃ sacchikaroti, paññÄya ca ativijjha passati. The end (NibbÄna) is not the path (noble 8fold path). The path, is conditioned, and is just like a raft to get to unconditioned NibbÄna (the other shore). It is interesting that the Buddha had great foresight when he said that N8P brings one to NibbÄna, it doesn’t cause or create it. For how could unconditioned be ever created? This misunderstanding was the cause of logical arguments by heterodox Mahayanists against any kind of development (unconditioned cannot be created by any type of development). Fortunately the path does not create the goal. So it can include useful means that may not be exact as the goal to be reached. For example: Desire is required to be able to train hard to get to Arhatship. Without it, one will simply not exert oneself hard enough on the path (SN51.15) and will not be motivated enough to counteract the kilesas – which are very strong. But once the destination is reached, desire is abandoned. In another sutta, Ananda teaches the same in another sutta, AN4.159. Conceit and craving can be skillfully used for the path, and abandoned when they are no longer needed. Unlike all the Philosophers caught up in thinking in their Ivory towers, the Buddha was able to bring the actual path for something that matters. Logical proofs are never final, and never satisfy the most important problem: the problem of Suffering. Only Buddha’s teaching does. IMHO. “AttÄ hi attano nÄtho kohi nÄtho paro siyÄ AttanÄ'va sudantena nÄthaṃ labhati dullabhaṃ.“ http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.12.budd.html “Venerable Gotama, I am one of such a doctrine, of such a view: ‘There is no self-doer, there is no other-doer.’(“Natthi attakÄro, natthi parakÄroâ€) “I have not, brahman, seen or heard such a doctrine, such a view. How, indeed, could one — moving forward by himself, moving back by himself — say: ‘There is no self-doer, there is no other-doer’? What do you think, brahmin, is there an element or principle of initiating or beginning an action?†… So, brahmin, when there is the element of endeavoring, endeavoring beings are clearly discerned; of such beings, this is the self-doer, this, the other-doer. I have not, brahmin, seen or heard such a doctrine, such a view as yours. How, indeed, could one — moving forward by himself, moving back by himself — say ‘There is no self-doer, there is no other-doer’?†http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an06/an06.038.niza.html dukkhaṃ ariyasaccaṃ pariññÄta dukkhasamudayaṃ ariyasaccaṃ pahÄtabba dukkhanirodhaṃ ariyasaccaṃ sacchikÄtabba dukkhanirodhagÄminÄ« paá¹ipadÄ ariyasaccaṃ bhÄvetabba PTS S V.422 With metta, Alex #115044 From: han tun Date: Sat May 14, 2011 8:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] ahosi kamma   Dear Sarah (Connie, Nina & Rob E), Thank you very much for quoting Ptsm. Kammakathaa. In your post 6 cases were quoted. In the Burmese books, *for the same text*, 12 cases are noted. (1) There has been action (ahosikamma.m), there has been action-result (ahosikammavipaako). (2) There has been action (ahosikamma.m), there has been no action-result (naahosikammavipaako). (3) There has been action (ahosikamma.m), there is action-result (atthikammavipaako). (4) There has been action (ahosikamma.m), there is no action-result (naatthikammavipaako). (5) There has been action (ahosikamma.m), there will be action-result (bhavissatikammavipaako). (6) There has been action (ahosikamma.m), there will be no action-result (nabhavissatikammavipaako). ---------- (7) There is action (atthikamma.m), there is action-result (atthikammavipaako). (8) There is action (atthikamma.m), there is no action-result (natthikammavipaako. (9) There is action (atthikamma.m), there will be action-result (bhavissatikammavipaako). (10) There is action (atthikamma.m), there will be no action-result (nabhavissatikammavipaako). ---------- (11) There will be action (bhavissatikamma.m), there will be action-result (bhavissatikammavipaako). (12) There will be action (bhavissatikamma.m), there will be no action-result (nabhavissatikammavipaako). Han: Nos. (1) to (6) pertain to the *past*; Nos. (7) to (10) pertain to the *present*; and Nos. (11) & (12) pertain to the *future*. ============== Dictionary meanings: PTS Dictionary: Ahosi-kamma = an act or thought whose kamma has no longer any potential force. Ahosi-kamma is said to be a kamma inhibited by a more powerful one. Pali-Burmese Dictionary: Ahosi = past action. Ahosi-kamma = same as in PTS. [Please note that in Pali-Burmese Dictionary, the meanings of ahosi and ahosi-kamma are different.] ============== Han: This is just for the information. Respectfully, Han #115045 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat May 14, 2011 9:25 am Subject: Re: Discussions in Bangkok with K.Sujin, Jan 2011(7) Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > S: It is referring to all conditioned dhammas under different classifications. Whether we talk about the hindrances, the khandhas or the path, for example, these are just different conditioned namas and rupas which can be known when they appear. Satipatthana always begins at this moment with the understanding of what is experienced now. I wonder if the classifications are just part of the sutta description, or are they supposed to be thought of when actually experiencing the dhammas on the fourth level...? Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #115046 From: "paccayas" Date: Sat May 14, 2011 4:38 am Subject: Re: Enlightenment from the light side   --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dieter" wrote: > > Hi Dhammafriends, > > hope you enjoy (in case you haven't read it before) ;-) > > The Light Side of Enlightenment (Bhikkhu Sujato ..http://santifm.org/santipada/2010/the-light-side-of-enlightenment/) > Buddhist light-bulb jokes... <....> haha, it's also very funny but have some real truth in it. Best wishes, Adam #115047 From: "colette" Date: Sat May 14, 2011 4:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] How is wisdom accumulated Hi Robert, There is your answer to the question "How is wisdom accumulated". You answered your own question: "..., I will wait. I appreciate all the difficult translating that you do..." Better watch out, "hell" may freeze over before you get an answer to your question that requires translation. I think Adrian Belew said it best in his song "Oh Daddy" where he tells his daughter "Don't hold your breathe cause ya might turn blue." May I try to anser your question of "how is wisdom accumulated"? What is there that can be "ACCUMULATED"? Does wisdom exist? If so, HOW? Why is your wisdom any different from my wisdom or from any person that lives in a homeless shelter or that lives in an IVORY TOWER on Wall St.? Is there really a difference between juggling two objects and juggling ten objects or 100 objects or 1000 objects? You yourself created a piece called THE TRANSFORMATION OF CONSCIOUSNESS... so you should easily be able to see what I'm speaking of. What does it mean to "accumulate" something that you are only delusioning the existence of? What is an AMERICAN DREAM? Isn't a dream nothing more than a hallucination? What about YOGA-NIDRA or TURIYA as being ALTERED STATES OF CONSCIOUSNESS (see MEDITATION and YOGA) Isn't this nothing more than an ALTERED STATE OF CONSCIOUSNESS, therefore a dream or a hallucination or a delusion? Can you prove that THE AMERICAN DREAM actually exists as all RUPA exist? If you can prove this than how can it be a dream? Is NAMA nothing more than RUPA? Is RUPA nothing more than NAMA? Is there a difference between THE MIND and THE BODY and THE UNIVERSE (see MAHAMUDRA, ADAM KADMON, AIN, AIN SOPH, AIN SOPH UR, etc)? How does CONTROL play into this? Is CONTROL a characteristic of WISDOM? IF I control my body does that mean that I can control other bodies as if I were a cattle rancher herding cattle to be taken to slaughter? What about a herding cattle to be taken to a SHOWER? What's the difference? If I control MONEY then don't I control other people? Sorry, group. I'm having fun with my colleagues Robert and Nina and you get to watch. Pardon me but my friends are just preparing the next course of the next part of the meal we're serving up so I've got some time to sit at the bar and have a drink or two. toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Nina. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > ...I am interested in those details about kamma > > > if I can read or hear it somehow. > > ------- > > N: I really appreciate your interest. See my answer to Connie, it > > does not exist in English. Later on, when time allows :-)) > > I spent a few minutes trying to learn Pali the other week but it seemed pretty complicated. :-) Some day if I have time I will try to learn something, but I'm already overwhelmed so it may be a while... > > Meanwhile, I will wait. I appreciate all the difficult translating that you do... > > Best, > Robert E. > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > #115048 From: "Ken H" Date: Sat May 14, 2011 1:30 pm Subject: Re: Enlightenment from the light side Hi Dieter and Adam, Yes, very funny thanks Dieter, and some truth in it. I don't know about arahants' changing light bulbs, though. I think the last arahant in the human realm died before light bulbs were invented. Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "paccayas" wrote: > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dieter" wrote: > > > > Hi Dhammafriends, > > > > hope you enjoy (in case you haven't read it before) ;-) > > > > The Light Side of Enlightenment (Bhikkhu Sujato ..http://santifm.org/santipada/2010/the-light-side-of-enlightenment/) > > Buddhist light-bulb jokes... > > <....> > haha, it's also very funny but have some real truth in it. > > Best wishes, > Adam > #115049 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat May 14, 2011 3:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] How is wisdom accumulated Hi Colette. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "colette" wrote: > You yourself created a piece called THE TRANSFORMATION OF CONSCIOUSNESS... I did? When was this? What kind of piece? Do you have me confused with someone else? ... > How does CONTROL play into this? Is CONTROL a characteristic of WISDOM? There is no control. And there is no such thing as control. It's an illusion. You know, in every school of Buddhism - every school - the most important thing is letting go. Wanting control is the opposite of letting go - it's the opposite direction from liberation. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = #115050 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat May 14, 2011 3:21 pm Subject: Re: Enlightenment from the light side   Hi Dieter. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dieter" wrote: > How many Abhidhamma scholars does it take to change a light bulb? > There are 20W light bulbs, 40W light bulbs, 80W light bulbs, 100W …200W… > There are 6V light bulbs, 12V light bulbs, 120V light bulbs, 240V light bulbs… > There are incandescent bulbs, fluorescent bulbs… > There are clear light bulbs, pearled light bulbs, colored light bulbs… > There are screw-in light bulbs, bayonet light bulbs… > There are 20W light bulbs that are 6V, there are 20W light bulbs that are 12V…120V…240V… > There are 40W light bulbs that are 6V…240V… > 80W…100W…200W… > There are 20W light bulbs that are 6V incandescent… > There are 200W light bulbs that are 240V, florescent, colored, and bayonet. These were all very cute, Dieter, but the Abhidhamma section made me laugh out loud. That is really funny. Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - #115051 From: "Dieter" Date: Sat May 14, 2011 3:27 pm Subject: Re: Enlightenment from the light side --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > > > Hi Dieter and Adam, > > Yes, very funny thanks Dieter, and some truth in it. > > I don't know about arahants' changing light bulbs, though. I think the last arahant in the human realm died before light bulbs were invented. Hi Ken H, well, we don't know about both.. ;-) for the latter S.E.Asian Buddhists may disagree.. with Metta Dieter #115052 From: "Ken H" Date: Sat May 14, 2011 3:55 pm Subject: Re: How is wisdom accumulated Hi Robert E, ---- <. . .> >> KH: matters relating to dhammas are not "wholly other" and I have never thought they were. > RE: You have said it was a completely different world from what we see and understand through concept, and that there is no relation between the conventional world and the paramatha world, and you have said so on innumerable occasions. You have said that the rules, laws and understandings that seem to pertain to the conventional world and to conventional objects are of the status of a "hallucination" and have no relation to actual reality at all. ----- KH: I recognise some of that, but not all of it. But in any case, I do believe the world, as described by the Buddha, is just one moment of conditioned dhammas. I also believe the world has latent tendencies. ---------------------------- > RE: Since there are no objects, no actions and only individual qualities perceived by individual cittas, I don't see how a conventional explanation of "latent tendencies" would apply to paramatha dhammas at all, or in any way. ----------------------------- KH: There are paramattha objects that perform actions (functions), and experience other, infinitely complex, paramattha objects. It is quite obvious to me that they must contain latent tendencies. ------------------ > RE: Do you see a continuum now between how tendencies seem to function in ordinary life and how they are carried from one individual citta to the next? ------------------ KH: Yes, if by "continuum" you mean a shadow, or rough approximation. The conventionally known world is a shadow of the real world. -------------------------- <. . .> >> KH: The same applies to 'greed' 'aversion' 'pleasant feeling' 'unpleasant feeling' and most of the other dhammas. We know what we are talking about, but we don't know the true nature of what we are talking about. > RE: First of all, I don't see how you can say that "we know what we are talking about" and at the same time say that we "don't know what it's nature is." ------------------------- KH: I have tried several times to explain the way I understand it. When the Buddha described seeing as just a conditioned dhamma, people didn't need to ask what he meant by "seeing," they needed ask what he meant by "conditioned dhamma." I think it was the same when he said latent tendencies were contained in cittas. --------------- > RE: If we don't know the nature of what something is, then we don't know anything about it. --------------- KH: We don't know the true nature of the world, we only know shadows, or rough approximations. ------------------- > RE: If I see an image on tv and I think it is a real person then I am pretty terribly deluded aren't I? In what way do I know what I am talking about if I am talking about a 2-dimensional image on the screen as if it were a real, three-dimensional person that I can touch and relate to? ------------------ KH: You would still know the *concept* of a person, wouldn't you? The TV person can touch and relate to other TV people. So you would be just a short step away from understanding that a real person could touch and relate to real people. ----------------------- > RE: Similarly, if I think that there are bodies, people, things, cars, science, technology, events and actions taking place all the time, when all there really is are cittas, then I am completely deluded, and don't have the slightest idea what I am talking about. ---------------------- KH: True, but, after hearing the Dhamma, we can transfer our knowledge of those things to the world of conditioned dhammas. We can see how those conventional things were just shadows of ultimate realities. ---------------------------- > RE: So I think you are completely wrong in this idea that you can "know what you are tlkaing about" while having no idea what it really is. I am allowed to see conventional and paramatha on a continuum, because I believe that the paramatha view of reality is really just a more refined breakdown of conventional reality seen more correctly and that one can cultivate and gradually gain a more and more correct vision of what is being seen. But you have spoken against this view of a continuum between conventional reality and direct discernment, and so I think it is off limits for you to make that connection. As soon as it suits you, you will once again say that they have no connection at all, I predict. ---------------------------- KH: I'll say it now: "The world as described by the Buddha is just a single moment of conditioned dhammas. "Seeing, hearing, . . . passing on latent tendencies . . are ultimately the functions of dhammas, not (as we formerly thought) the functions of people, cars, . . . the weather . . etc." ---------- > RE: So I think the wheel is reinvented from whole cloth in dhamma theory. There is no music in dhamma theory, only individual 'heard objects' with no tone or rhythm; there is no car in dhamma theory, only hardness, color and motion, seen one at a time with no conglomerated object being formed. It is indeed "wholly other, "reinvented, and totally separate from conventional reality. -------- KH: No two sense objects are exactly alike. Sanna marks and remembers each one differently, and so different concepts are brought to mind. -------------- > RE: Please tell me how "car" and "individual qualities" of hardness, color and motion have any relation to one another. That has been my side of the argument, which you have fought against. Are you on my team now? -------------- KH: There is just the experience of hardness (or heat etc) followed by thinking (of a car), which is conditioned by sanna and other dhammas. ------------------- <. . .> > > KH: I am sure there are many conventional theories that try to explain latent tendencies. I doubt any of them are widely agreed upon, but that is besides the point. > RE: They are largely agreed upon. We can see the memory center in the brain; we know how habits are registered and formed through formation of neural patterns, and behavioral conditioning in psychology, etc., etc. They are agreed upon in the scientific community with no problem. ------------------ KH: You could be right, but I remember hearing on a TV science show that scientists couldn't agree on what consciousness was. Some thought it was matter, just like the rest of the universe, while others thought consciousness belonged to a whole new field of science that was totally unknown. In any case, it is besides the point. :-) ---------------------- >> KH: The point is that we already know what is *meant* by latent tendency. > RE: You mean in the most gross, general way, which doesn't really inform us about anything? --------------------- KH: Yes, just like "seeing" for example. We all know what seeing is - in a gross and general way that doesn't really inform us about anything. We are informed of something really important *when we learn that seeing is a function of eye-citta, not of a sentient being.* ------------------------------ > RE: That is a grand departure from the meticulous detail of Abhidhamma and commentary. I guess you just don't care anymore. ------------------------------ KH: Heartless beast that I am! :-) Ken H #115053 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat May 14, 2011 1:56 pm Subject: Everything Converges on Feeling! Friends: Feeling (Vedanã): Causes and Effects: Definitions: There are Pleasant Feelings = mental gladness and bodily pleasure. There are Painful Feelings = mental sadness and bodily pain. There is neither Pleasant nor Painful Feeling = Neutral indifference. Dynamics: Pleasant Feeling is agreeable when arising, yet disagreeable when ceasing! Painful Feeling is disagreeable when arising, yet agreeable when ceasing! Neutral Feeling is quite agreeable, when one is aware of its presence, yet quite dull and disagreeable, when one is unaware of its presence! Deleterious Side-Effects: If Unaware, Pleasant Feeling will inevitably cause the arising of Desire... If Aware, Pleasant Feeling will not cause the arising of this Desire! If Unaware, Painful Feeling will inevitably cause the arising of Aversion... If Aware, Painful Feeling will not cause the arising of this Aversion! If Unaware, Neutral Feeling will inevitably cause the arising of Ignorance. If Aware, Neutral Feeling will not cause arising of this Ignorance! Near Causes: The Cause of Feeling is Contact: Eye-contact, Ear-contact, Nose-contact, Tongue-contact, Body-contact or Mental-contact. At the moment this contact ceases, the associated feeling also instantly ceases... Effects: The Effect of the phenomena Feeling is -in the case- of Unawareness: Craving towards the object = Attraction, when the feeling is pleasant. Craving away from the object = Repulsion, when the feeling is painful. Craving towards 'other' than object = neglect, when the feeling is neutral. Characteristics: Feeling is - as everything else - that is conditioned and constructed: 1: Transient, impermanent, passing, cannot be kept, and cannot be maintained! 2: Dissatisfying, disappointing, frustrating, painful, and miserable! 3: Impersonal, selfless, ownerless, and not-Me-nor-Mine-nor-Self! Paradox: There is this changing phenomena Feeling, yet there is no Feeler... Buddha once said: Everything, every mental state, converges on Feeling... Comments: We run after pleasant feeling and away from painful feeling, even without knowing it or being aware of it! Feeling is thus the property by which our autopilot mind is controlled. Unaware of that we become blind slaves of feeling! This robot-maniac mind runs after objects such as Porn, drugs, booze, sex, entertainment, and food!, which, when contacted, give rise to pleasant feelings. Pleasant feelings are thus the proximate cause of destructive addiction! <....> Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu SamÄhita _/\_ * <....> #115054 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat May 14, 2011 6:47 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Enlightenment from the light side   Hi, Ken (and Dieter & Adam) - In a message dated 5/13/2011 11:31:07 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Dieter and Adam, Yes, very funny thanks Dieter, and some truth in it. I don't know about arahants' changing light bulbs, though. I think the last arahant in the human realm died before light bulbs were invented. Ken H ================================ BTW, Dieter, I had missed your light-bulb post!! The two items I enjoy most are the following: How many Nagar­junas does it take to change a light bulb? Since there's no Nagarjuna and no light bulb, how can there be any change? and How many Abhid­hamma scholars does it take to change a light bulb? There are 20W light bulbs, 40W light bulbs, 80W light bulbs, 100W …200W… There are 6V light bulbs, 12V light bulbs, 120V light bulbs, 240V light bulbs… There are incan­descent bulbs, fluor­escent bulbs… There are clear light bulbs, pearled light bulbs, colored light bulbs… There are screw-in light bulbs, bayonet light bulbs… There are 20W light bulbs that are 6V, there are 20W light bulbs that are 12V…120V…240V… There are 40W light bulbs that are 6V…240V… 80W…100W…200W… There are 20W light bulbs that are 6V incandescent… There are 200W light bulbs that are 240V, florescent, colored, and bayonet. I hope some of the Abhidhammikas here at least smiled at the 2nd of these two! ;-) And, Ken, doesn't the first of these give you at least an iota of appreciation for the Naga Man? ;-) With metta, Howard P. S. As my signature quote of the day, I will use a pre-Dravidian, early proto-Pali inscription. Inscription Reproduced by Crypto-Pseudo-Cuneiform-Proto-Pali Project Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #115055 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat May 14, 2011 7:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Enlightenment from the light side   Hi again, Dieter & all - The following post got wildly messed up in transmission, particularly the signature quote at the end, which should NOT appear as ordinary language. I'll try to modify it below, but I'll then let the matter go should I get the same result! With metta, Howard Attempt at modification: Hi, Ken (and Dieter & Adam) - In a message dated 5/13/2011 11:31:07 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Dieter and Adam, Yes, very funny thanks Dieter, and some truth in it. I don't know about arahants' changing light bulbs, though. I think the last arahant in the human realm died before light bulbs were invented. Ken H ================================ BTW, Dieter, I had missed your light-bulb post!! The two items I enjoy most are the following: How many Nagarjunas does it take to change a light bulb? Since there's no Nagarjuna and no light bulb, how can there be any change? and How many Abhidhamma scholars does it take to change a light bulb? There are 20W light bulbs, 40W light bulbs, 80W light bulbs, 100W …200W… There are 6V light bulbs, 12V light bulbs, 120V light bulbs, 240V light bulbs… There are incandescent bulbs, fluorescent bulbs… There are clear light bulbs, pearled light bulbs, colored light bulbs… There are screw-in light bulbs, bayonet light bulbs… There are 20W light bulbs that are 6V, there are 20W light bulbs that are 12V…120V…240V… There are 40W light bulbs that are 6V…240V… 80W…100W…200W… There are 20W light bulbs that are 6V incandescent… There are 200W light bulbs that are 240V, florescent, colored, and bayonet. I hope some of the Abhidhammikas here at least smiled at the 2nd of these two! ;-) And, Ken, doesn't the first of these give you at least an iota of appreciation for the Naga Man? ;-) With metta, Howard P. S. As my signature quote of the day, I will use a pre-Dravidian, early proto-Pali inscription. Inscription Reproduced by Crypto-Pseudo-Cuneiform-Proto-Pali Project Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #115056 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat May 14, 2011 7:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Enlightenment from the light side   Hi, Dieter - Ah, well! It seems that the transmission to Yahoo followed by broadcasting it to the list members serves to decrypt the "inscription"! With metta, Howard In a message dated 5/14/2011 9:33:13 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: Inscription Reproduced by Crypto-Pseudo-Cuneiform-Proto-Pali Project Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #115057 From: "philip" Date: Sun May 15, 2011 12:23 am Subject: Re: Tanha bhava vs. aggregates of clinging vs. lobha (Jon)   Hi Jon and Sarah Thanks for he below, Jon, and for your response to my other question about thinking about characteristics of dhamma being akusala or not. Also thanks Sarah for further thoughts on "not falling away." I am out of discussion mode for the time being (if I was ever in it) but reading SPD a bit now and then, and listening to the recorded talks a bit now and then! Metta, Phil > > J: Thanks for the question, and apologies for the delay in replying. > > I understand bhava tanha ('clinging to becoming') to refer to the wish for life to go on. This is different from attachment to people and things, or ideas about this or that (although as forms of clinging, they share a common characteristic). > > #115058 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Sun May 15, 2011 2:38 am Subject: Re: Enlightenment from the light side   Hi Howard ( Adam ,Ken , Robert, all..) I couldn't resist .. ;-) How many Howards does it take to change a light bulb? The teamleader announces that the Bulb Inscription Deciphering Project ( BIDP) has been succcessful completed , using the code of a pre-Dravidian, early proto-Pali inscription, and is ready to change.... with Metta Dieter #115059 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat May 14, 2011 10:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Enlightenment from the light side upasaka_howard Offline Send Email   ;-)) In a message dated 5/14/2011 12:38:52 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, moellerdieter@... writes: Hi Howard ( Adam ,Ken , Robert, all..) I couldn't resist .. ;-) How many Howards does it take to change a light bulb? The teamleader announces that the Bulb Inscription Deciphering Project ( BIDP) has been succcessful completed , using the code of a pre-Dravidian, early proto-Pali inscription, and is ready to change.... with Metta Dieter #115060 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun May 15, 2011 4:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] ahosi kamma   Dear Han, yes, this is the same as in the co. I mentioned. And this also gives good examples. I shall return to this subject. Nina. Op 14-mei-2011, om 0:36 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > Dear Sarah (Connie, Nina & Rob E), > > Thank you very much for quoting Ptsm. Kammakathaa. > > In your post 6 cases were quoted. > In the Burmese books, *for the same text*, 12 cases are noted. > > (1) There has been action (ahosikamma.m), there has been action- > result (ahosikammavipaako). ... etc. #115061 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun May 15, 2011 5:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Tanha bhava vs. aggregates of clinging vs. lobha (Jon) Dear Philip, Op 14-mei-2011, om 16:23 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > I am out of discussion mode for the time being (if I was ever in > it) but reading SPD a bit now and then ------ N: Excellent. Any thoughts on Survey? Nina. #115062 From: "connie" Date: Sun May 15, 2011 6:24 am Subject: ahosi kamma   Thanks Han, Sarah, Nina. Instead of the commentary just now, then – partial translation of the corresponding sutta: Gradual Sayings, Book of Threes, Ch.4 (Messengers of the Devas), $33. Causes (b). Monks, there are these three originating causes of action. What three? Freedom from lust, malice and delusion. An act not performed in lust, not born of lust, not originating in lust, not arising from lust, - since lust has vanished, that act is abandoned, cut off at the root, made like a palm-tree stump, made unable to come again, of a nature not to arise again in future time. An act not performed in malice ... not performed under delusion ... is cut off at the root ... of a nature not to arise again in future time. Suppose seeds that are unbroken, not rotten, unspoiled by wind and heat, capable of sprouting, well embedded, and a man burns them with fire (cf KSii62), and having done so reduces them to ashes. Having done that he winnows the ashes in a strong wind or lets them be caried off by a swiftly flowing steam, - those seeds, monks, would be cut off at the root, made like a palm-tree stump, made unable to become again, of a nature not to arise again in future time ... Just so, monks, an act not performed in lust, not performed in malice, not performed under delusion, ... is of a nature not to arise again in future time. These indeed, monks, are the originating causes of actions. From lust or malice or delusion born, A deed, or great or small, performed by fools^ Just here is felt: no other ground is seen^^ For its fulfilment. Wise monks should eschew Lust, malice and delusion for this cause, Get knowledge** and forsake all ways of woe.' ^ Text has wrongly caapi viddasu for caap' aviddasu of Cy (yam so avidu andha-baalo ... karoti). Aviddasu = avidvaa. ^^ Vatthum = khettam, as at Aii158. Cy: There is no other ground to ripen the fruit of it. The deed done by one does not ripen in the personal existence of another. ** Vijjam uppaadayam = arahatta-magga-vijjan uppaadetvaa. -Cy. ATI's basic summation: An action (kamma) performed by an arahant bears no kammic fruit. This sutta explains why. === & so long, anusayas! best wishes, connie #115063 From: "colette" Date: Sun May 15, 2011 5:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] How is wisdom accumulated   Hi Robert, Easily understood: "Wanting control is the opposite of letting go - it's the opposite direction from liberation." I never thought of it but the second I read that sentence then it was perfectly clear. UNFORTUNATELY, I, also, had to IMMEDIATELY get the REEPER and the HARVESTER out of storage since the crops had suddenly become ripe for the picking or harvesting. It raises some very interesting aspects of the performance "TO MANIFEST". I like how the concept of "letting go" flows in the same stream of consciousness as "grasping". I wonder how a BOX JELLYFISH relates to the DUALITY and the transluscence? Thanx for the thought. toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Colette. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "colette" wrote: > > > You yourself created a piece called THE TRANSFORMATION OF CONSCIOUSNESS... > > I did? When was this? What kind of piece? Do you have me confused with someone else? > > ... > > > How does CONTROL play into this? Is CONTROL a characteristic of WISDOM? > > There is no control. And there is no such thing as control. It's an illusion. > > You know, in every school of Buddhism - every school - the most important thing is letting go. Wanting control is the opposite of letting go - it's the opposite direction from liberation. > > Best, > Robert E. > > = = = = = = = = = = = = = = > #115064 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun May 15, 2011 6:58 am Subject: The Scream for Cream!   Friends: From external Element to Urge to silly Search: There is the element of eye-sensitivity, the element of visual form, which induces the element of visual consciousness. The coincidence of these three, is eye Contact... Thus in dependence on this element of visual-sensitivity, there arises eye-contact. In dependence on eye-contact, there arises a feeling, born of eye-contact. In dependence on feeling born of eye-contact, there arises instant craving... In dependence on the element of visual form, there arises perception. In dependence on this visual experience, tendency towards a form arises. In dependence on this inclination, desire for particular visible forms arises. In dependence on this specific desire, a fever for these specific forms arises. In dependence on this fever for form, search after these certain forms arises. In dependence on this search for form, reaching out, acquisition, clinging & panic to a many of various forms, comes into being... Such is the arising of this entire mass of ever frustrated suffering... Similarly with the pairs: ear & sound, nose & smell, tongue & taste, body & touch, mind & mental states, which make their respective kinds of consciousness arise. This search, this urge, and this compulsive drive, is caused by that craving ! Craving that was born from feeling, which was arisen from contact… Any Craving causes Suffering... Right here and now, later and much later... Right there at welcoming this Contact, is this Suffering therefore born... Right there at avoiding Contact, is this Suffering therefore left... I Scream, You Scream, We all Scream for Ice-Cream... (Jim Jarmusch in the film: Down by Law) <......> Source: The Grouped Sayings on the Elements by the Buddha. Dhatu-Samyutta Nikâya XIV http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/index.html Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samâhita _/\_ * <....> #115065 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun May 15, 2011 2:08 pm Subject: Re: How is wisdom accumulated   Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > ------------------ > > RE: Do you see a continuum now between how tendencies seem to function in ordinary life and how they are carried from one individual citta to the next? > ------------------ > > KH: Yes, if by "continuum" you mean a shadow, or rough approximation. The conventionally known world is a shadow of the real world. Hey, that's my line. I am now even more convinced that you are coming over to my side and believe in some relation between the conventional world and paramatha dhammas - a shadow or distorted relation, but a relationship none the less. > -------------------------- > <. . .> > >> KH: The same applies to 'greed' 'aversion' 'pleasant feeling' 'unpleasant feeling' and most of the other dhammas. We know what we are talking about, but we don't know the true nature of what we are talking about. > > > RE: First of all, I don't see how you can say that "we know what we are talking about" and at the same time say that we "don't know what it's nature is." > ------------------------- > > KH: I have tried several times to explain the way I understand it. When the Buddha described seeing as just a conditioned dhamma, people didn't need to ask what he meant by "seeing," they needed ask what he meant by "conditioned dhamma." I think it was the same when he said latent tendencies were contained in cittas. I thought the whole point of the Abhidhamma and the paramatha view was that people *do not know* what seeing is, or what anything else is that they *think* they know. The fact that they use the word and engage in seeing does not mean that they know what it is, except in the most conceptually incorrect way. It is the correct definition of seeing and visible object and the other human functions that we take for granted and think are caused by a self that the teachings redefine to set the record straight. Your idea now that the conventional knowledge of seeing, etc., is an adequate basis for the teachings is astonishing to me. > --------------- > > RE: If we don't know the nature of what something is, then we don't know anything about it. > --------------- > > KH: We don't know the true nature of the world, we only know shadows, or rough approximations. > > ------------------- > > RE: If I see an image on tv and I think it is a real person then I am pretty terribly deluded aren't I? In what way do I know what I am talking about if I am talking about a 2-dimensional image on the screen as if it were a real, three-dimensional person that I can touch and relate to? > ------------------ > > KH: You would still know the *concept* of a person, wouldn't you? I thought the whole idea was to replace such false concepts with accurate concepts that point the person in the right direction. What happened to right view, Ken? > The TV person can touch and relate to other TV people. That is an illusion about the nature of the medium, just as we have self-based illusions about the nature of samsara. > So you would be just a short step away from understanding that a real person could touch and relate to real people. A short step? So now the conceptual view of persons is a short step from the paramatha view? I guess we can just take a hop, skip and a jump and we'll be enlightened. > ----------------------- > > RE: Similarly, if I think that there are bodies, people, things, cars, science, technology, events and actions taking place all the time, when all there really is are cittas, then I am completely deluded, and don't have the slightest idea what I am talking about. > ---------------------- > > KH: True, but, after hearing the Dhamma, we can transfer our knowledge of those things to the world of conditioned dhammas. We can see how those conventional things were just shadows of ultimate realities. You're stealing my view again. You've never spoken like this before, and this is inconsistent with the radical nature of the paramatha view. ... > ------------------------------ > > RE: That is a grand departure from the meticulous detail of Abhidhamma and commentary. I guess you just don't care anymore. > ------------------------------ > > KH: Heartless beast that I am! :-) Indeed... Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #115066 From: "Ken H" Date: Sun May 15, 2011 4:47 pm Subject: Re: wisdom and doing   Hi Sarah and Robert E, ---------- <. . .> >> KH: As I see it, an inherent characteristic exists irrespectively of whether or not it is observed. Therefore, (taking a conventional example) I believe iron possesses its magnetic property irrespectively of whether a magnetic field is currently acting upon it. > > In the same way, I believe that a dhamma possesses its anatta property irrespectively of whether the idea of atta has ever occurred to anyone. .... S: Leaving aside the conventional example, this is correct. As we read in AN 3s, whether a Tathagata appears or not, all conditioned dhammas are anicca, dukkha and anatta as Nina quoted. --------- KH: Yes, that's what I thought you would have said. But when Robert and I were arguing about it, you seemed to be agreeing with Robert. That is, you seemed to be agreeing that anatta was just an observation, or a conclusion drawn from an observation - or something like that. Obviously, there was a breakdown in communication. I was 99.9 per cent sure that's all there was to it. But there was always the possibility that I had been misunderstanding something you had been telling me all along. But now that we have sorted that out, let's get back to my conventional example, which you weren't overly impressed with. Robert would like a conventional example of an inherent characteristic. Is there such an example? To make things more complicated, Robert has the impression that anatta is the absence of a characteristic, rather than a characteristic in its own right. What can you tell him? I am running low on ideas! Ken H #115067 From: "Lukas" Date: Sun May 15, 2011 5:24 pm Subject: anumodana Dear Nina Fast question: When I appreciate anothers kusala, this is anumodana? Mudita , what is the characteristic of it? Best Lukas #115068 From: "Ken H" Date: Sun May 15, 2011 7:38 pm Subject: Re: Enlightenment from the light side   Hi Howard, ---- <. . .> > H: And, Ken, doesn't the first of these give you at least an iota of appreciation for the Naga Man? ;-) ---- I don't want to spoil the joke but, no, Nagarjuna does not deserve any appreciation as a Dhamma teacher. He taught that conditioned dhammas were not absolutely real. That means he had wrong understanding. Therefore, even when he said there was "no Nagarjuna" he was proclaiming either an eternity belief or an annihilation belief. (My guess is it was eternity belief.) Ken H #115069 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun May 15, 2011 6:03 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Enlightenment from the light side   Hi, Ken - In a message dated 5/15/2011 5:38:42 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, ---- <. . .> > H: And, Ken, doesn't the first of these give you at least an iota of appreciation for the Naga Man? ;-) ---- I don't want to spoil the joke but, no, Nagarjuna does not deserve any appreciation as a Dhamma teacher. ---------------------------------------------------- It's not only a joke. His given name had to have been 'Arjuna' and the Naga prefix added due to the legend/myth of his having resided for a time with the Nagas, serpent-like beings who could also take human form. -------------------------------------------------- He taught that conditioned dhammas were not absolutely real. That means he had wrong understanding. Therefore, even when he said there was "no Nagarjuna" he was proclaiming either an eternity belief or an annihilation belief. (My guess is it was eternity belief.) --------------------------------------------- Omigod!! Of the two mischaracterizations, you choose the less applicable by far!! (And as an aside: It's okay when you and others here say there are no beings!) And, BTW, the Buddha himself taught the unreality of dhammas! ------------------------------------------ Ken H ================================== With metta, Howard All Conditioned Dhammas are Empty and Unreal 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) ___________________________ /"Thus, monks, the Tathagata, when seeing what is to be seen, doesn't construe an [object as] seen. He doesn't construe an unseen. He doesn't construe an [object] to-be-seen. He doesn't construe a seer. "When hearing... "When sensing... "When cognizing what is to be cognized, he doesn't construe an [object as] cognized. He doesn't construe an uncognized. He doesn't construe an [object] to-be-cognized. He doesn't construe a cognizer./ (From the Kalaka Sutta) __________________________ /He who neither goes too far nor lags behind and knows about the world: "This is all unreal," — such a monk gives up the here and the beyond, just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin./ (From the Uraga Sutta ) __________________________ /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) #115070 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun May 15, 2011 10:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] anumodana   Dear Lukas, Op 15-mei-2011, om 9:24 heeft Lukas het volgende geschreven: > When I appreciate anothers kusala, this is anumodana? ----- N: Yes. But kusala citta is mostly alternating with akusala citta, for example, you are also attached to the person involved, or to a situation. -------- > > L:Mudita , what is the characteristic of it? ------- N: Appreciation of someone else's good fortune, and this includes his kusala, and also for example praise he receives or wealth. One has no envy. Thus, when we appreciate someone else's kusala there is mudita cetasika. -- Nina. #115071 From: "Ken H" Date: Mon May 16, 2011 9:58 am Subject: Re: Enlightenment from the light side   Hi Howard, ------ <. . .> > H: It's not only a joke. His given name had to have been 'Arjuna' and the Naga prefix added due to the legend/myth of his having resided for a time with the Nagas, serpent-like beings who could also take human form. ------ KH: That's interesting, thanks, but I was referring to the joke about changing a light bulb. --------------- > H: He taught that conditioned dhammas were not absolutely real. That means he had wrong understanding. Therefore, even when he said there was "no Nagarjuna" he was proclaiming either an eternity belief or an annihilation belief. (My guess is it was eternity belief.) >> > H: Omigod!! Of the two mischaracterizations, you choose the less applicable by far!! --------------- KH: I'd be interested to know why. If, as you imply, Naraguna taught the middle way, why would eternity belief be a more inaccurate characterisation than would annihilation belief? ----------------------- > H: (And as an aside: It's okay when you and others here say there are no beings!) ----------------------- KH: I think it's okay to say there are no beings *when you accept there are conditioned dhammas.* Otherwise, "no beings" takes on an entirely different meaning. In my opinion it gives anatta an ineffectual meaning, leaving the way open for eternity belief. ------------------------------ > H: And, BTW, the Buddha himself taught the unreality of dhammas! ------------------------------ KH: That may be so according to Nagarjuna, but it is definitely not so according to the Theravada. BTW, reading about Nagarjuna on Wiki I notice that his "no inherent characteristics" teaching went so far as to say there was nothing inherently kusala, and nothing inherently akusala. Apparently everything comes down to a value judgement. In other words, it's not just conditioned dhammas, but the entire teaching of kamma and vipaka that is thrown out the window. I can't see how any part of the Dhamma remains. Ken H #115072 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon May 16, 2011 7:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Enlightenment from the light side   Hi, Ken - In a message dated 5/15/2011 7:58:14 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, ------ <. . .> > H: It's not only a joke. His given name had to have been 'Arjuna' and the Naga prefix added due to the legend/myth of his having resided for a time with the Nagas, serpent-like beings who could also take human form. ------ KH: That's interesting, thanks, but I was referring to the joke about changing a light bulb. ---------------------------------- Ahh! ---------------------------------- --------------- > H: He taught that conditioned dhammas were not absolutely real. That means he had wrong understanding. Therefore, even when he said there was "no Nagarjuna" he was proclaiming either an eternity belief or an annihilation belief. (My guess is it was eternity belief.) >> > H: Omigod!! Of the two mischaracterizations, you choose the less applicable by far!! --------------- KH: I'd be interested to know why. If, as you imply, Naraguna taught the middle way, why would eternity belief be a more inaccurate characterisation than would annihilation belief? ------------------------------------------- The typical criticisms he gets when at all are that he is a nihilist. (Of course, the Buddha has received such an accusation as well.) In any case, Nagarjuna was very much an insubstantialist, a non-eternalist, and a teacher of emptiness. But he is, admittedly, difficult to understand. ------------------------------------------ ----------------------- > H: (And as an aside: It's okay when you and others here say there are no beings!) ----------------------- KH: I think it's okay to say there are no beings *when you accept there are conditioned dhammas.* Otherwise, "no beings" takes on an entirely different meaning. In my opinion it gives anatta an ineffectual meaning, leaving the way open for eternity belief. ------------------------------ > H: And, BTW, the Buddha himself taught the unreality of dhammas! ------------------------------ KH: That may be so according to Nagarjuna, but it is definitely not so according to the Theravada. -------------------------------------------- Did you see the sutta quotes I gave to back up my assertion? (You didn't repeat them here in quoting my post.) -------------------------------------------- BTW, reading about Nagarjuna on Wiki I notice that his "no inherent characteristics" teaching went so far as to say there was nothing inherently kusala, and nothing inherently akusala. Apparently everything comes down to a value judgement. ---------------------------------------------- I haven't seen him to say that there is no wholesome/unwholesome distinction, but Nagarjuna does deny all inherence, due to dependent origination. -------------------------------------------- In other words, it's not just conditioned dhammas, but the entire teaching of kamma and vipaka that is thrown out the window. I can't see how any part of the Dhamma remains. -------------------------------------------- What remains is the tilakkhana and paticcasamupada and much more. ------------------------------------------ Ken H ================================= With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #115073 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon May 16, 2011 2:30 pm Subject: Re: wisdom and doing   Hi Ken H., and Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Sarah and Robert E, > > ---------- > <. . .> > >> KH: As I see it, an inherent characteristic exists irrespectively of whether or not it is observed. Therefore, (taking a conventional example) I believe iron possesses its magnetic property irrespectively of whether a magnetic field is > currently acting upon it. > > > > In the same way, I believe that a dhamma possesses its anatta property irrespectively of whether the idea of atta has ever occurred to anyone. > .... > S: Leaving aside the conventional example, this is correct. As we read in AN 3s, whether a Tathagata appears or not, all conditioned dhammas are anicca, dukkha and anatta as Nina quoted. > --------- > > KH: Yes, that's what I thought you would have said. But when Robert and I were arguing about it, you seemed to be agreeing with Robert. That is, you seemed to be agreeing that anatta was just an observation, or a conclusion drawn from an observation - or something like that. > > Obviously, there was a breakdown in communication. I was 99.9 per cent sure that's all there was to it. But there was always the possibility that I had been misunderstanding something you had been telling me all along. > > But now that we have sorted that out, let's get back to my conventional example, which you weren't overly impressed with. Robert would like a conventional example of an inherent characteristic. Is there such an example? > > To make things more complicated, Robert has the impression that anatta is the absence of a characteristic, rather than a characteristic in its own right. What can you tell him? I am running low on ideas! The word "characteristic" can be rather tricky. Of course anatta is an inherent characteristic of all dhammas, but what exactly does that mean? I think what Sarah agreed with me about in the last discussion - and which I believe she would still agree with, was the idea that anatta was not a "thing," and that it stood for the absence of any existent entity or connection to self. If we understand that anatta means "no self" or "not self" then whatever anatta is or isn't has to follow from there. We can't just say "it's a positive characteristic" based on some general principle, with no idea of what the positive characteristic is, which is I think what you tend to do. You don't ever say *what* the positive characteristic anatta *is,* and I strongly believe that is because you can't, because you don't know what it is. You just go back to the general principle and don't deal with what anatta actually is. If you want to say that the "positive characteristic" of anatta is that for every single dhamma that arises there is "no self" or any semblance of self, then you and I can agree instantly. I'll be happy to say that is a positive -- in the sense of definite, and definitive -- characteristic, and that it is an absolute truth that is always characteristic of every dhamma. But if you say that there is a "thing" called the "anatta characteristic" and that the discerning can "see it," like I can see a mole on someone's cheek, then I will say you are making up conceptual fabrications and you are not being true to what anatta means, and what the Buddha meant when he spoke about it. If you believe that there is an anatta characteristic, other than the clear discernment that there is *no self* within, attached to, or pertaining in any way to any dhamma, then you must be able to describe it and say what it is. I can tell you that hardness is hard, that movement moves and that heat is hot. But if you ask me what the characteristic of anatta is, I can only say that it is "no self" because that's what it means. As soon as you are able to tell me how anatta is experienced, other than as the definitive absence of self, we can have a definitive conversation about what the positive characteristic anatta actually is. I am still sure that Sarah will agree with what I say above, but if she does not, I will look forward to her explanation of what I am missing in my understanding. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #115074 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon May 16, 2011 2:45 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ahosi kamma   Hi Han. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: > > Dear Sarah (Connie, Nina & Rob E), > > Thank you very much for quoting Ptsm. Kammakathaa. > > In your post 6 cases were quoted. > In the Burmese books, *for the same text*, 12 cases are noted. > > (1) There has been action (ahosikamma.m), there has been action-result (ahosikammavipaako). ... > ============== > > Dictionary meanings: > > PTS Dictionary: > Ahosi-kamma = an act or thought whose kamma has no longer any potential force. Ahosi-kamma is said to be a kamma inhibited by a more powerful one. > > Pali-Burmese Dictionary: > Ahosi = past action. > Ahosi-kamma = same as in PTS. > [Please note that in Pali-Burmese Dictionary, the meanings of ahosi and ahosi-kamma are different.] Thank you for running through these different cases of kamma and vipaka. I keep going back to very basic questions about kamma: I wonder if you have a sense in the translation of kamma as action in all these cases, whether it especially pertains to cetana, or whether it can stand for both the volition and the physical action that may be involved on the "kamma" side of the equation? Thanks, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #115075 From: "Ken H" Date: Mon May 16, 2011 3:35 pm Subject: Re: wisdom and doing   Hi Robert E, ----------- <. . .> > RE: The word "characteristic" can be rather tricky. Of course anatta is an inherent characteristic of all dhammas, but what exactly does that mean? I think what Sarah agreed with me about in the last discussion - and which I believe she would still agree with, was the idea that anatta was not a "thing," and that it stood for the absence of any existent entity or connection to self. ----------- KH: We all agree that a characteristic of a thing (dhamma) is not, itself, a dhamma. It is part of the substance of a dhamma. The characteristic, hardness, for example is part of the substance of the rupa by that name. Anicca, dukkha and anatta add to the substance of hardness-rupa. ----------------------- > RE: If we understand that anatta means "no self" or "not self" then whatever anatta is or isn't has to follow from there. We can't just say "it's a positive characteristic" based on some general principle, with no idea of what the positive characteristic is, which is I think what you tend to do. You don't ever say *what* the positive characteristic anatta *is,* and I strongly believe that is because you can't, because you don't know what it is. You just go back to the general principle and don't deal with what anatta actually is. ----------------------- KH: Anatta is the no-self characteristic of a dhamma. Similarly, hardness is the hardness characteristic of a dhamma. What else can I say? ------------------------------- > RE: If you want to say that the "positive characteristic" of anatta is that for every single dhamma that arises there is "no self" or any semblance of self, then you and I can agree instantly. I'll be happy to say that is a positive -- in the sense of definite, and definitive -- characteristic, and that it is an absolute truth that is always characteristic of every dhamma. But if you say that there is a "thing" called the "anatta characteristic" and that the discerning can "see it," like I can see a mole on someone's cheek, ----------------------------- KH: Leaving aside the term "thing," that is basically what I am saying. Anatta can become the object of mind-consciousness, just a hardness can become the object of body-consciousness. ------------------- > RE: then I will say you are making up conceptual fabrications and you are not being true to what anatta means, and what the Buddha meant when he spoke about it. If you believe that there is an anatta characteristic, other than the clear discernment that there is *no self* within, attached to, or pertaining in any way to any dhamma, then you must be able to describe it and say what it is. I can tell you that hardness is hard, that movement moves and that heat is hot. But if you ask me what the characteristic of anatta is, I can only say that it is "no self" because that's what it means. As soon as you are able to tell me how anatta is experienced, other than as the definitive absence of self, we can have a definitive conversation about what the positive characteristic anatta actually is. --------------------- KH: If you look into an empty room, you might say there is "no self" in there. But you are not experiencing anatta, are you? ------------------------------ > RE: I am still sure that Sarah will agree with what I say above, but if she does not, I will look forward to her explanation of what I am missing in my understanding. ------------------------ KH: Substance! :-) Ken H #115076 From: "Ken H" Date: Mon May 16, 2011 3:52 pm Subject: Re: wisdom and doing   Hi Robert E and Sarah, Oh wait! Damn, too late I've posted it! A characteristic does not become the object (arammana) of citta. The dhamma that bears the characteristic is the arammana, and citta can experience one of its characteristics. I always get that wrong! :-) Ken H > > KH: Anatta can become the object of consciousness (mind-door consciousness), just a hardness can become the object of body-consciousness. > #115077 From: han tun Date: Mon May 16, 2011 5:09 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ahosi kamma   Dear Robert E, > > Han: (1) There has been action (ahosikamma.m), there has been action-result (ahosikammavipaako). > Robert E: Thank you for running through these different cases of kamma and vipaka. I keep going back to very basic questions about kamma: I wonder if you have a sense in the translation of kamma as action in all these cases, whether it especially pertains to cetana, or whether it can stand for both the volition and the physical action that may be involved on the "kamma" side of the equation? ---------- Han: Yes, I would translate "kamma" as "action" and "kamma-vipaaka" as the "result of action", in all these cases where these two words are mentioned. For a "kamma" to be successfully committed there must be "cetanaa". For example, in Going for Refuge & Taking the Precept by Bhikkhu Bodhi, there is the following passage: [A complete act of killing constituting a full violation of the precept involves five factors: (1) a living being; (2) the perception of the living being as such; (3) the thought or volition of killing; (4) the appropriate effort; and (5) the actual death of the being as a result of the action.] Han: So No (3) volition or cetanaa must be there to successfully commit the act of killing. And the action involves not only physical action, but all three are involved: bodily action (kaaya-kamma), verbal action (vacii-kamma), and mental action (mano-kamma). Kind regards, Han #115078 From: "Lukas" Date: Mon May 16, 2011 6:11 pm Subject: Re: Enlightenment from the light side   Hi Howard May you be so kind and introduce some Nagarjuna concepts in skim? >Howard: He taught that conditioned dhammas were not absolutely real. >That means he had wrong understanding. L: Maybe not so wrong :P Theras taught that all (paramattha)dhammas are empty, devoid of Self, devoid of any core, devoid of anything. But they have sabhava(distinct characteristic), so that can be known. This sounds very similar to Nagarjuna, don't u think? Sometimes scolars of theravada misinterpret the sabhava as sa - with bhava - nature. Claming that dhammas have its own nature, thus they exist. While the truth is that (sabbe dhamma anatta)all dhammas are anatta(empty, devoid of core, out of control) - source Dispeller of delusion on synonyms of anatta :P >H: Therefore, even when he said there was "no > Nagarjuna" he was proclaiming either an eternity belief or an annihilation > belief. (My guess is it was eternity belief.) L: Why your quess is eternity belief :P ? >H:And as an aside: It's okay when you and others here say there > are no beings!) And, BTW, the Buddha himself taught the unreality of > dhammas! L: No one here is saying there are no beings. I think the problem of Nagarajuna was that he was a philosopher. I know very little of him, therefore I can misjudge him. But on the other hand wasn't he a precursor of mahajana ideology on emptiness? >H:And, BTW, the Buddha himself taught the unreality of > dhammas! L: real or not real doesnt matter, if something doesnt last how could it be real. Best wishes Lukas P.s Howard please give the first letter of your name before you start answer or your full name. It will be more convenient to all of us. #115079 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon May 16, 2011 6:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ahosi kamma   Dear Han, Thank you for the explanation that is so complete. Nina. Op 16-mei-2011, om 9:09 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > And the action involves not only physical action, but all three are > involved: bodily action (kaaya-kamma), verbal action (vacii-kamma), > and mental action (mano-kamma). #115080 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon May 16, 2011 7:56 am Subject: The 4 Clingings!   Friends: There are four kinds of Mental Clinging: The Blessed Buddha once said: Bhikkhus: There are these four kinds of Clinging. What four? 1: Clinging to Sense-Pleasures… 2: Clinging to Various Views… 3: Clinging to Rituals and Superstition… 4: Clinging to an Ego-Concept… These are the four kinds of Clinging! This Noble 8-fold Way is to be developed for the direct experience of the four kinds of clinging, for the full understanding of these types of clinging, for their complete elimination, and for their final overcoming, abandoning and leaving all behind… The Noble 8-fold Way is to be developed for the ceasing of all clinging! Comment: 1: The 1st kind of clinging to sights, sounds, smells, flavours, touches, and thoughts is fairly obvious, yet still long habituated and thus tenacious... 2: Clinging is to Views is thinking: Doing good deeds are completely useless. Doing evil has no consequences! No action has any effect on my future! 3: Clinging to rituals & superstition is like thinking that fire, bathing, and various empty rituals, like wearing funny hats & praying, can purify mind… 3: Clinging to an Ego-concept, personality-belief, & a 'self' is the assuming an unchanging internal entity ‘I-Me', which however is non-existent... The proximate cause of all clinging is Craving, which has to be left! This is the 2nd Noble Truth! Clinging means: adhering, attaching, gripping, clasping, clutching, and grasping, to which we stick stubbornly and tenaciously. The word pali word The Buddha used ‘Upâdâna’ literally means ‘taking up’ indicating that, as soon as one takes up the object, then clinging occurs! Sariputta once said: When, friends, a Noble Disciple understands clinging, the cause of clinging, the ceasing of clinging, and the way leading to the ceasing of clinging, in that way he is one of right view, whose view is straight, who has perfect confidence in the Dhamma, and has arrived at this true Dhamma... And what is clinging, what is the cause of clinging, what is the ceasing of clinging, what is the way to the cease clinging? Friends: There are these 4 kinds of clinging: clinging to sense-pleasures, clinging to views, clinging to rituals & superstition, and the subtle clinging to the ego-concept of an assumed inner self. With the arising of craving, clinging also arises. With the ceasing of craving, clinging thus ceases too! The way leading to the ceasing of clinging is just this Noble 8-fold Way: Right View , Right, Motivation, Right Speech , Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right Effort, Right Awareness, and Right Concentration… Source: Majjhima Nikâya 9. Sammaditthi Sutta: Discourse on Right View http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn-009-nb0.html <...> Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikâya. Book [V:59] section 45: The Way. 173: The 4 Clingings ... http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/index.html. Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samâhita _/\_ * <....> #115081 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon May 16, 2011 7:32 pm Subject: More dukkha   Hi Connie & Ann, Thx Connie for posting the cute pic of the grandkids, "Goofbells" in "Significant Others" folder. Hope others share pics of their family members or of themselves. You mentioned various family problems (off-list) and I thought of Ann's recent health issues (neuralgia, Ann? Best wishes for a quick recovery and lovely to see you posting again) and of Jon's ghastly skin problems for the last 3 mths which at long last seem to be abating in itchiness and pain intensity. I also thought about how probably everyone here on DSG has some health or family issues. As Ken H wrote to Adam and Lukas: "We all have our problems - tiredness, old age, sicknesses and pains of various descriptions – but they are all just stories relating to the past. With right understanding we can ignore the stories and start again." And isn't this just what the Teachings are about? "Birth is dukkha; ageing is dukkha; and death is dukkha; sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair are dukkha; association with the unloved is dukkha; separation from the loved is dukkha; not attaining one's wishes is dukkha... in short the 5 upadana khandhas are dukkha." All those aches and pains, all those itches and family issues are all gone. Time to let go, begin again and understand what is appearing at this very moment: seeing, visible object, hearing, sound, body sense experience, tangible object, thinking and more thinking.... Just one dhamma appearing at a time. The Path beginning with right understanding now is the only way out.... let's keep sharing and reminding each other. Metta Sarah ======= #115082 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon May 16, 2011 7:53 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] part 1 to Ken O - was: Bkk - with K.Sujin Mar 2011 (2) was: concepts can lead to awakening   Hi Rob E, --- On Tue, 10/5/11, Robert E wrote: > >In addition, the Buddha and those ariyans who attained stages of enlightenment based on (mundane) jhana, are able to 'dwell in fruition' (phala samapatti), experiencing nibbana again and again. Anagamis and arahats may also 'dwell in cessation (nirodha samapatthi). At these times, according to pre-set time periods, no cittas arise. ... R:>Thanks, this is very much in the direction my question was headed. Just an idea of what the life of the cittas are when one is 'out of the net.' .... S: And of course, only the cittas of the arahat are 'out of the net'... >R:Well, it is more clear, understanding that even arahats would experience concepts and paramatha dhammas depending on various conditions, but without any attachment or wrong view. I liked the example of the arahat who lived a long lay life, recognizing her accumulations for such. ... S: I think you're referring to Visakkha - a sotapanna, not an arahat. Of course, there were many other female arahats who had led long lay lives before ordaining - in countless lives, too. I don't think you were around when Connie shared a wonderful series from the commentaries on them. If you go to "Useful Posts" and look under "Sisters", you'll find plenty of inspiring bed-time reading. .... >R: However, I'm still a little unclear about the different configurations of concepts and views, as reflected in my last post to your part 1. But I appreciate the input! .... S: Like now - lots of thinking about concepts of one kind or another, mostly in ignorance and attachment. Metta Sarah ======= #115083 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon May 16, 2011 8:06 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: anusaya revisited   Dear Rob E, I think that what you wrote before was a very good reflection on how the anusayas operate: --- On Thu, 12/5/11, Robert E wrote: I may just be using my imagination, but I am starting to form an idea of how a "latent tendency" may exist in the citta, based on all this discussion lately. I see from this post that the "tendency" arises to cling to the object when the object is present. So the object in a sense activates the tendency, even though the tendency is not a characteristic of the object itself, but is a characteristic of the citta. It seems that rather than the tendency being a "thing unto itself" that is accumulated or that has a space in a citta, it may be more like the way the citta is shaped by the tendency of the last citta, in other words it is influenced or conditioned by the same tendency in the previous citta and so it is shaped and formed in that same way when the previous citta falls away. So that citta is going to be prepared or open to having the same reaction of clinging or craving when that same object of clinging arises for the next citta. I hope that makes some degree of sense - it is just my way of starting to understand how this works. ..... S: Yes, well put, "citta is shaped by the tendency of the last citta" is a good way to put it - and this is all by natural decisive support condition, the widest of all the conditions . .... >So again, it's not like there is a "latent tendency" that is a "something" that is lurking around within the citta. It is just a "tendency," a way that the citta is primed to behave when the right stimulus hits it. It is like all of your friends convinced you over and over again that tea with sugar is the best drink in the world and so when you are offered some tea the desire for sugar is going to arise from all that past conditioning towards craving. All the times you were told and convinced and conditioned to want sugar with your tea are like the momentary passing on of the tendency or conditioning from one citta to the next and each time it gets stronger. Or when you see the sugar near the tea you will cling and want to keep it around and put it in the tea. But you won't really think or care about it until the tea is served, or you see the sugar nearby. It remains "latent" until then. Anyway, that is how I am coming to see it at present. .... S: Again, well expressed. No tendency is ever lost and we can see how children learn to become addicted to all sorts of strange tastes like coffee too! As always, I appreciate your careful reflections. If Jon doesn't hire you as his assistant, I will hire you as my speech-maker and post-writer! Metta Sarah ======= Best, Robert E. #115084 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon May 16, 2011 7:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing   Hi, Ken (and Robert) - In a message dated 5/16/2011 1:35:05 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Robert E, ----------- <. . .> > RE: The word "characteristic" can be rather tricky. Of course anatta is an inherent characteristic of all dhammas, but what exactly does that mean? I think what Sarah agreed with me about in the last discussion - and which I believe she would still agree with, was the idea that anatta was not a "thing," and that it stood for the absence of any existent entity or connection to self. ----------- KH: We all agree that a characteristic of a thing (dhamma) is not, itself, a dhamma. It is part of the substance of a dhamma. The characteristic, hardness, for example is part of the substance of the rupa by that name. Anicca, dukkha and anatta add to the substance of hardness-rupa. ------------------------------------------ I think it is better to stop thinking in terms of "substance" and individual entities. Dhammas are qualities or activities and are not things that "have" qualities or engage in activities. ------------------------------------------ ----------------------- > RE: If we understand that anatta means "no self" or "not self" then whatever anatta is or isn't has to follow from there. We can't just say "it's a positive characteristic" based on some general principle, with no idea of what the positive characteristic is, which is I think what you tend to do. You don't ever say *what* the positive characteristic anatta *is,* and I strongly believe that is because you can't, because you don't know what it is. You just go back to the general principle and don't deal with what anatta actually is. ----------------------- KH: Anatta is the no-self characteristic of a dhamma. ----------------------------------------------- What does that mean? When one says that a dhamma is anatta, it is merely a denial of a dhamma having self. That's all. ---------------------------------------------- Similarly, hardness is the hardness characteristic of a dhamma. What else can I say? --------------------------------------------- Any instance of hardness is itself a dhamma. Likewise for instances of warmth, odor, flavor, etc. --------------------------------------------- ------------------------------- > RE: If you want to say that the "positive characteristic" of anatta is that for every single dhamma that arises there is "no self" or any semblance of self, then you and I can agree instantly. I'll be happy to say that is a positive -- in the sense of definite, and definitive -- characteristic, and that it is an absolute truth that is always characteristic of every dhamma. But if you say that there is a "thing" called the "anatta characteristic" and that the discerning can "see it," like I can see a mole on someone's cheek, ----------------------------- KH: Leaving aside the term "thing," that is basically what I am saying. Anatta can become the object of mind-consciousness, just a hardness can become the object of body-consciousness. ------------------- > RE: then I will say you are making up conceptual fabrications and you are not being true to what anatta means, and what the Buddha meant when he spoke about it. If you believe that there is an anatta characteristic, other than the clear discernment that there is *no self* within, attached to, or pertaining in any way to any dhamma, then you must be able to describe it and say what it is. I can tell you that hardness is hard, that movement moves and that heat is hot. But if you ask me what the characteristic of anatta is, I can only say that it is "no self" because that's what it means. As soon as you are able to tell me how anatta is experienced, other than as the definitive absence of self, we can have a definitive conversation about what the positive characteristic anatta actually is. --------------------- KH: If you look into an empty room, you might say there is "no self" in there. But you are not experiencing anatta, are you? ------------------------------ > RE: I am still sure that Sarah will agree with what I say above, but if she does not, I will look forward to her explanation of what I am missing in my understanding. ------------------------ KH: Substance! :-) Ken H ============================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #115085 From: Rajesh Patil Date: Mon May 16, 2011 10:45 pm Subject: Best wishes for the Buddha's 2600th enlightenment day.   Dear All, Best wishes for the Buddha's 2600th enlightenment day. Sabbe Satta Sukhi Hontu (May All Beings be Happy) Make India Buddhist        Rajesh #115086 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon May 16, 2011 7:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Enlightenment from the light side   Hi, Lukas - In a message dated 5/16/2011 4:11:29 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, szmicio@... writes: Hi Howard May you be so kind and introduce some Nagarjuna concepts in skim? ---------------------------------------------- There is plenty of material on the internet and elsewhere on Nagarjuna to read. It is not appropriate for this list to be discussing him and his teachings, and, anyway, his teachings are far too complex for me to try present them in brief. Besides that, I'm no expert on Nagarjuna, and though I've gained much from him, I'm not a "disciple" of his. ----------------------------------------------- >Howard: He taught that conditioned dhammas were not absolutely real. >That means he had wrong understanding. L: Maybe not so wrong :P Theras taught that all (paramattha)dhammas are empty, devoid of Self, devoid of any core, devoid of anything. But they have sabhava(distinct characteristic), so that can be known. This sounds very similar to Nagarjuna, don't u think? ---------------------------------------------- Largely. However, Nagarjuna was wary of 'sabhava' (Skt, 'svabhava'), because D. O. rules out *self* nature. Sabhava was also roundly decried in the Theravadin PTSM, it happens. ---------------------------------------------- Sometimes scolars of theravada misinterpret the sabhava as sa - with bhava - nature. Claming that dhammas have its own nature, thus they exist. While the truth is that (sabbe dhamma anatta)all dhammas are anatta(empty, devoid of core, out of control) - source Dispeller of delusion on synonyms of anatta :P ---------------------------------------------- My understanding is that in genuine Theravada, 'sabhava' is a synonym merely of 'lakkhana', with later reifications of the term being substantialist errors, definitely off the mark. --------------------------------------------- >H: Therefore, even when he said there was "no > Nagarjuna" he was proclaiming either an eternity belief or an annihilation > belief. (My guess is it was eternity belief.) L: Why your quess is eternity belief :P ? ---------------------------------------------- That was KenH's guess, not mine. I don't know why the quoted material began with H:, but I never put that. Actually, I think that Nagarjuna was a genuine presenter of the middle way and neither a nihilist nor an eternalist. (But his emphasis on emptiness made some folks mistakenly accuse him of being nihilist.) Within the Pali suttas, he was most influenced, it is clear to me, by the Kaccayanagotta Sutta. --------------------------------------------- >H:And as an aside: It's okay when you and others here say there > are no beings!) And, BTW, the Buddha himself taught the unreality of > dhammas! L: No one here is saying there are no beings. ---------------------------------------------- Not so. There are folks here who definitely assert exactly that. -------------------------------------------- I think the problem of Nagarajuna was that he was a philosopher. I know very little of him, therefore I can misjudge him. But on the other hand wasn't he a precursor of mahajana ideology on emptiness? --------------------------------------------- Yes. ------------------------------------------- >H:And, BTW, the Buddha himself taught the unreality of > dhammas! L: real or not real doesn't matter, if something doesn't last how could it be real. ------------------------------------------- Some folks would say that while it exists it is a reality. ----------------------------------------- Best wishes Lukas P.s Howard please give the first letter of your name before you start answer or your full name. It will be more convenient to all of us. ------------------------------------------- Whatever I say in a post of mine is unquoted, while all else is quoted. That should be sufficient. =================================== With metta, Howard #115087 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue May 17, 2011 3:33 am Subject: Re: wisdom and doing   Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Robert E, > > ----------- > <. . .> > > RE: The word "characteristic" can be rather tricky. Of course anatta is an inherent characteristic of all dhammas, but what exactly does that mean? > > I think what Sarah agreed with me about in the last discussion - and which I believe she would still agree with, was the idea that anatta was not a "thing," and that it stood for the absence of any existent entity or connection to self. > ----------- > > KH: We all agree that a characteristic of a thing (dhamma) is not, itself, a dhamma. It is part of the substance of a dhamma. The characteristic, hardness, for example is part of the substance of the rupa by that name. Anicca, dukkha and anatta add to the substance of hardness-rupa. > > ----------------------- > > RE: If we understand that anatta means "no self" or "not self" then whatever anatta is or isn't has to follow from there. We can't just say "it's a positive characteristic" based on some general principle, with no idea of what the positive characteristic is, which is I think what you tend to do. You don't ever say *what* the positive characteristic anatta *is,* and I strongly believe that is because you can't, because you don't know what it is. You just go back to the general principle and don't deal with what anatta actually is. > ----------------------- > > KH: Anatta is the no-self characteristic of a dhamma. Similarly, hardness is the hardness characteristic of a dhamma. What else can I say? Well you can say, theoretically, if you experienced the "no-self" characteristic, what would you be experiencing? If I say "I will show you hardness," and I have you tap a piece of cherry-wood, you can feel that it is hard. If I say "I will show you motion," I can move something and have you experience that. We all know what these characteristics are. I can tell you if you are calm or agitated, so I have a sense of what the "samatha characteristic" is like if it is present. So, here we go: if I show you the anatta characteristic, what will you perceive? What sense does it occur to? How is it experienced? You see what I'm driving at? You either know what anatta is, or you don't. If you know what it is, you can describe it. I actually know what the 'no-self' characteristic is, in a general way. It is the experience of "no-self." When you experience "no-self," what are you experiencing? You are experiencing that there is no self. What else could it be? And we should agree that there is no such thing as a "no-self," anymore than I can perceive a "no unicorn," or an "absent friend who missed our appointment." They are not presences, they are absences, and that's the kind of characteristic that "no-self," or anatta, is. Can you tell me where you disagree with me here? And if you do, please tell me what your alternative explanation is of what the "no-self" characteristic is, and how and by which sense it is experienced. Just describe, in a general way, how you understand no-self as a characteristic and how it is demonstrated by an arising dhamma. > ------------------------------- > > RE: If you want to say that the "positive characteristic" of anatta is that for every single dhamma that arises there is "no self" or any semblance of self, then you and I can agree instantly. I'll be happy to say that is a positive -- in the sense of definite, and definitive -- characteristic, and that it is an absolute truth that is always characteristic of every dhamma. But if you say that there is a "thing" called the "anatta characteristic" and that the discerning can "see it," like I can see a mole on someone's cheek, ----------------------------- > > KH: Leaving aside the term "thing," that is basically what I am saying. Anatta can become the object of mind-consciousness, just a hardness can become the object of body-consciousness. So when it becomes the object of mind, what is it? A concept, a presence, an absence, an understanding, an insight, a sort of view of a dhamma that shows that it has no self? How does the characteristic appear as you understand it? > ------------------- > > RE: then I will say you are making up conceptual fabrications and you are not being true to what anatta means, and what the Buddha meant when he spoke about it. > > If you believe that there is an anatta characteristic, other than the clear discernment that there is *no self* within, attached to, or pertaining in any way to any dhamma, then you must be able to describe it and say what it is. I can tell you that hardness is hard, that movement moves and that heat is hot. > But if you ask me what the characteristic of anatta is, I can only say that it is "no self" because that's what it means. As soon as you are able to tell me how anatta is experienced, other than as the definitive absence of self, we can have a definitive conversation about what the positive characteristic anatta actually is. > --------------------- > > KH: If you look into an empty room, you might say there is "no self" in there. But you are not experiencing anatta, are you? No, in that case I am experiencing "no one in the room," but it is an analogous understanding to seeing that there is "no entity in this dhamma or anything that is related or connected to a self." That is anatta indeed. What do you think it is, if not that? You still haven't said, so far. Is it indescribable, an ephemeral invisible characteristic that we know must be there, but that we can't describe or talk about. Is it a ghost? Is it a ghost-like absence that shimmers all about the dhamma? What is it, and how is it perceived? If it is a characteristic, then you should be able to describe how it is experienced, just like you can say that hardness feels hard, and motion is moving, samatha is calmness, and anatta is....'no self.' No one home. > ------------------------------ > > RE: I am still sure that Sarah will agree with what I say above, but if she does not, I will look forward to her explanation of what I am missing in my understanding. > ------------------------ > > KH: Substance! :-) Do you mean substance like the substantiality of an object, or do you mean substance like a lack of substantial reasoning or knowledge in my understanding? If you mean the latter, I would say that I have given you a very concrete explanation of anatta and a very concrete, simple challenge, and so far you haven't been able to describe anatta as a positive characteristic in any way, shape or form. You say it is the 'no-self' characteristic, but that is just redundant, a tautology, it doesn't demonstrate the slightest understanding of how anatta is experienced, or what it is as a characteristic. I still think you don't actually know what it is! :-) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = #115088 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue May 17, 2011 3:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] ahosi kamma   Hi Han. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: > > Dear Robert E, > > > > Han: (1) There has been action (ahosikamma.m), there has been action-result (ahosikammavipaako). > > > Robert E: Thank you for running through these different cases of kamma and vipaka. I keep going back to very basic questions about kamma: I wonder if you have a sense in the translation of kamma as action in all these cases, whether it especially pertains to cetana, or whether it can stand for both the volition and the physical action that may be involved on the "kamma" side of the equation? > > ---------- > > Han: Yes, I would translate "kamma" as "action" and "kamma-vipaaka" as the "result of action", in all these cases where these two words are mentioned. > > For a "kamma" to be successfully committed there must be "cetanaa". > For example, in Going for Refuge & Taking the Precept by Bhikkhu Bodhi, there is the following passage: > [A complete act of killing constituting a full violation of the precept involves five factors: (1) a living being; (2) the perception of the living being as such; (3) the thought or volition of killing; (4) the appropriate effort; and (5) the actual death of the being as a result of the action.] > Han: So No (3) volition or cetanaa must be there to successfully commit the act of killing. > > And the action involves not only physical action, but all three are involved: bodily action (kaaya-kamma), verbal action (vacii-kamma), and mental action (mano-kamma). Thank you very much. I think what you have said and quoted above makes clear that kamma potentially involves all three levels of action - volition, speech and physical action. However, some questions: I don't think you are saying that all three have to be present to create kamma...? I would guess that one could have kamma produced by having the volition to compliment someone and then say something nice; or the volition to hurt someone and then say something mean, without any additional action. Likewise, I would suppose that one could have the intention to sculpt something and then create the sculpture without saying anything, etc. But I would guess that if one simply does something by happenstance with no volition - if that is even possible - that might not create kamma...? In any case, it seems like the component that must always be there for kamma to be formed is the volition. I think it is also true that one can have kamma in the form of volition with no speech or action...? [Mental kamma.] I think however that you were saying that "complete kamma" that will have the full effect of kamma would have to go through all three - volition, speech and action...? [And I guess that would be kamma-patha...?] Sorry for all the scattered questions, but I am just hoping to sort some of this out... Thanks much, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #115089 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue May 17, 2011 3:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] part 1 to Ken O - was: Bkk - with K.Sujin Mar 2011 (2) was: concepts can lead to awakening   Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > >R: However, I'm still a little unclear about the different configurations of concepts and views, as reflected in my last post to your part 1. But I appreciate the input! > .... > S: Like now - lots of thinking about concepts of one kind or another, mostly in ignorance and attachment. Plenty of ignorance, that's for sure! :-) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #115090 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue May 17, 2011 3:55 am Subject: [dsg] Re: anusaya revisited   Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: Rob E.: > ...But you won't really think or care about it until the tea is served, or you see the sugar nearby. It remains "latent" until then. Anyway, that is how I am coming to see it at present. > .... > S: Again, well expressed. No tendency is ever lost and we can see how children learn to become addicted to all sorts of strange tastes like coffee too! > > As always, I appreciate your careful reflections. If Jon doesn't hire you as his assistant, I will hire you as my speech-maker and post-writer! I am ready at a moment's notice! Although I think if I started writing your posts, your popularity would suddenly plummet! :-) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = #115091 From: "Lukas" Date: Tue May 17, 2011 5:17 am Subject: 17th of May - Vesak Day   Dear friends, Tomorrow is Vesak. A Good day. Best Lukas #115092 From: "glenjohnann" Date: Tue May 17, 2011 5:59 am Subject: Re: More dukkha   Hi Sarah A big thank you for a very timely reminder. So easy to get caught up in the pain and stories and wishes for an end to it all – but as you say each moment is an opportunity for a new beginning. It is important that we all support each other in this regard sharing and reminding. Happy to hear that Jonothan's pain issues are abating. Yes, a good possibility that mine is a neuralgia or some sort. In the meantime, I keep riding my bike and reading DSG etc. – find both very helpful. Ann --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > You mentioned various family problems (off-list) and I thought of Ann's recent health issues (neuralgia, Ann? Best wishes for a quick recovery and lovely to see you posting again) and of Jon's ghastly skin problems for the last 3 mths which at long last seem to be abating in itchiness and pain intensity. I also thought about how probably everyone here on DSG has some health or family issues. > > As Ken H wrote to Adam and Lukas: > > "We all have our problems - tiredness, old age, sicknesses and pains of various descriptions â€" but they are all just stories relating to the past. > > With right understanding we can ignore the stories and start again." > > And isn't this just what the Teachings are about? "Birth is dukkha; ageing is dukkha; and death is dukkha; sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair are dukkha; association with the unloved is dukkha; separation from the loved is dukkha; not attaining one's wishes is dukkha... in short the 5 upadana khandhas are dukkha." > > All those aches and pains, all those itches and family issues are all gone. Time to let go, begin again and understand what is appearing at this very moment: seeing, visible object, hearing, sound, body sense experience, tangible object, thinking and more thinking.... Just one dhamma appearing at a time. > > The Path beginning with right understanding now is the only way out.... let's keep sharing and reminding each other. #115093 From: han tun Date: Tue May 17, 2011 8:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] ahosi kamma   Dear Robert E, [Robert]: Thank you very much. I think what you have said and quoted above makes clear that kamma potentially involves all three levels of action – volition, speech and physical action. However, some questions: I don't think you are saying that all three have to be present to create kamma...? I would guess that one could have kamma produced by having the volition to compliment someone and then say something nice; or the volition to hurt someone and then say something mean, without any additional action. Likewise, I would suppose that one could have the intention to sculpt something and then create the sculpture without saying anything, etc. [Han]: All three, i.e., bodily action (kaaya-kamma), verbal action (vacii-kamma), and mental action (mano-kamma) *may not be* involved in *every* action, good or bad. As you had said above, there may be one, or two, or all three involved as the case may be. ---------------- [Robert]: But I would guess that if one simply does something by happenstance with no volition – if that is even possible – that might not create kamma...? [Han]: Please read the following background story of Dhammapada Verse No. 1. < The Story of Thera Cakkhupala On one occasion, Thera Cakkhupala came to pay homage to the Buddha at the Jetavana monastery. One night, while pacing up and down in meditation, the Thera accidentally stepped on some insects. In the morning, some bhikkhus visiting the Thera found the dead insects. They thought ill of the Thera and reported the matter to the Buddha. The Buddha asked them whether they had seen the Thera killing the insects. When they answered in the negative, the Buddha said, "Just as you had not seen him killing, so also he had not seen those living insects. Besides, as the Thera had already attained arahatship he could have no intention of killing and so was quite innocent. "On being asked why Cakkhupala was blind although he was an arahat, the Buddha told the following story: Cakkhupala was a physician in one of his past existences. Once, he had deliberately made a woman patient blind. That woman had promised him to become his slave, together with her children, if her eyes were completely cured. Fearing that she and her children would have to become slaves, she lied to the physician. She told him that her eyes were getting worse when, in fact, they were perfectly cured. The physician knew she was deceiving him, so in revenge, he gave her another ointment, which made her totally blind. As a result of this evil deed the physician lost his eyesight many times in his later existences. Then the Buddha spoke in verse as follows: Verse 1: All mental phenomena have mind as their forerunner; they have mind as their chief; they are mind-made. If one speaks or acts with an evil mind, 'dukkha' follows him just as the wheel follows the hoof-print of the ox that draws the cart.> Han: When Thera Cakkhupala killed those insects there was no volition (cetanaa), and so even if he were not an Arahant at that time, it would not be an akusala kamma-patha. Whereas, when he blinded a patient deliberately in his past life there was volition and so it was an akusala kamma-patha and there were kamma-vipaakas for that. ---------------- [Robert]: In any case, it seems like the component that must always be there for kamma to be formed is the volition. [Han]: Correct. In AN 6.63 Nibbedhika Sutta: Penetrative, the Buddha said: "Intention, I tell you, is kamma. Intending, one does kamma by way of body, speech, & intellect. "Cetanaaha.m bhikkhave kamma.m vadaami, cetayitvaa kamma.m karoti kaayena Vaacaaya manassaa." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an06/an06.063.than.html [Here, Ven Thanissaro Bhikkhu translated cetanaa as "intention". More common translation is "volition".] --------------- [Robert]: I think it is also true that one can have kamma in the form of volition with no speech or action...? [Mental kamma.] [Han]: Correct. Abhijjhaa (covetousness), byaapaada (ill-will), micchaadi.t.thi (wrong view) are all akusala kamma-patha, although verbal action and/or bodily action may or may not follow. --------------- [Robert]: I think however that you were saying that "complete kamma" that will have the full effect of kamma would have to go through all three - volition, speech and action...? [And I guess that would be kamma-patha...?] Sorry for all the scattered questions, but I am just hoping to sort some of this out... [Han]: Already answered above. --------------- Kind regards, Han #115094 From: "philip" Date: Tue May 17, 2011 9:23 am Subject: Re: More dukkha   Hi Sarah and Ann and Lukas and all First of all, nice to see you hear Ann. It was good to meet you in Thailand. Sorry to hear you've been having medical problems. But Sarah, I will lodge a typical protest about the following > As Ken H wrote to Adam and Lukas: > > "We all have our problems – tiredness, old age, sicknesses and pains of various descriptions â€Ebut they are all just stories relating to the past. > > With right understanding we can ignore the stories and start again." > > And isn't this just what the Teachings are about? "Birth is dukkha; ageing is dukkha; and death is dukkha; sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair are dukkha; association with the unloved is dukkha; separation from the loved is dukkha; not attaining one's wishes is dukkha... in short the 5 upadana khandhas are dukkha." > > All those aches and pains, all those itches and family issues are all gone. Time to let go, begin again and understand what is appearing at this very moment: seeing, visible object, hearing, sound, body sense experience, tangible object, thinking and more thinking.... Just one dhamma appearing at a time. > > The Path beginning with right understanding now is the only way out.... let's keep sharing and reminding each other. Ph: Ken and you are wrting about harsh vipaka that is inevitable to all of us, but Lukas was writing about hoping to overcome his habit of breaking the precepts about drinking and I assume other akusala kamma patha behaviour that comes from breaking the precept. I agree that we need wisdom to wisely accept harsh vipaka, but if we use reflection on the Buddha's teaching on vipaka to rationalize accepting habitually breaking the precepts and often performing akuala kamma patha (i.e harmful behaviour) we are being very foolish. If Lukas continues to drink because he believes that it is conditioned in a way that cannot be stopped, that it is vipaka, well, that is very tragic and the kind of post you have written here might have contributed to it. (And of course Ken H's was the real culprit.) That is my rather harsh opinion! It is wonderful that we can support each other about wisely understanding vipaka. But I think DSG continues to be a place where people fail to support each other about avoiding bad behaviour. Mostly because the topic never comes up, except when Lukas and I and perhaps others occasionally bring it up. Anyways, I will say that I am grateful to have DSG to help develop understanding of deep topics such as vipaka, but I get my Buddhist guidance about bad behaviour elsewhere, and I hope Lukas and others who tend to behave badly get firm guidance elsewhere as well. I suppose if one had to choose one sutta for such guidance, this would be a good one. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.061.than.html Thanks for letting me just throw in my opposing viewpoint on occasion. Metta, Phil #115095 From: "philip" Date: Tue May 17, 2011 9:29 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Tanha bhava vs. aggregates of clinging vs. lobha (Jon)   Hi Nina > > > I am out of discussion mode for the time being (if I was ever in > > it) but reading SPD a bit now and then > ------ > N: Excellent. Any thoughts on Survey? Ph: I'm sure there will be questions, I will be asking them sooner or later, for sure. It really is a great book for understanding deep points of Dhamma. I read it in the evening on days on which I have behaved in line with the precepts and can look back on my behaviour that day without regret, and feel therefore that I (all very much I, of course) have earned some reflection on the deep teachings. But I don't touch it on days when there has been a lot of unwise behaviour, because the Buddha said that the deep teachings don't sink into disturbed minds (and our minds are disturbed by bad behaviour) the way dye is not absorbed by a soiled cloth, and I tend to feel that is true. Here is hoping that there will be more and more days when I earn some time with the very excellent Survey of Paramattha Dhammas! Metta, Phil #115096 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue May 17, 2011 9:31 am Subject: Re: Enlightenment from the light side   Hi Lukas and Howard, I accidentally put an H instead of a KH in front of the following gem of wisdom: :-) > He taught that conditioned dhammas were not absolutely real. That means he had wrong understanding. > Lukas, in his reply, filled in what he thought were the missing letters, and so we got: > Howard: He taught that conditioned dhammas were not absolutely real. That means he had wrong understanding. > Apart from the designation, the content was OK, wasn't it? According to the Dhamma, conditioned dhammas *are* absolute realities, and to hold otherwise would be wrong view. Wouldn't it? Howard can regard that as a rhetorical question. :-) ----------------- > L: Maybe not so wrong :P Theras taught that all (paramattha)dhammas are empty, devoid of Self, devoid of any core, devoid of anything. But they have sabhava(distinct characteristic), so that can be known. This sounds very similar to Nagarjuna, don't u think? ----------------- KH: Unfortunately, it does sound similar to Nagarjuna. The Theras taught dhammas were empty of a permanent soul, or self, but Nagarjuna decided that was not enough. He extended the emptiness principle to include everything. And so we find the ridiculous concept of dhammas that somehow both exist and lack own being. If it wasn't so serious it would be laughable. ----------------- > L: Largely. However, Nagarjuna was wary of 'sabhava' (Skt, 'svabhava'), because D. O. rules out *self* nature. Sabhava was also roundly decried in the Theravadin PTSM, it happens. ----------------- KH: I agree, the word sabhava was sometimes used to mean self (atta) or "something more". Even in English the word "substance" can be used to mean something more. A "person of substance" for example, is a person with admirable qualities. With or without admirable qualities, a person is still a person. And it's the same with dhammas. They are without a permanent soul, but they still exist; they still have "own being." ------------------------ > > L: Sometimes scolars of theravada misinterpret the sabhava as sa - with bhava - nature. Claming that dhammas have its own nature, thus they exist. While the truth is that (sabbe dhamma anatta)all dhammas are anatta(empty, devoid of core, out of control) - source Dispeller of delusion on synonyms of anatta :P ------------------------ KH: No, it is not just scholars of Theravada, it is the Theravada itself. According to Theravadin texts, the word sabhava can mean "substance" or "inherent characteristic" and in that sense all dhammas definitely do have sabhava. It was only Nagarjuna (and the Mahayanists who followed him) who maintained that dhammas had no inherent characteristics. -------------------- <. . .> >H: Therefore, even when he said there was "no > Nagarjuna" he was proclaiming either an eternity belief or an annihilation > belief. (My guess is it was eternity belief.) L: Why your quess is eternity belief :P ? ------------------ KH: Once again, my original mistake has caused you to think it was Howard speaking, when it was actually me. My guess was based on a broad categorisation of all views into 1) eternity based, 2) annihilation based, and 3) the middle way. Rightly or wrongly, I tend to think that eternal-life is the wrong view that appeals to people most. It appeals so much that some people are prepared to dishonestly rewrite the Buddha's Dhamma and turn it into an eternal-life teaching. They still maintain the word "anatta" but give it a watered-down meaning that allows for eel-wriggling. In that way, people can say "no elf" and still mean "self". And thus imply the possibility of eternal life! --------------------------- <. . .> >>H:And, BTW, the Buddha himself taught the unreality of dhammas! >> > L: real or not real doesn't matter, if something doesn't last how could it be real. --------------------------- KH: I think you have a good point, Lukas, but one that can be very confusing. The Buddha described absolute reality as the presently arisen conditioned dhammas. They are not real in the sense that worldlings know "real". They are unreal in that sense. However, in the sense that they do exist, and are the only things that do exist, they are absolutely real (paramattha dhamma). And so if, in some suttas, the Buddha described everything as being unreal, I am sure he meant everything was "absolutely not the way worldlings believe it to be." Ken H #115097 From: "philip" Date: Tue May 17, 2011 10:14 am Subject: Re: More dukkha   Hi again Correction on this: > But I think DSG continues to be a place where people fail to support each other about avoiding bad behaviour. Mostly because the topic never comes up, except when Lukas and I and perhaps others occasionally bring it up. That is not why DSG is a place where people fail to support each other about bad behaviour. The reason DSG is a place where people fail to support each other about bad behaviour is because of the prevalent idea that identifying and trying to stop or avoid bad behaviour is wrong because there is bound to be clinging to self involved. We have to stop bad behaviour, plain and simple, especially when it is as blatant and easy to identify as breaking the precepts in planned ways, such as drinking alcohol. People who can't even keep the precept on alcohol are just playing games with Dhamma and should not be listened to when they are discussing deep points to rationalize continuing to break the precepts, they are not good friends, plain and simple. Metta, Phil p.s Lukas, sorry as always for posting in a one-way direction. My posts give things to you from a different angle from other people, you can reflect on various viewpoints, that's good. But please read the Buddha's advice to his son Rahula - before, during and after behaviour in body, speech and mind, we are told by the Buddha to reflect on the probable results. That might seem like common sense and is not as deep and fascinating as paramattha dhammas, but it is what the Buddha said to his little son. It might sound very Christian to say so, but we are like the Buddha's children, because our understanding is so feeble. #115098 From: "philip" Date: Tue May 17, 2011 10:58 am Subject: Re: More dukkha   Hi again Lukas > People who can't even keep the precept on alcohol are just playing games with Dhamma and should not be listened to when they are discussing deep points to rationalize continuing to break the precepts, they are not good friends, plain and simple. This was a bit too harsh. They are not good friends at such times that they advise a relaxed attitude towards precepts they don't keep themselves because at such times they are busy justifying their own transgressions... but Dhamma friendship doesn't exist except on the momentary level, I do understand that, somehow... and there can be good understanding at other moments, the gross idiocies which we all display at times (some of us more than others, emphasis on us) don't destroy the potential for wisdom to arise a moment later... Metta, Phil > > p.s Lukas, sorry as always for posting in a one-way direction. My posts give things to you from a different angle from other people, you can reflect on various viewpoints, that's good. But please read the Buddha's advice to his son Rahula - before, during and after behaviour in body, speech and mind, we are told by the Buddha to reflect on the probable results. That might seem like common sense and is not as deep and fascinating as paramattha dhammas, but it is what the Buddha said to his little son. It might sound very Christian to say so, but we are like the Buddha's children, because our understanding is so feeble. > #115099 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue May 17, 2011 12:10 pm Subject: Re: wisdom and doing Hi Howard, ----- <. . .> > H: I think it is better to stop thinking in terms of "substance" and individual entities. Dhammas are qualities or activities and are not things that "have" qualities or engage in activities. ------ KH: Of what are they qualities or activities? ----------------------- <. . .> KH: Anatta is the no-self characteristic of a dhamma. >> > H: What does that mean? When one says that a dhamma is anatta, it is merely a denial of a dhamma having self. That's all. ----------------------- KH: It means dhammas are inherently anatta. They don't just happen to be without atta at the moment. Because of their inherent anatta-nature there is no possibility they ever could have been otherwise. They could never have been atta, and they could never have been conditioned by atta, or capable of conditioning atta, or have a connection with atta in any way whatsoever. -------------------------- >> KH: Similarly, hardness is the hardness characteristic of a dhamma. What else can I say? > H: Any instance of hardness is itself a dhamma. Likewise for instances of warmth, odor, flavor, etc. -------------------------- KH: I think dhammas are named after their most obvious, particular characteristic. They also possess other characteristics. Therefore, we can't say any one of those characteristics is all that makes up the substance of a dhamma. Ken H #115100 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue May 17, 2011 12:13 pm Subject: Re: wisdom and doing   Hi Ken H. Uh oh, looks like I may have answered this post twice. Since I said some new things, I will send this new answer as well. Sorry for any redundancy. Imagine having to sit through my statements about anatta twice in a row – now that's unpleasant vipaka! ;-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Ken (and Robert) - > > In a message dated 5/16/2011 1:35:05 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > kenhowardau@... writes: > > Hi Robert E, > > ----------- > <. . .> > > RE: The word "characteristic" can be rather tricky. Of course anatta is > an inherent characteristic of all dhammas, but what exactly does that mean? > > I think what Sarah agreed with me about in the last discussion - and which > I believe she would still agree with, was the idea that anatta was not a > "thing," and that it stood for the absence of any existent entity or > connection to self. > ----------- > > KH: We all agree that a characteristic of a thing (dhamma) is not, itself, > a dhamma. It is part of the substance of a dhamma. The characteristic, > hardness, for example is part of the substance of the rupa by that name. > Anicca, dukkha and anatta add to the substance of hardness-rupa. Really? In what way is "no-self" a part of the substance of a dhamma? How can "no-something" be part of "substance." It is not too easy to show, just be definition that "substance" = "something," and "no-self" is not something but "not-something." The problem with creating all these categories and concepts and then calling them characteristics is that you can't think straight anymore. You keep saying that "no-self" is part of "substance," that it is substantial and that it is a positive characteristic of something, even though it is clearly by definition non-substance, non-substantial, and the denial of the "self-characteristic" rather than a "something" in its own right. What you are doing is taking a "non-entity," the very denial of entity in Buddhism, and turning it into a substantial, positive entity! It is the exact opposite of the whole point of anatta, and what Buddha explicitly set out to do - to show that there is no entity, no substantiality, no self in samsara. The self is a very tricky thing - self-concept can show up anywhere in many different guises. Welcome to yours. > ------------------------------------------ > I think it is better to stop thinking in terms of "substance" and > individual entities. Dhammas are qualities or activities and are not things > that "have" qualities or engage in activities. > ------------------------------------------ Then stop saying they are substantial and have own-being. > > ----------------------- > > RE: If we understand that anatta means "no self" or "not self" then > whatever anatta is or isn't has to follow from there. We can't just say "it's > a positive characteristic" based on some general principle, with no idea of > what the positive characteristic is, which is I think what you tend to do. > You don't ever say *what* the positive characteristic anatta *is,* and I > strongly believe that is because you can't, because you don't know what it > is. You just go back to the general principle and don't deal with what > anatta actually is. > ----------------------- > > KH: Anatta is the no-self characteristic of a dhamma. That is parrotry, Ken. Repeating the same sentence over and over again does not demonstrate understanding. Translate that lovely phrase into a statement that says what the no-self characteristic *is;* otherwise you are saying absolutely nothing but reciting a mantra. It may soothe you, but it's worthless. The whole dispute is not over the existence of the no-self characteristic, but of what it consists of, and you can't say, can you? You don't know what it is. > ----------------------------------------------- > What does that mean? When one says that a dhamma is anatta, it is > merely a denial of a dhamma having self. That's all. > ---------------------------------------------- > > Similarly, hardness is the hardness characteristic of a dhamma. What else > can I say? > --------------------------------------------- > Any instance of hardness is itself a dhamma. Likewise for instances of > warmth, odor, flavor, etc. > --------------------------------------------- You're missing the point. What is the anatta characteristic? Describe or define it. How does a "no-self" characteristic show up in a dhamma? How is it experienced? What is its quality? You can't say, because you don't know. If you do know, say something about it. > ------------------------------- > > RE: If you want to say that the "positive characteristic" of anatta is > that for every single dhamma that arises there is "no self" or any semblance > of self, then you and I can agree instantly. I'll be happy to say that is > a positive -- in the sense of definite, and definitive -- characteristic, > and that it is an absolute truth that is always characteristic of every > dhamma. But if you say that there is a "thing" called the "anatta > characteristic" and that the discerning can "see it," like I can see a mole on > someone's cheek, ----------------------------- > > KH: Leaving aside the term "thing," that is basically what I am saying. > Anatta can become the object of mind-consciousness, just a hardness can > become the object of body-consciousness. So when mind engages the anatta characteristic, what does it experience - that there is no self, or something else? If something else, then what? Describe how the no-self characteristic is engaged by mind-consciousness. > ------------------- > > RE: then I will say you are making up conceptual fabrications and you > are not being true to what anatta means, and what the Buddha meant when he > spoke about it. > > If you believe that there is an anatta characteristic, other than the > clear discernment that there is *no self* within, attached to, or pertaining in > any way to any dhamma, then you must be able to describe it and say what > it is. I can tell you that hardness is hard, that movement moves and that > heat is hot. > But if you ask me what the characteristic of anatta is, I can only say > that it is "no self" because that's what it means. As soon as you are able to > tell me how anatta is experienced, other than as the definitive absence of > self, we can have a definitive conversation about what the positive > characteristic anatta actually is. > --------------------- > > KH: If you look into an empty room, you might say there is "no self" in > there. But you are not experiencing anatta, are you? No, because an empty room is not a dhamma, it's a room, and it is absent of people, not "self." When you experience anatta, you experience the absence of self, not an absence of bodies that you think of as people. Self is a concept of entity within and between all things, that connects and controls them and is served by them. This concept says that beings exist and can be born and die, and that they need to be served and protected. Self-concept justifies clinging, craving and aversion, because the self-concept is self-serving. When anatta is realized there is freedom from all that. Dhammas are seen as not worth clinging to, as they are shifting configurations of non-entity that cannot be held onto and cannot satisfy, which leads to detachment; and beings are seen as non-entities, just shifting kandhas. There is no one lurking in the body waiting to get what they want; that's just an arising thought-form. That's anatta in a nutshell, what the Buddha taught. When you experience a dhamma and experience clearly that there is nothing there but a momentary experience - no self or entity in or about it, and no entity or being in the citta experiencing it, you realize there is no self, no being, no entity, on either end of the experience, and that leads to detachment and peace. That's the no-self characteristic, experienced as 'just what is' with nothing lurking within. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #115101 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue May 17, 2011 12:15 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing   Hi Howard. Now that I look at the original post, I realize why I answered Ken twice. I got mixed up and didn't realize this was your answer to the post! Looking through it again, I appreciate your comments. Best, Robert E. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > ------------------------------------------ > I think it is better to stop thinking in terms of "substance" and > individual entities. Dhammas are qualities or activities and are not things > that "have" qualities or engage in activities. > ------------------------------------------ ... #115102 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue May 17, 2011 12:26 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ahosi kamma   Hi Han. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: > [Robert]: In any case, it seems like the component that must always be there for kamma to be formed is the volition. > > [Han]: Correct. In AN 6.63 Nibbedhika Sutta: Penetrative, the Buddha said: > "Intention, I tell you, is kamma. Intending, one does kamma by way of body, speech, & intellect. > "Cetanaaha.m bhikkhave kamma.m vadaami, cetayitvaa kamma.m karoti kaayena vaacaaya manassaa." > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an06/an06.063.than.html > [Here, Ven Thanissaro Bhikkhu translated cetanaa as "intention". More common translation is "volition".] > > --------------- > > [Robert]: I think it is also true that one can have kamma in the form of volition with no speech or action...? [Mental kamma.] > > [Han]: Correct. Abhijjhaa (covetousness), byaapaada (ill-will), micchaadi.t.thi (wrong view) are all akusala kamma-patha, although verbal action and/or bodily action may or may not follow. Thank you for all your answers, Han, which were very clear. I especially enjoyed the story of the arahant stepping on the insects by accident. That made the cetana component of kamma very clear. I also liked seeing how Buddha corrected the bikkhus who looked at the death of the insects and didn't understand the central importance of cetana. I think we often look at actions in their own right and fail to closely examine the type of intention involved. It's a good story. It also reminded me of how surprised I was a few years ago when I found out that Buddha did not mind the monks eating meat that was given to them, as long as they were not directly involved in the killing of the animal. I did not realize until then that Buddha was more concerned with the volitional act of the person involved then of the death of the animal per se. It shifts your focus when you look at it that way. Appreciate your help! Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #115103 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue May 17, 2011 12:29 pm Subject: Re: More dukkha   Hi Phil. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > Ph: Ken and you are wrting about harsh vipaka that is inevitable to all of us, but Lukas was writing about hoping to overcome his habit of breaking the precepts about drinking and I assume other akusala kamma patha behaviour that comes from breaking the precept. I agree that we need wisdom to wisely accept harsh vipaka, but if we use reflection on the Buddha's teaching on vipaka to rationalize accepting habitually breaking the precepts and often performing akuala kamma patha (i.e harmful behaviour) we are being very foolish. Just wanted to throw my two cents in. There is no reason why we can't protect ourselves by trying to stop akusala behavior while also understanding kamma and vipaka. They are not mutually exclusive. Even Ken H. can stop being bad if he really wants to. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #115104 From: "connie" Date: Tue May 17, 2011 1:07 pm Subject: More dukkha   Write on, Sarah. When it comes to dukkha, more is never enough; woe, lobha's stealth mode! Akusala hetu! en guarde!!* against the self, perhaps... who cares who... just recognize the enemy... no need to call! haha. But if you're down pointing folk out, Lobha Mula Citta, there's one of the usual suspects - 8 types of the devil anyway. If memory serves, the dosa mulas round out the basic dirty dozen & then it seems like the 2 general mohas are the real brains behind the akusala javana cittas / cetasikas / gangs, but lets not split heads. We're not talking about sobhana kiriya cittas here! That's "ahosi" of a different color. peace! connie *point of context ;) > Posting: A method of holding a weapon further down the handle in order to extend the reach by a few inches. Posting is a trade-off; the fencer loses a little control < snip! lol > there is no need to establish right of way, and hitting first can result in being awarded the touch. Technically, it is not legal to slide one's hand on the grip from front to back during an action (see USFA t.16), so a fencer who wishes to post must do it while the action is stopped, or risk a possible penalty. < en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fencing_terms #115105 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue May 17, 2011 9:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Enlightenment from the light side   Hi, Ken (and Lukas) - In a message dated 5/16/2011 7:31:20 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Lukas and Howard, I accidentally put an H instead of a KH in front of the following gem of wisdom: :-) > He taught that conditioned dhammas were not absolutely real. That means he had wrong understanding. > Lukas, in his reply, filled in what he thought were the missing letters, and so we got: > Howard: He taught that conditioned dhammas were not absolutely real. That means he had wrong understanding. > Apart from the designation, the content was OK, wasn't it? According to the Dhamma, conditioned dhammas *are* absolute realities, and to hold otherwise would be wrong view. Wouldn't it? Howard can regard that as a rhetorical question. :-) ----------------------------------------------------- I don't so regard it. I consider it a false assertion in the form of a question. Some evidence of the falsity: 1) /"Thus, monks, the Tathagata, when seeing what is to be seen, doesn't construe an [object as] seen. He doesn't construe an unseen. He doesn't construe an [object] to-be-seen. He doesn't construe a seer. "When hearing... "When sensing... "When cognizing what is to be cognized, he doesn't construe an [object as] cognized. He doesn't construe an uncognized. He doesn't construe an [object] to-be-cognized. He doesn't construe a cognizer./ (From the Kalaka Sutta) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 2) /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) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 3) /He who does not find core or substance in any of the realms of being, like flowers which are vainly sought in fig trees that bear none — such a seeker gives up the here and the beyond, just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin./ (From the Uraga Sutta) __ _ _ _ _ _ _ 4) /He who neither goes too far nor lags behind and knows about the world: "This is all unreal," — such a monk gives up the here and the beyond, just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin./ (From the Uraga Sutta ) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 5) /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) ----------------------------------------------------------- ----------------- > L: Maybe not so wrong :P Theras taught that all (paramattha)dhammas are empty, devoid of Self, devoid of any core, devoid of anything. But they have sabhava(distinct characteristic), so that can be known. This sounds very similar to Nagarjuna, don't u think? ----------------- KH: Unfortunately, it does sound similar to Nagarjuna. The Theras taught dhammas were empty of a permanent soul, or self, but Nagarjuna decided that was not enough. He extended the emptiness principle to include everything. And so we find the ridiculous concept of dhammas that somehow both exist and lack own being. If it wasn't so serious it would be laughable. ----------------- > L: Largely. However, Nagarjuna was wary of 'sabhava' (Skt, 'svabhava'), because D. O. rules out *self* nature. Sabhava was also roundly decried in the Theravadin PTSM, it happens. --------------------------------------------- ----------------- KH: I agree, the word sabhava was sometimes used to mean self (atta) or "something more". ----------------------------------------------- Ken, perhaps you didn't realize that Lukas was quoting me - hence your not jumping on it! ;-) ---------------------------------------------- Even in English the word "substance" can be used to mean something more. A "person of substance" for example, is a person with admirable qualities. With or without admirable qualities, a person is still a person. And it's the same with dhammas. They are without a permanent soul, but they still exist; they still have "own being." ------------------------ > > L: Sometimes scolars of theravada misinterpret the sabhava as sa - with bhava - nature. Claming that dhammas have its own nature, thus they exist. While the truth is that (sabbe dhamma anatta)all dhammas are anatta(empty, devoid of core, out of control) - source Dispeller of delusion on synonyms of anatta :P ------------------------ KH: No, it is not just scholars of Theravada, it is the Theravada itself. According to Theravadin texts, the word sabhava can mean "substance" or "inherent characteristic" and in that sense all dhammas definitely do have sabhava. ------------------------------------------- It is really edifying when KenH makes the Mahayanists' case for them! ;-)) The (incorrect) usage of 'sabhava' to mean substance and inherent characteristic is *exactly* what was roundly criticized in the PTSM! ------------------------------------------- It was only Nagarjuna (and the Mahayanists who followed him) who maintained that dhammas had no inherent characteristics. ------------------------------------------ The PTSM was not a Mahayanist work. ----------------------------------------- -------------------- <. . .> >H: Therefore, even when he said there was "no > Nagarjuna" he was proclaiming either an eternity belief or an annihilation > belief. (My guess is it was eternity belief.) L: Why your quess is eternity belief :P ? ------------------ KH: Once again, my original mistake has caused you to think it was Howard speaking, when it was actually me. My guess was based on a broad categorisation of all views into 1) eternity based, 2) annihilation based, and 3) the middle way. ---------------------------------------------- Huh???? -------------------------------------------- Rightly or wrongly, I tend to think that eternal-life is the wrong view that appeals to people most. -------------------------------------------- Nagarjuna thought so as well. So what? --------------------------------------------- It appeals so much that some people are prepared to dishonestly rewrite the Buddha's Dhamma and turn it into an eternal-life teaching. They still maintain the word "anatta" but give it a watered-down meaning that allows for eel-wriggling. In that way, people can say "no elf" and still mean "self". And thus imply the possibility of eternal life! ----------------------------------------------- Do you think anyone around here does that? There are precious few eternalists to be found around here, Ken. ---------------------------------------------- --------------------------- <. . .> >>H:And, BTW, the Buddha himself taught the unreality of dhammas! >> > L: real or not real doesn't matter, if something doesn't last how could it be real. --------------------------- KH: I think you have a good point, Lukas, but one that can be very confusing. The Buddha described absolute reality as the presently arisen conditioned dhammas. --------------------------------------------------- Not a chance! Again: /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) ------------------------------------------------- They are not real in the sense that worldlings know "real". They are unreal in that sense. However, in the sense that they do exist, and are the only things that do exist, they are absolutely real (paramattha dhamma). And so if, in some suttas, the Buddha described everything as being unreal, I am sure he meant everything was "absolutely not the way worldlings believe it to be." ---------------------------------------------------- Excellent wriggling, Ken, based on nothing but your wishes. --------------------------------------------------- Ken H ================================= With metta, Howard #115106 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue May 17, 2011 9:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing   Hi, Ken - In a message dated 5/16/2011 10:10:24 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, ----- <. . .> > H: I think it is better to stop thinking in terms of "substance" and individual entities. Dhammas are qualities or activities and are not things that "have" qualities or engage in activities. ------ KH: Of what are they qualities or activities? ------------------------------------------- You tell me, Ken: Warmth is a rupa and is a quality. Of what is it a quality? Hardness is also a rupa and a quality. Of what is IT a quality. You wish to think in terms of things, that "have" qualities. That is based on conventional perception: tables are hard, irons are hot, ice is cold. Your "reality view" is in fact conventional view. ------------------------------------------ ----------------------- <. . .> KH: Anatta is the no-self characteristic of a dhamma. >> > H: What does that mean? When one says that a dhamma is anatta, it is merely a denial of a dhamma having self. That's all. ----------------------- KH: It means dhammas are inherently anatta. They don't just happen to be without atta at the moment. ----------------------------------------------- At every moment. ----------------------------------------------- Because of their inherent anatta-nature there is no possibility they ever could have been otherwise. They could never have been atta, and they could never have been conditioned by atta, or capable of conditioning atta, or have a connection with atta in any way whatsoever. -------------------------- >> KH: Similarly, hardness is the hardness characteristic of a dhamma. What else can I say? > H: Any instance of hardness is itself a dhamma. Likewise for instances of warmth, odor, flavor, etc. -------------------------- KH: I think dhammas are named after their most obvious, particular characteristic. They also possess other characteristics. Therefore, we can't say any one of those characteristics is all that makes up the substance of a dhamma. ------------------------------------------------ That is Kenism, not Buddhism. Any hardness is exactly that, and not some hard thing. ----------------------------------------------- Ken H ================================ With metta, Howard #115107 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue May 17, 2011 1:48 pm Subject: Re: wisdom and doing   Hi Robert E, ----- > RE: Uh oh, looks like I may have answered this post twice. Since I said some new things, I will send this new answer as well. Sorry for any redundancy. Imagine having to sit through my statements about anatta twice in a row - now that's unpleasant vipaka! ;-) ----- KH: I can think of worse vipaka. . . . Or can I? . . . Yes, only joking! :-) I don't know what time it is in America, but perhaps you have stayed up too late: you have got me confused with Howard. And so you've said unkind things about Howard's ideas, for a change. :-) I did write this next bit: ------------ >> The characteristic, hardness, for example is part of the substance of the rupa by that name. Anicca, dukkha and anatta add to the substance of hardness-rupa. > RE: In what way is "no-self" a part of the substance of a dhamma? ------------ KH: I've answered that question a hundred times. My latest efforts are in a reply to Howard, just posted. -------------------- <. . .> > RE: What you are doing is taking a "non-entity," the very denial of entity in Buddhism, and turning it into a substantial, positive entity! It is the exact opposite of the whole point of anatta, and what Buddha explicitly set out to do - to show that there is no entity, no substantiality, no self in samsara. The self is a very tricky thing - self-concept can show up anywhere in many different guises. Welcome to yours. -------------------- KH: I don't know why you are so fixated on the question of anatta with regard to sabhava. Perhaps I should ask if you would accept *anything* as being the sabhava of a dhamma. <. . .> Here's a bit from Howard that you thought was from me: > ------------------------------------------ > I think it is better to stop thinking in terms of "substance" and > individual entities. Dhammas are qualities or activities and are not things > that "have" qualities or engage in activities. > ------------------------------------------ > RE: Then stop saying they are substantial and have own-being. -------------------------- KH: Poor Howard! :-) ------------- <. . .> > KH: Anatta is the no-self characteristic of a dhamma. That is parrotry, Ken. Repeating the same sentence over and over again does not demonstrate understanding. Translate that lovely phrase into a statement that says what the no-self characteristic *is;* otherwise you are saying absolutely nothing but reciting a mantra. It may soothe you, but it's worthless. The whole dispute is not over the existence of the no-self characteristic, but of what it consists of, and you can't say, can you? You don't know what it is. ------------- KH: You seem to be forgetting all the attempts I have made. Remember "magnetic" for example. <. . .> This next bit is Howard, followed by me, followed by Howard again. > ----------------------------------------------- > What does that mean? When one says that a dhamma is anatta, it is > merely a denial of a dhamma having self. That's all. > ---------------------------------------------- > > Similarly, hardness is the hardness characteristic of a dhamma. What else > can I say? > --------------------------------------------- > Any instance of hardness is itself a dhamma. Likewise for instances of warmth, odor, flavor, etc. > --------------------------------------------- > RE: You're missing the point. What is the anatta characteristic? Describe or define it. How does a "no-self" characteristic show up in a dhamma? How is it experienced? What is its quality? You can't say, because you don't know. If you do know, say something about it. --------------- KH: I *have* been saying things about it. Whether they were right or wrong, I have at least been trying. ----------------------- <. . .> > RE: So when mind engages the anatta characteristic, what does it experience – that there is no self, or something else? If something else, then what? Describe how the no-self characteristic is engaged by mind-consciousness. ---------------------- KH: It happens in a moment when there is mind-citta and there is a paramattha dhamma object, and there is contact. At that moment panna can understand the inherent anatta characteristic of the paramattha dhamma object. If the characteristic wasn't there, it couldn't be directly known by panna. But it is there, and it can be known. Ken H #115108 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue May 17, 2011 9:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing   Hi, Robert - In a message dated 5/16/2011 10:13:12 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, epsteinrob@... writes: > ------------------------------------------ > I think it is better to stop thinking in terms of "substance" and > individual entities. Dhammas are qualities or activities and are not things > that "have" qualities or engage in activities. > ------------------------------------------ Then stop saying they are substantial and have own-being. ================================= That was me being quoted, Robert, not Ken. :-) With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #115109 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue May 17, 2011 9:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing   Hi, Robert - In a message dated 5/16/2011 10:16:04 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, epsteinrob@... writes: Hi Howard. Now that I look at the original post, I realize why I answered Ken twice. I got mixed up and didn't realize this was your answer to the post! Looking through it again, I appreciate your comments. -------------------------------- :-) ------------------------------- Best, Robert E. ========================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #115110 From: "connie" Date: Tue May 17, 2011 3:31 pm Subject: more dukkha   sorry, friends, my bad: 2 dosa mula cittas. still 8 lobha mula and a dirty dozen akusala cittas, isn’t it? light’s on but no one’s home, connie #115111 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue May 17, 2011 4:46 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: More dukkha   Hi Phil, I appreciate your reaching out and kind support and advice to Lukas. However... --- On Tue, 17/5/11, philip wrote: >P1: People who can't even keep the precept on alcohol are just playing games with Dhamma and should not be listened to when they are discussing deep points to rationalize continuing to break the precepts, they are not good friends, plain and simple. >P2:This was a bit too harsh. They are not good friends at such times that they advise a relaxed attitude towards precepts they don't keep themselves because at such times they are busy justifying their own transgressions... .... S: Just to get a few facts straight as this was in reply to my note to Ann, Connie & all, comments you've made before, so a little more personal than usual in response this time:-) 1. I've seldom met anyone who sees the danger of alcohol abuse as much as I do (and have expressed in no uncertain times before on DSG - see under "drinking...." in U.P.). So it does surprise me to keep reading you suggest these points in response to anything I (or others) have said. 2. I've never "rationalized" the breaking of the precepts or continuation do so and don't recall seeing anyone else do so here. Indeed it is those of us who emphasise the "present moment dhammas" who see the greatest danger in even present minor akusala, let alone the very gross akusala you often refer to in this regard. 3. I don't know what this "justifying their own transgressions" is about:-) I completely gave up alcohol more than 45 years ago after watching my beloved father become an alcoholic and seeing the harm it caused him and everyone else. For Jon, longer still... Before that, we were both typical party folk. So, it's a little funny to read your replies to my (or others' comments). 4. So no, we don't "advise a relaxed attitude towards precepts" - quite the contrary. Understanding dhammas as conditioned and anatta does not mean "a relaxed attitude" to akusala, especially strong akusala. Quite the opposite. The urgency is at this very moment to understand the present dhammas which includes the understanding of the benefit of kusala and the harm of akusala. I think you'll find it is those who emphasise and really understand "present moment dhammas" most, who are least likely to kill, steal, lie or be involved in sexual misconduct. 5. With regards to the taking of alcohol, such as a glass of wine at meals which is so common - the harm is in the growth of the tendency and the other deeds which alcohol (or other kinds of intoxication) may lead to/does lead to. The Buddha never said that the taking of alcohol in itself was akusala kamma patha however. Again, it is panna only at such times which will know the degree of akusala if it arises. As we know, a sotapanna would never knowingly take intoxicants - not just in this life, but any life afterwards. They fully see the harm. Without understanding accumulated to this degree, even those of us who live reasonably harmless lives now, can't say about next life or lives. I am confident, however, that the abstaining from harm, inc. the breaking the precepts now with the growth of right understanding is the tendency that should be accumulated now. The right understanding of any dhammas as anata is the most precious tendency of all. ... >P2: but Dhamma friendship doesn't exist except on the momentary level, I do understand that, somehow... and there can be good understanding at other moments, the gross idiocies which we all display at times (some of us more than others, emphasis on us) don't destroy the potential for wisdom to arise a moment later... .... S: The question, with regard to the "gross idiocies" is how to help our friends, so that they don't arise and manifest. Is the best way just to tell them "Stop!" or to help them to really understand their nature? Even before studying the Buddha's Teachings, I tried to tell my father and my friends to "Stop!". I can say to you now, as any other sensible person can, "Stop!" with regard to your addictions. They are sheer madness. You know this, Lukas knows this. Sometimes the reminders work and often they don't. Just like when you tell a child not to swear, the child then swears twice as much - saying "Stop!" is usually not enough as Lukas knows. What we learn from the Buddha's Teachings in addition to good conventional wisdom, is that any stopping or starting at this moment will depend entirely on an understanding of the harm and many other conditions. This is why the Buddha taught the understanding of the 4 Noble Truths. The Path is the only way out. Seeing now? Kusala? Akusala? The understanding and the with it, the overcoming and prevention of akusala has to begin now. As usual, no need to reply Phil:-) Metta Sarah ====== #115112 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Tue May 17, 2011 10:07 am Subject: Happy Vesak to All Beings!   Friends: At this Fullmoon Day do all Buddhas Awaken: 2011 May 17 Vesak Day celebrates birth, Enlightenment , and passing away of the Buddha Gotama . Rejoice! Keep clean, calm, cool, clever, and caring... About this Buddhist Vesak Festival: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vesak This May full moon also celebrates the Buddha's third visit to Sri Lanka in the eighth year after his Enlightenment where he journeyed to Kelaniya on the invitation of the Nâga King Maniakkhika (Mahavamsa i,72ff.). The day also celebrates the crowning of king Devânampiyatissa (Mhv. Xi.42), and the laying of the foundation stone of the Mahâ Stûpa (Mhv. Xxix.1) Please Remember: At this very May full moon in year 528 BC the Blessed Buddha awakened by completely perfect and utterly unsurpassable self-Enlightenment! At that time a girl named Sujata Senani lived in Uruvela . When adult she prayed before a certain Banyan tree, that she might get a good husband equal to herself in caste & that her firstborn may be a son. Her prayer was successful. Since indeed it did happen. At the full moon day of the Wesak month, she rose at early dawn and milked the cows. As soon as new buckets were placed under the cows, the milk poured spontaneously in streams all by itself! Seeing this miracle, she knew something special was happening! That same night the Future Buddha dreamt 5 dreams making him conclude: "Surely, truly, without any doubt, today I will reach perfect Enlightenment!" His 5 colored radiance illuminated the whole tree. Then Sujata came and offered the cooked milk rice into the hands of this Great Being. Later a local grass-cutter came going with a bundle of grass just harvested from nearby. He offered the Great Being 8 handfuls of Kusa grass, when he saw that this Sage was a Holy Man. The Future Buddha accepted the grass and proceeded to the foot of the Bodhi-tree . Reaching the imperturbable Eastern side, where all the Buddhas take their seat , he sat down saying to himself: This is the immovable spot, where all the prior supreme Buddhas have planted themselves! This is the place for destroying this net of desire! Then the Future Buddha turned his back to the trunk and thus faced east. Right there, he then resolutely settled on this mighty decision: Let just blood and flesh of this body dry up & let skin and sinews fall from the bones. I will not leave this seat before having attained the absolute and Supreme Self-Enlightenment! So determined did he seat himself in this unconquerable seat , from which not a 100 lightning strikes could make him waver from. At this very moment the rebel deity Mara -The Evil One- raised exclaiming: Prince Siddhattha will pass beyond my power, but I will never allow it! And sounding the Mara 's war shout, he summoned his mighty army for battle. Then Mara warned his evil militia: This Sakyamuni, son of Suddhodana , is far greater than any other man, so we will never succeed to fight him up front. We must thus attack him from the rear. Frustrated, being unable even to touch this big wielder of power also with 9 mighty hurricanes of wind, rain, rocks, weapons, red coals, hot ashes, sand, mud, and darkness Mara somewhat in panic shouted at his army: "Why do you all stand still? Seize, kill & drive away this prince!" Mara then yelled: "Siddhattha , leave this seat. It is not yours, but mine!" Hearing this, the Well-gone One replied: Mara, neither have you fulfilled the 10 perfections to the third degree, nor have you given the 5 great donations. Neither have you striven for insight, nor for the welfare of all the world, nor for supreme self-enlightenment! Therefore does this very seat surely not belong to you, but truly indeed only to me. Suddenly overpowered by fear Mara 's followers fled helter-skelter in all directions. Not two went in the same direction, but leaving their weapons in a chaos, they all fled terrified by metaphysical panic. Seeing them flee thus, the great assembly of deities triumphantly shouted: Mara is defeated. Prince Siddhattha has won! Let us celebrate this truly sublime, wonderful and unique victory! It was before the sun had set that the Tathagata conquered Mara and defeated his army. That same night, after having bathed, while the Bo tree rained red sprigs onto his robe, The Consummate One gained knowledge of his prior lives during the 1st watch of the night: "With the mind thus concentrated, purified, bright, unified, focused, tractable, compliant, steady & imperturbable, I directed mind to remembrance of my past lives. I recollected many past lives , i.e., one re-birth, two...five, ten... 50, a hundred, a thousand, 100 thousand, many eons of cosmic contraction, & many eons of cosmic expansion: There I had such a name, belonged to such a clan & species, had such a body. Such was my food, such my life of pleasures and pains. Such was the end of my life. Passing away from that state, I re-arose there. There I had such name, belonged to such a sort & family, had such a form. Such was my food, such my experience of pleasures & pains. Such was the end of my life. Passing away from that state, I re-arose here. Thus I remembered my various past lives in all their various modes and manifold details. This was the first knowledge I attained in the first watch of the night. Ignorance was destroyed; the knowledge arose; darkness was destroyed; light arose as happens in one who is alert, aware, and determined. But the very pleasant feeling that arose by this did neither invade my mind, nor remain. With the mind thus concentrated, purified, bright, intact, pliant, malleable, steady, and totally imperturbable, I directed it to the knowledge of the passing away and reappearance of beings. I saw by means of the divine eye , purified & surpassing the human eye! I saw beings passing away & re-appearing, and I realized how & why they are high or low, beautiful or ugly, fortunate and unfortunate all in exact accordance with the intentions of their prior actions: These beings who were endowed with bad behaviour of body, speech, and mind, who reviled the Noble Ones, held wrong views & acted under the influence of wrong views, with the break-up of the body, after death, have re-appeared in the plane of misery, the bad painful destination, the lower realms, even in hell. But the beings who were gifted with good behaviour of body, speech and mind, who did not revile the Noble Ones, who held right views and acted under the influence of right views after the break-up of the body, after the death, have re-appeared in happy destinations, even in a divine world! Thus by means of the divine eye, purified and surpassing the human I saw beings passing away & re-appearing, all in accordance with their particular mixture of good and bad kamma ... But the satisfaction that arose here did neither invade my mind, nor remain. With the mind thus concentrated and completely absorbed, I then directed it towards understanding the ending of mental fermentation. I realized how it actually comes to be, that: This is Suffering ... Such is the Cause of Suffering... Such is the End of Suffering... Such is the Way to End Suffering... <...> Source: The Jâtaka Nidâna. The story of Gotama Buddha. Tr. by N.A. Jayawickrama, Pali Text Society 1990. http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=132935 Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samâhita _/\_ * <...> #115113 From: "Lukas" Date: Tue May 17, 2011 5:30 pm Subject: Re: More dukkha   Hi Phil, > > People who can't even keep the precept on alcohol are just playing games with Dhamma and should not be listened to when they are discussing deep points to rationalize continuing to break the precepts, they are not good friends, plain and simple. > > This was a bit too harsh. L: That's all right :P Today is a Vesak day, good day for practice. They are not good friends at such times that they advise a relaxed attitude towards precepts they don't keep themselves because at such times they are busy justifying their own transgressions... but Dhamma friendship doesn't exist except on the momentary level, L: Sadhu... only momentary friendship. I do understand that, somehow... and there can be good understanding at other moments, the gross idiocies which we all display at times (some of us more than others, emphasis on us) don't destroy the potential for wisdom to arise a moment later... > > Metta, > > Phil > > > > > > p.s Lukas, sorry as always for posting in a one-way direction. My posts give things to you from a different angle from other people, you can reflect on various viewpoints, that's good. But please read the Buddha's advice to his son Rahula - before, during and after behaviour in body, speech and mind, we are told by the Buddha to reflect on the probable results. That might seem like common sense and is not as deep and fascinating as paramattha dhammas, but it is what the Buddha said to his little son. It might sound very Christian to say so, but we are like the Buddha's children, because our understanding is so feeble. > > > L: Yeap. I will have it in mind. Thank you. Best Lukas Reply | Messages in this Topic (9) #115114 From: "sarah" Date: Tue May 17, 2011 7:02 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: A Sotapanna   Dear Vince, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Vince wrote: > just another text on the point > According this Sutta, some monks should take care of sila while others not. > Only those released by both ways or by discernment (arhants) they can keep > a perfect sila in a natural way. Some of the rest, despite being released, > they should a task to do because they can fall: ..... S: Sotapannas will not ever break the precepts again and will not "fall" from the knowledge developed, having experienced nibbana. They will never again be born into lower planes or break the precepts again. Max 7 more lives. For an arahat, there is not more "task" - all defilements are eradicated, no new kamma to bring birth. The cycle is finished. .... > > "Monks, there are these seven individuals to be found in the world. Which seven? > One [released] both ways, one released through discernment, a bodily witness, > one attained to view, one released through conviction, a Dhamma-follower, and a > conviction-follower. > [...] > "And what is the individual released through discernment? There is the case > where a certain individual does not remain touching with his body those peaceful > liberations that transcend form, that are formless, but â€" having seen with > discernment â€" his fermentations are ended. This is called an individual who is > released through discernment. Regarding this monk, I do not say that he has a > task to do with heedfulness. Why is that? He has done his task with heedfulness. > He is incapable of being heedless. > [...] > "And what is the individual released through conviction? There is the case where > a certain individual does not remain touching with his body those peaceful > liberations that transcend form, that are formless, but â€" having seen with > discernment â€" some of his fermentations are ended, and his conviction in the > Tathagata is settled, rooted, and established. This is called an individual who > is released through conviction. Regarding this monk, I say that he has a task > to do with heedfulness. Why is that? [I think:] 'Perhaps this venerable one, > when making use of suitable resting places, associating with admirable friends, > balancing his [mental] faculties, 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 himself in the here & now.' Envisioning this fruit of > heedfulness for this monk, I say that he has a task to do with heedfulness." > > MN 70 Kitagiri Sutta http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.070.than.html .... S: The last one, the sotapanna, has only eradicated some defilements inc. the gross kilesa involved in breaking precepts, but has perfect confidence in the Triple Gem that is unshakeable. The full eradication of defilements is assured. Adhi sila (higher sila) has been purified, but not adhi citta (higher concentration, purified only by the anagami) or adhi panna (higher wisdom, purified only by the arahat. .... > > What do you think? > > (it seems maybe Thanissaro translate "discernment" instead "insight" or > "panna"... I'm right in this? .... S: Yes, but even the one referred to as "released through conviction" or any other description of any enlightened one, has to have developed the panna of the eightfold path to the degree of that enlightenment. Just as we all have different accumulations here, different strengths and weaknesses, still all have to develop panna - the understanding of namas and rupas. Thx for sharing the sutta and your comments. Metta Sarah ======= #115115 From: "sarah" Date: Tue May 17, 2011 8:28 pm Subject: Fwd: [dsg] Re: : insight. links.   Dear Ken O, #113809 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: >KO:Vipassana if we > definte it strictly as nama and rupa, can arise after the fourfold jhanas of > breathing as a meditation subject. ... S: Vipassana is not "nama and rupa", it is insight into namas and rupas. Yes, it can arise anytime - before or after any jhana, before or after the arising of any other experiences. .... >KO: This breathing is concept and not nama and > rupa, I breath in long ....  You can read the commentary which the link > show.  The mind lay hold on the materality and mentality as said in the para > from the commentary of the satipathana.   This commentary wordings are supported > by Visud as well. > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/soma/wayof.html#feeling  commentary ..... S: Yes, in between moments of samatha bhavana with breath as object or even jhana cittas, insight can arise which understands that in reality there are only namas and rupas. These are what are directly known by insight. .... >KO: >..... > Having emerged from the absorption, he lays hold of either the respiration body > or the factors of absorption. >   > There the meditating worker in respiration [assasapassasa kammika] examines the > body (rupa) thinking thus: Supported by what is respiration? Supported by the > basis [vatthunissita]. The basis is the coarse body [karajja kaya]. The coarse > body is composed of the Four Great Primaries and the corporeality derived from > these [cattari mahabhutani upadarupañca]. > The worker in respiration examines the respiration while devoting himself to the > development of insight through the means of corporeality. > The basis, namely, the coarse body, is where the mind and mental characteristics > occur.>> >   > Similiar in Visud  VIII, 224 -  .... S: Yes, having "emerged from absorption", he (by conditions) understands that was is taken for the body, respiration or breath are just rupas. Just namas and rupas in reality. ..... <...> > KO:  Next he defines the in-breaths and out-breaths and the body as > "materiality", and the consciousneess and the states associated with the > consciousness as "the immaterial (mind)".  This is in brief (cf MA.1.249); but > the details will be explained later in the defining of mentality-materiality (ch > XVII, 3f)>> ..... S: Exactly - as we read in Vis ch XV11, just "mentality-materiality" and this is the field of insight. Just elements, just khandhas which are known by insight. .... >   > these are the writings from different translators which show that meditation > subject of breathing is a concept and not nama and rupa as claim by Sarah, Jon > and Ken H.  .... S: As we've always said, the subject of breath/breathing in samatha bhavana is a concept. In the development of insight, the object, whether breath, (a particular rupa conditioned by citta), or any other reality is a nama or rupa. As it says above, "the details will be explained later in the defining of mentality-materiality (ch XVII, 3f". We can go through this chapter together if you like. ... >KO: If Sarah, Jon and Ken H wish to show, it is nama and rupa only and > no concepts are involved, show the text as well.  I have been saying this, but > I have yet seen a quote from any of you. ... S: See the quotes and my comments above. We have to be clear about whether the passages are referring to samatha or vipassana bhavana or a combination of both. See lots more in the saved messages under "Anapanasati" in U.P. ... >>KO: Vipassana mediation starts at feelings onwards > KO: ÂFeelings can lead to insight but comtemplation of feelings starts at first > jhana. .... S: I asked for your text to support all this: >KO: Pg24, Commentary to Anapasati, para 6.  > > < other three tetrads are (respectively) by way of comtemplation of feelings, the > mind and mental objects for one who has attained first jhanas.>> ... S: This is in the context of anapanasati. It doesn't say that "vipassana meditation starts at feelings" and it doesn't say that "contemplation of feelings starts at first jhana". The text is referring to the one who has attained first jhana. After that citta has fallen away, there can be insight into that citta, the feeling or any of the other mental factors which arose with the citta. Anytime at all, not just after first jhana and if we have an idea of "feelings first", it will never be insight. Sabbe dhamma anatta! Metta Sarah ========= #115116 From: "azita" Date: Tue May 17, 2011 8:34 pm Subject: Re: 17th of May - Vesak Day   hallo Lucas, Thank you Lucas, a very special kind of day I you think? Was thinking about Vesak this morning and decided to read from SN and found this in the intro to the Khandhavagga. "To give up clinging is difficult because clinging is reinforced by views which rationalize our identification with the aggregates & thus equip clinging with a protective shield. The most common way the suttas distinguish between 'the uninstructed worldling' & 'the instructed noble disciple' is precisely by way of identity view (sakkaayaditthi): the worldling perpetually regards the aggregates as a self or a self's accessories; the noble disciple never does so, for such a disciple has seen with wisdom the selfless nature of the aggregates." I think precepts are less likely to be 'broken' when there is a degree of right view because right view sees the danger in breaking them, right view knows the right way. May all beings be happy azita --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > > Dear friends, > Tomorrow is Vesak. A Good day. > > Best > Lukas > #115117 From: "sarah" Date: Tue May 17, 2011 8:47 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Why a sotapanna would never intentionally kill a being: KK March 2011   Dear Ken O, #114883 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > I understand nama and rupa only as I was a dinosaur before but do you understand > > the Buddha teachings are not restricted to nama and rupa.  .... S: The Buddha's teachings include an explanation of concepts as well as realities - but as is made clear at the beginning of the first chapter of the first book of the Abhidhamma, only namas and rupas are real, only these can be known by insight, only these are the objects of the Path development. ... > KO: Nama and rupa are important to the clear comprehension and development of > insight.  But there are not the only components to the development of insight, > they are also samantha, there also virtures, there are also jhanas.   That is > the position of the commentarian, the Abhidhamma and the suttas.  .... S: There is samatha when there is insight, but not necessarily any jhana and the calm with insight is "higher" than in samatha bhavana, because it is not taken for Self. What else? virtues - different kinds of sila. Insight itself is a kind of sila. The virati path factors are sila. No insight without sila. Again, this is the "higher" sila, the adhi sila which is perfected by the sotapanna. The jhana attainer can never attain higher sila. I think that we just have to agree to disagree in our interpretation of the texts, now you're no longer a dinosaur Metta Sarah ========= #115118 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue May 17, 2011 11:26 pm Subject: From an India tour.   Dear friends, I am reading to Lodewijk "In Asoka's Footsteps", India 1999. < It is essential to gradually learn the difference between nåma and rúpa, because so long as we confuse their characteristics there is no way to become detached from the concept of self. Khun Sujin often repeated that seeing is nåma, the element which experiences visible object, and that visible object is rúpa. Some people may feel bored to hear this again and again, but when we carefully consider the reality appearing at the present moment it never is boring; it is always new, because by considering what we hear understanding can grow little by little. We are so used to thinking of a self who sees, we have to be reminded again and again that it is nåma which sees. We are absorbed in our thoughts arising on account of what is seen that we forget that seeing can only see what is visible. We cannot hear often enough that it is only visible object which is seen, a kind of rúpa. > Nina. #115119 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue May 17, 2011 11:41 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Tanha bhava vs. aggregates of clinging vs. lobha (Jon)   Dear Phil, Op 17-mei-2011, om 1:29 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > . I read it in the evening on days on which I have behaved in line > with the precepts and can look back on my behaviour that day > without regret, and feel therefore that I (all very much I, of > course) have earned some reflection on the deep teachings. But I > don't touch it on days when there has been a lot of unwise > behaviour, because the Buddha said that the deep teachings don't > sink into disturbed minds (and our minds are disturbed by bad > behaviour) the way dye is not absorbed by a soiled cloth, and I > tend to feel that is true. ------ N: Sure, read when you feel like it. When reading after a bad day, it may help you to see that whatever happens is conditioned. Also one's good or bad behaviour. But even reading or not reading is conditioned. Nina. #115120 From: "sarah" Date: Tue May 17, 2011 11:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] How is wisdom accumulated   Hi Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Colette. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "colette" wrote: > > > You yourself created a piece called THE TRANSFORMATION OF CONSCIOUSNESS... > > I did? When was this? What kind of piece? Do you have me confused with someone else? ..... S: here you go - you might like to see what you've been writing in your sleep: http://roulette404.multiply.com/journal/item/2581 Not sure if Colette will continue to feel so honoured to discuss with you if you enlighten her:-/ Metta Sarah ====== #115121 From: "moellerdieter" Date: Wed May 18, 2011 12:57 am Subject: Re: 17th of May - Vesak Day   --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > > Dear friends, > Tomorrow is Vesak. A Good day. > > Best > Lukas > Hi Lukas and All, good you reminded .. ;-) and Happy Vesakh! We can be happy to have the guidance of the teacher , the Buddha Dhamma, can't we? With Metta Dieter #115122 From: Kevin F Date: Wed May 18, 2011 8:22 am Subject: When a Discple Listens Carefully   Hello All, This amazing passage is worth wise reflection! The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book [V: 95-6] section 46: The Links. 38: Unhindered. "..When, Bhikkhus, a Noble Disciple listens carefully to the Dhamma, alert with keen ears, attending to it as a matter of crucial concern, as something of vital importance, directing his entire mind to it, in that very moment the Five Mental Hindrances are absent in him. On that occasion the Seven Links to Awakening develop towards complete fulfilment...>" Posted by Robert K at www.abhidhamma.org (P.S. Rob can you create direct page links at abhidhamma.org?) Kevin ___________ With metta Kevin Sarah:"The citta itself (for example, rooted in ignorance, or, for example, rooted in >wisdom), plus all the other accompanying cetasikas which arise with those javana >cittas also accumulate by way of upanissaya paccaya. So, wisdom itself >accumulates when ever it arises." #115123 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed May 18, 2011 8:55 am Subject: Re: Tanha bhava vs. aggregates of clinging vs. lobha (Jon)   Dear Nina, all, >N: Sure, read when you feel like it. When reading after a bad day, >it >may help you to see that whatever happens is conditioned. Also >one's good or bad behaviour. But even reading or not reading is >conditioned. The path is hard work, and it is hard because things don't just happen. Strong right effort is required. If a person doesn't do much, then the strongest stream of tendencies (akusala ones) will make one naturally go where the water naturally flows, only downwards. While whatever that happens is conditioned, sure, it doesn't need to remove the need for "personal" responsibility and effort. "Believe in conditions, but yourself do the work." If one doesn't make the causes for Awakening to occur, then there will never be conditions for Awakening to occur. Awakening happens due to causes that are set. If one (who is not yet awakened) doesn't do good, then one does bad. It is better to do good. IMHO. With metta, Alex #115124 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed May 18, 2011 8:59 am Subject: Re: When a Discple Listens Carefully   Dear Kevin, all, And for those who are not as bright to become awakened merely through listening, need also to do samatha and vipassana... With metta, Alex #115125 From: Vince Date: Wed May 18, 2011 9:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sotapanna   Dear Sarah you wrote: > S: Sotapannas will not ever break the precepts again and will not "fall" from > the knowledge developed, having experienced nibbana. They will never again be > born into lower planes or break the precepts again. Max 7 more lives. So they are reborn even 7 times and respecting precepts from the beginning of each live ? best, Vince. #115126 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed May 18, 2011 10:12 am Subject: [dsg] Re: A Sotapanna truth_   Dear All, > > S: Sotapannas will not ever break the precepts again and will not >"fall" from the knowledge developed, having experienced nibbana. They >will never again be born into lower planes or break the precepts >again. Max 7 more lives. > >So they are reborn even 7 times and respecting precepts from the >beginning of each live ? I wonder how will a sotopanna child behave. Also, what if s/he were asked some philosophical question, would s/he answer correctly? What if the child was brought up in a household that taught wrong view? Some ideas. BTW, a sekha can break minor precepts, MN48: "Again, bhikkhus, the noble disciple reflects. I share this view with those come to righteousness of view. I'm also endowed with that unique characteristic. Bhikkhus, what is that unique characteristic of one come to righteousness or view? When he does any wrong, it becomes manifest to him, and he instantly goes to the Teacher or a wise co-associate in the holy life and declares and makes it manifest and makes amends for future restrain, like a toddler who is slow to stand and lie would tred on a burning piece of charcoal and would instantly pull away from it. In the same manner when he does any wrong, it becomes manifest to him, and he instantly goes to the Teacher or a wise co-associate in the holy life and declares and makes amends for future restrain. This is a unique character of one come to righteousness of view. This is the fourth noble knowledge attained, not of the world and not shared by the ordinary." http://metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/Majjhima1/048-kosambiya-\ sutta-e1.html With metta, Alex #115127 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed May 18, 2011 6:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Tanha bhava vs. aggregates of clinging vs. lobha (Jon)   Hi, Alex (and Nina) - In a message dated 5/17/2011 6:55:42 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Dear Nina, all, >N: Sure, read when you feel like it. When reading after a bad day, >it >may help you to see that whatever happens is conditioned. Also >one's good or bad behaviour. But even reading or not reading is >conditioned. The path is hard work, and it is hard because things don't just happen. Strong right effort is required. If a person doesn't do much, then the strongest stream of tendencies (akusala ones) will make one naturally go where the water naturally flows, only downwards. While whatever that happens is conditioned, sure, it doesn't need to remove the need for "personal" responsibility and effort. "Believe in conditions, but yourself do the work." ------------------------------------------------ My perspective: That business of "you, yourself, doing the work" comes down to nothing but conditions - mere conditions, but without that "doing" there are not those conditions, and there is no result. Among the conditions that we view as "you, yourself, doing the work" are numerous crucial instances of thinking, planning, intending, and willing. The bottom line is that "It's all conditions," but those conditions DO NEED TO OCCUR! ---------------------------------------------- If one doesn't make the causes for Awakening to occur, then there will never be conditions for Awakening to occur. Awakening happens due to causes that are set. --------------------------------------------- Exactly! The Buddha put enormous emphasis on kamma, and kamma is volition/intention as far as the Buddha was concerned. It is odd to say the least, IMO, for any Buddhists to give short shrift to it! ------------------------------------------- If one (who is not yet awakened) doesn't do good, then one does bad. It is better to do good. --------------------------------------------- Yes, let's opt for good! ;-) ------------------------------------------- IMHO. ------------------------------------------ Of course!! LOL! ----------------------------------------- With metta, Alex ================================ With metta, Howard Do what is Skillful, Follow the Holy Life! /Just as a dewdrop on the tip of a blade of grass quickly vanishes with the rising of the sun and does not stay long, in the same way, brahmans, the life of human beings is like a dewdrop — limited, trifling, of much stress & many despairs. One should touch this [truth] like a sage, do what is skillful, follow the holy life. For one who is born there is no freedom from death. Just as when the rain-devas send rain in fat drops, and a bubble on the water quickly vanishes and does not stay long, in the same way, brahmans, the life of human beings is like a water bubble — limited, trifling, of much stress & many despairs. One should touch this [truth] like a sage, do what is skillful, follow the holy life. For one who is born there is no freedom from death. Just as a line drawn in the water with a stick quickly vanishes and does not stay long, in the same way, brahmans, the life of human beings is like a line drawn in the water with a stick — limited, trifling, of much stress & many despairs. One should touch this [truth] like a sage, do what is skillful, follow the holy life. For one who is born there is no freedom from death. Just as a river flowing down from the mountains, going far, its current swift, carrying everything with it, so that there is not a moment, an instant, a second where it stands still, but instead it goes & rushes & flows, in the same way, brahmans, the life of human beings is like a river flowing down from the mountains — limited, trifling, of much stress & many despairs. One should touch this [truth] like a sage, do what is skillful, follow the holy life. For one who is born there is no freedom from death./ (From the Arakenanusasani Sutta) #115128 From: "Ken H" Date: Wed May 18, 2011 1:09 pm Subject: Re: Enlightenment from the light side   Hi Howard, -------- <. . .> >> KH: According to the Dhamma, conditioned dhammas *are* absolute realities, and to hold otherwise would be wrong view. Wouldn't it? >> >> Howard can regard that as a rhetorical question. :-) > H: I don't so regard it. I consider it a false assertion in the form of a question. Some evidence of the falsity: <. . .> (From the Kalaka Sutta) <. . .> (From the Phena Sutta) <. . .> (From the Uraga Sutta) <. . .> (From the Uraga Sutta ) <. . .> (From the Dvayatanupassana Sutta) -------- KH: I think we (meaning DSG) have been over those suttas enough times to know that you are never going to change your mind. I could give my interpretations of them (based on what I can remember from those former discussions) and maybe you, too, could put them into your own words. But unless Lucas or someone else is keen to join in, I think we would both be wasting our time. ------------------------- <. . .> >> KH: I agree, the word sabhava was sometimes used to mean self (atta) or "something more". >> > H: Ken, perhaps you didn't realize that Lukas was quoting me - hence your not jumping on it! ;-) ------------------------- KH: A chance gone begging! :-) But I was right, wasn't I? In some Pali texts the word 'sabhava' is used to denote self - and duly denied - while in other Pali texts it is used to denote absolute reality, and duly affirmed. ---------------------------- <. . .> >> KH: According to Theravadin texts, the word sabhava can mean "substance" or "inherent characteristic" and in that sense all dhammas definitely do have sabhava. >> > H: It is really edifying when KenH makes the Mahayanists' case for them! ;-)) The (incorrect) usage of 'sabhava' to mean substance and inherent characteristic is *exactly* what was roundly criticized in the PTSM! ---------------------------- KH: Does the PTSM say there is no inherently kusala (or akusala) kamma, and there is no inherently desirable (or undesirable) object experienced as a result of kamma? I think it is only the Nagarjunian texts that say that sort of thing. I am sure all of the Pali texts say the exact opposite. ------------------ <. . .> > KH: My guess was based on a broad categorisation of all views into 1) eternity based, 2) annihilation based, and 3) the middle way. >> > H: Huh???? ------------------ KH: Have I said something you disagreed with? ------------------------------------------------- <. . .> KH: And so if, in some suttas, the Buddha described everything as being unreal, I am sure he meant everything was "absolutely not the way worldlings believe it to be." > H: Excellent wriggling, Ken, based on nothing but your wishes. --------------------------------------------------- KH: I think we all agree that the Dhamma is different from the ways known to worldlings. But, I will concede, that might not be the particular point being made in those suttas. Maybe in those suttas "unreal" denoted that all conditioned reality was dukkha (unsatisfactory), unlike Nibbana. In any case, it certainly did not mean 'not absolutely real.' Both the conditioned world and nibbana are absolutely real. Ken H #115129 From: "Ken H" Date: Wed May 18, 2011 1:57 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing Hi Howard, ------ <. . .> >>> H: Dhammas are qualities or activities and are not things that "have" qualities or engage in activities. >>> >> KH: Of what are they qualities or activities? >> > H: You tell me, Ken: ------- KH: I asked because I wanted you to admit that, according to the Nagarjunians, dhammas are just the emanations of an "ocean of being". Lacking their own being, they are nothing more than ripples on the "ocean of being." ---------- > H: Warmth is a rupa and is a quality. Of what is it a quality? Hardness is also a rupa and a quality. Of what is IT a quality. --------- KH: A rupa can be called by one of its characteristics, but it is a physical phenomenon possessing *several* characteristics. ---------------- > H: You wish to think in terms of things, that "have" qualities. That is based on conventional perception: tables are hard, irons are hot, ice is cold. Your "reality view" is in fact conventional view. --------------- KH: Yes, I understand the Dhamma to be telling me about things that have characteristics. Otherwise, there would be no absolute reality that was anatta. And wouldn't that be good news for the eternalists! ----------------------------------------------- <. . . > > H: That is Kenism, not Buddhism. Any hardness is exactly that, and not some hard thing. ----------------------------------------------- KH: It is hardly a Kenism. All Theravada Buddhists, and some Mahayana Buddhists, believe in the absolute reality of dhammas. Ken H #115130 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed May 18, 2011 8:49 am Subject: Honouring the 3 Jewels is the Entrance!   Friends: Faith in the Three Jewels is the Entrance! Worthy, honourable & perfectly self-Enlightened is the Buddha! Consummated in knowledge and behaviour, totally transcended, expert in all dimensions, knower of all worlds, unsurpassable trainer of those who can be tamed, both teacher & guide of gods as well as of humans, blessed, exalted, awakened and enlightened is the Buddha! Perfectly formulated is this Buddha-Dhamma, visible right here and now, immediately effective, timeless, inviting each & everyone to come and see for themselves, inspect, examine and verify! Leading each and everyone through progress towards perfection. Directly observable, experiencable and realizable by each intelligence... Perfectly training is the Noble Sangha community of Buddha's disciples. Training the right way, the true way, the good way, and the direct way! Therefore do these eight kinds of individuals, the 4 Noble pairs, deserve both gifts, self-sacrifice, offerings, hospitality and reverential salutation with joined palms, since this Noble Sangha community of Noble disciples, is an unsurpassable and forever unsurpassed field of merit, in and for this world, to support, worship, respect, protect, give to and gain from ... Therefore: Buddham saranam gacch�mi Dhammam saranam gacch�mi Sangham saranam gacch�mi I take refuge in the Buddha! I take refuge in the Dhamma! I take refuge in the Sangha! Thereby Honouring: The Torch-bearer of Mankind! <....> Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Sam�hita _/\_ * <....> #115131 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed May 18, 2011 3:16 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] How is wisdom accumulated   Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > > Hi Rob E, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Colette. > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "colette" wrote: > > > > > You yourself created a piece called THE TRANSFORMATION OF CONSCIOUSNESS... > > > > I did? When was this? What kind of piece? Do you have me confused with someone else? > ..... > S: here you go - you might like to see what you've been writing in your sleep: > http://roulette404.multiply.com/journal/item/2581 > > Not sure if Colette will continue to feel so honoured to discuss with you if you enlighten her:-/ Wow, thanks, Sarah - good to know! I've been so busy lately it's hard to keep track of every article or essay that I write, or the exact spelling of my name. But I answer to just about anything - even a dog whistle, so it's fine... Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #115132 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed May 18, 2011 3:37 pm Subject: Re: wisdom and doing   Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > > > Hi Robert E, > > ----- > > RE: Uh oh, looks like I may have answered this post twice. Since I said some new things, I will send this new answer as well. Sorry for any redundancy. Imagine having to sit through my statements about anatta twice in a row - now that's unpleasant vipaka! ;-) > ----- > > KH: I can think of worse vipaka. . . . Or can I? . . . Yes, only joking! :-) > > I don't know what time it is in America, but perhaps you have stayed up too late: you have got me confused with Howard. And so you've said unkind things about Howard's ideas, for a change. :-) > > I did write this next bit: > ------------ > >> The characteristic, hardness, for example is part of the substance of the rupa by that name. Anicca, dukkha and anatta add to the substance of hardness-rupa. > > > RE: In what way is "no-self" a part of the substance of a dhamma? > ------------ > > KH: I've answered that question a hundred times. My latest efforts are in a reply to Howard, just posted. > > -------------------- > <. . .> > > RE: What you are doing is taking a "non-entity," the very denial of entity in Buddhism, and turning it into a substantial, positive entity! It is the exact opposite of the whole point of anatta, and what Buddha explicitly set out to do - to show that there is no entity, no substantiality, no self in samsara. > > The self is a very tricky thing - self-concept can show up anywhere in many different guises. Welcome to yours. > -------------------- > > KH: I don't know why you are so fixated on the question of anatta with regard to sabhava. Perhaps I should ask if you would accept *anything* as being the sabhava of a dhamma. That is an interesting question, but you have avoided the subject, which is - how can 'no-self,' the very denial of entity, be a positive part of the "substance" of something. It's nonsensical, Ken, and I'm still waiting for your explanation, which you have never given. I can certainly accept the "sabhava" of a dhamma in the sense of its function or characteristic in the moment, but not of something that it owns or possesses as that is just silly for a momentary dhamma that is part of a pattern of continuing cause and effect. If it owned it, it would be isolated from the flow of continuous cause and effect. In that case, such a solid sense of sabhava would not only deny anatta, but also anicca, which is the principle or understanding that there is no solid entity within continual changing conditions and conditionality. So no, nothing owns anything, least of all a fleeting conditioned dhamma which is not made of anything at all other than conditionality - totally dependent on what is happening around it and to it to form it for a fleeting moment. How can it own or possess anything? Rather, it is owned and possessed by shifting conditions, without a leg to stand on. > <. . .> > > Here's a bit from Howard that you thought was from me: > > > ------------------------------------------ > > I think it is better to stop thinking in terms of "substance" and > > individual entities. Dhammas are qualities or activities and are not things > > that "have" qualities or engage in activities. > > ------------------------------------------ > > > RE: Then stop saying they are substantial and have own-being. > -------------------------- > > KH: Poor Howard! :-) Well it doesn't pertain to Howard, because he never said that they were substantial and had own-being, you did. No wonder I was confused! Anyway, that's what Howard gets for not putting his name on top of his interspersed comments. :-) I didn't know what was going on once I got into the "reply" template. > ------------- > <. . .> > > KH: Anatta is the no-self characteristic of a dhamma. > > That is parrotry, Ken. Repeating the same sentence over and over again does not demonstrate understanding. Translate that lovely phrase into a statement that says what the no-self characteristic *is;* otherwise you are saying absolutely > nothing but reciting a mantra. It may soothe you, but it's worthless. The whole dispute is not over the existence of the no-self characteristic, but of what it consists of, and you can't say, can you? You don't know what it is. > ------------- > > KH: You seem to be forgetting all the attempts I have made. > Remember "magnetic" for example. That demonstrated how something can have a property when it is not active, but magnetism is not the same as "no-self." As I pointed out in that example when it came up, the correct example would be a body that lacked magnetism, ie, "no-magnetism." Because my point has always been that a negation cannot be an existent form. If we were talking about something that does exist, a "self" that actually did exist, we could talk about when and how it shows up. But a "no self" never shows up anywhere. It's not anything. You will never find "no magnetism" anywhere, no matter how many scraps of metal, planets or magnets you inspect. "No magnetism" does not exist. And neither does "no self." That doesn't mean it isn't a characteristic of dhammas - it is, but it is a negative characteristic not a positive existent form. The clue is the word "no" or "not," which stands for something that is not there, not for something that is there. > <. . .> > > This next bit is Howard, followed by me, followed by Howard again. > > > ----------------------------------------------- > > What does that mean? When one says that a dhamma is anatta, it is > > merely a denial of a dhamma having self. That's all. > > ---------------------------------------------- > > > > Similarly, hardness is the hardness characteristic of a dhamma. What else > > can I say? > > --------------------------------------------- > > Any instance of hardness is itself a dhamma. Likewise for instances of warmth, odor, flavor, etc. > > --------------------------------------------- > > > RE: You're missing the point. Again, Howard was not engaged with my point to you, so this doesn't apply to him. It's just mistaken identity again. It still applies to you however, since you missed my point in any case. :-) > What is the anatta characteristic? Describe or define it. How does a "no-self" characteristic show up in a dhamma? How is it experienced? What is its quality? You can't say, because you don't know. If you do know, say something about it. > --------------- > > KH: I *have* been saying things about it. Whether they were right or wrong, I have at least been trying. I'm not aware that you have answered the request above, to describe the anatta characteristic and how it is experienced. If so, can you please repeat? I'd like to see your answer to that very much. > ----------------------- > <. . .> > > RE: So when mind engages the anatta characteristic, what does it experience – that there is no self, or something else? If something else, then what? Describe how the no-self characteristic is engaged by mind-consciousness. > ---------------------- > > KH: It happens in a moment when there is mind-citta and there is a paramattha dhamma object, and there is contact. At that moment panna can understand the inherent anatta characteristic of the paramattha dhamma object. > > If the characteristic wasn't there, it couldn't be directly known by panna. But it is there, and it can be known. I can accept that and like that as a preliminary explanation, but I would still need you to fill in the missing blank, which is: when panna directly understands the anatta characteristic of a dhamma, is it understanding that there is no self in that dhamma, or does the anatta characteristic consist of something beyond that? What is your understanding of the what the 'no self characeristic experience' is for panna? See, I can very easily understand and agree with the idea that panna - which is wise - sees the dhamma directly and is then enlightened as to the fact that the dhamma has no self and is not in itself a self or entity. In the moment that it clearly sees the nature of the dhamma, it sees that it is of the nature of "no self" and that is a most stunning realization. Panna would instantly understand in that moment that the dhamma is a momentary result of shifting conditions and that this is all that it is and nothing more solid, substantial, unchanging or more permanent that that - therefore it could never ever be a self or anything like a self or solid entity. It is that kind of wise discernment of a dhamma that allows citta to detach and stop having any investment in something that has no solid identity. There's nowhere to rest in a dhamma, nothing to come back to, and no way to control something that is just shifting kandhas. It appears and is gone - poof! It pops up due to conditions and then is gone forever. So if that's what your understanding is, then we may agree on the 'anatta characteristic.' Let me know! Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #115133 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed May 18, 2011 5:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bkk - with Han & Phil, Mar 2011 (4): Breakfast Topics   Hi Howard, #114533 --- On Thu, 14/4/11, upasaka@... wrote: >>H: When anger flares in someone and they throw a punch at the one who annoyed them, that motion, a rupa, occurs as an immediate consequence of volition (as one of many causal conditions), and that volition is kamma. ..... >S: Yes, the volition is kamma. The rupas are conditioned by those cittas with anger. The result or consequence of that act of kamma is never immediate however. >The only kamma that brings immediate result are the lokuttara cittas which bring instant result (phala), vipaka cittas. >Only the rupas of the body are conditioned by kamma and these are all conditioned by kamma of previous lives, such as the eye-sense and masculinity/femininity. ------------------------------------------------ H:> None of this makes sense to me, Sarah. 1) Would the punching have occurred had their been no volition in that regard. If not, then the punching certainly had the volition as a condition. ... S: True! .... 2) Do you mean to say in your last sentence that a) what one sees and hears and tastes and smells and thinks are not conditioned by volition at all, .... S: Let's differentiate between the seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling and the thinking. The seeing, hearing, tasting and smelling of their respective rupas are the result of past kamma, past volition involved in kamma patha that conditioned rebirth and these vipaka cittas. The thinking, i.e the javana cittas in the mind-door process in particular, are conditioned by our accumulated tendencies for such. This includes the volition, the memory, the greed, the anger, the thinking cetasikas of vitakka and vicara and all the other associated mental tendencies. If the tendencies, notably the intention are of a degree that kamma is performed, then it will later bring its own results in future. As I said, the rupas conditioned at the time of being angry, are conditioned by those cittas with anger and not that kamma, however. .... >and b) the physical sensations one notices are not conditioned by any volition within the same lifetime? .... S: They are conditioned by those cittas with anger instantly. Of course there is also cetana arising with those cittas, but the rupas conditioned by the kamma (if strong enough to bring results) will be later. Just as our sex, our heart rupas, our eye-sense is conditioned primarily by past kamma. ... >What is so special about body-door, and what is the magical mystery of previous lifetimes??? .... S: We can distinguish (to some degree) between rupas which are the result of past kamma, such as masculinity/femininity and those rupas, such as when we blush or make a gesture, which are the result of present cittas. Then there are rupas which are the result of nutriment or the result of temperature. .... >This last business about previous lifetimes sounds more like Theosophy and occultism to me than Dhamma. .... S: From CMA, "Compendium of Matter" #10 "Kamma as a Mode of Origin": "Therein, the twenty-five kinds of wholesome and unwholesome kamma pertaining to the sense sphere and the fine-material sphere produce, in one's own internal continuum, volitionally conditioned material phenomena originating from kamma, moment by moment *beginning with rebirth-linking*." Guide to this: "Kamma here refers to volition (cetanaa) in past wholesome and unwholesome states of consciousnesness......*Eighteen kinds of material phenomena are produced by kamma: the eight sensitivities; the two sex faculties; the life faculty; the heart-base; and space*. Of these, nine kinds - the eight faculties and the heart-base - arise exclusively from kamma. The other nine kinds arise from kamma only when they occur in the kamma-born groups; otherwise they originate from the other causes." Metta Sarah ======= #115134 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed May 18, 2011 6:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] When a Discple Listens Carefully   Dear Kevin, Op 18-mei-2011, om 0:22 heeft Kevin F het volgende geschreven: > Book [V: 95-6] section 46: The Links. 38: Unhindered. > > "..When, Bhikkhus, a Noble Disciple listens carefully to the Dhamma, > alert with keen ears, > attending to it as a matter of crucial concern, as something of vital > importance, directing > his entire mind to it, in that very moment the Five Mental Hindrances > are absent in him. > On that occasion the Seven Links to Awakening develop towards > complete fulfilment...>" -------- N: Thank you, I value this text, it is inspiring. In this sutta we learn that it all begins with listening. Without hearing the Dhamma we do not know how to be aware and develop understanding of paramattha dhammas. The mentioning of the Seven Links to Awakening point to satipa.t.thaana. One can listen to the Dhamma and also develop awareness and understanding of the naama and ruupa that appear at those moments. We hear about seeing, but there is seeing and it has a specific characteristic. It is quite different from thinkling of what is seen. Little by little we can be used to its characteristic. At the moments of awareness of characteristics there is also calm, no hindrances. ------- Nina. #115135 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed May 18, 2011 6:26 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Tanha bhava vs. aggregates of clinging vs. lobha (Jon)   Hi Howard and Alex, Op 18-mei-2011, om 2:33 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > A:If one (who is not yet awakened) doesn't do good, then one does > bad. It is > better to do good. > --------------------------------------------- > H: Yes, let's opt for good! ;-) ------- N: I agree with both of you. But I also consider the person addressed to. I know that one cannot be forced into reading and studying and sometimes, the more one stresses something the more he will be disinclined to read. ------- Nina. #115136 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed May 18, 2011 6:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Enlightenment from the light side   Hi, Ken - In a message dated 5/17/2011 11:09:32 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, -------- <. . .> >> KH: According to the Dhamma, conditioned dhammas *are* absolute realities, and to hold otherwise would be wrong view. Wouldn't it? >> >> Howard can regard that as a rhetorical question. :-) > H: I don't so regard it. I consider it a false assertion in the form of a question. Some evidence of the falsity: <. . .> (From the Kalaka Sutta) <. . .> (From the Phena Sutta) <. . .> (From the Uraga Sutta) <. . .> (From the Uraga Sutta ) <. . .> (From the Dvayatanupassana Sutta) -------- KH: I think we (meaning DSG) have been over those suttas enough times to know that you are never going to change your mind. ------------------------------------------------- I'm as variable as quicksilver compared to the immovable object known as "KenH"!! LOLOL! ------------------------------------------------- I could give my interpretations of them (based on what I can remember from those former discussions) and maybe you, too, could put them into your own words. But unless Lucas or someone else is keen to join in, I think we would both be wasting our time. ---------------------------------------------------- I do not recall any significant discussion of these suttas. What I do recall is a consistent ignoring of them. --------------------------------------------------- ------------------------- <. . .> >> KH: I agree, the word sabhava was sometimes used to mean self (atta) or "something more". >> > H: Ken, perhaps you didn't realize that Lukas was quoting me - hence your not jumping on it! ;-) ------------------------- KH: A chance gone begging! :-) -------------------------------------------------------- LOL! ----------------------------------------------------- But I was right, wasn't I? In some Pali texts the word 'sabhava' is used to denote self - and duly denied - while in other Pali texts it is used to denote absolute reality, and duly affirmed. --------------------------------------------------------- I haven't seen 'sabhava' used in suttas myself, but I have READ that genuine Theravada understands it to mean merely "lakkhana," an assertion I accept, whereas certain late commentarial works used the term literally to mean "own being", and it was that usage that was objected to in the PTSM. ------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------- <. . .> >> KH: According to Theravadin texts, the word sabhava can mean "substance" or "inherent characteristic" and in that sense all dhammas definitely do have sabhava. >> > H: It is really edifying when KenH makes the Mahayanists' case for them! ;-)) The (incorrect) usage of 'sabhava' to mean substance and inherent characteristic is *exactly* what was roundly criticized in the PTSM! ---------------------------- KH: Does the PTSM say there is no inherently kusala (or akusala) kamma, and there is no inherently desirable (or undesirable) object experienced as a result of kamma? I think it is only the Nagarjunian texts that say that sort of thing. I am sure all of the Pali texts say the exact opposite. ------------------------------------------------ I had replied to that question, Ken, but you don't quote that reply here. ----------------------------------------------- ------------------ <. . .> > KH: My guess was based on a broad categorisation of all views into 1) eternity based, 2) annihilation based, and 3) the middle way. >> > H: Huh???? ------------------ KH: Have I said something you disagreed with? --------------------------------------------------- Your statement gives me no clue of why you would think that Nagarjuna was an eternalist. He was ANYTHING but that!!! If one were to argue - and that is what you should be doing, I think - that he was a nihilist, there would stand on a firmer basis, though I deem that evaluation as also incorrect. (Of course, to argue about Nargarjuna would require that you read and study at least his primary work.) -------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------- <. . .> KH: And so if, in some suttas, the Buddha described everything as being unreal, I am sure he meant everything was "absolutely not the way worldlings believe it to be." > H: Excellent wriggling, Ken, based on nothing but your wishes. --------------------------------------------------- KH: I think we all agree that the Dhamma is different from the ways known to worldlings. But, I will concede, that might not be the particular point being made in those suttas. ---------------------------------------------- Thank you. :-) -------------------------------------------- Maybe in those suttas "unreal" denoted that all conditioned reality was dukkha (unsatisfactory), unlike Nibbana. In any case, it certainly did not mean 'not absolutely real.' Both the conditioned world and nibbana are absolutely real. ---------------------------------------------- I know you believe that. --------------------------------------------- Ken H ================================ With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #115137 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed May 18, 2011 6:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing   Hi, Ken - In a message dated 5/17/2011 11:57:07 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, ------ <. . .> >>> H: Dhammas are qualities or activities and are not things that "have" qualities or engage in activities. >>> >> KH: Of what are they qualities or activities? >> > H: You tell me, Ken: ------- KH: I asked because I wanted you to admit that, according to the Nagarjunians, dhammas are just the emanations of an "ocean of being". Lacking their own being, they are nothing more than ripples on the "ocean of being." ----------------------------------------------------- I'm not terribly offended by that somewhat new-agey metaphor, but I do not recall Nagarjuna ever using it. He would deny the existence of a thing, a separate reality, corresponding to "the ocean" as much as "the waves". ----------------------------------------------------- ---------- > H: Warmth is a rupa and is a quality. Of what is it a quality? Hardness is also a rupa and a quality. Of what is IT a quality. --------- KH: A rupa can be called by one of its characteristics, but it is a physical phenomenon possessing *several* characteristics. ---------------- > H: You wish to think in terms of things, that "have" qualities. That is based on conventional perception: tables are hard, irons are hot, ice is cold. Your "reality view" is in fact conventional view. --------------- KH: Yes, I understand the Dhamma to be telling me about things that have characteristics. Otherwise, there would be no absolute reality that was anatta. And wouldn't that be good news for the eternalists! ------------------------------------------- Oh, geez! ------------------------------------------ ----------------------------------------------- <. . . > > H: That is Kenism, not Buddhism. Any hardness is exactly that, and not some hard thing. ----------------------------------------------- KH: It is hardly a Kenism. All Theravada Buddhists, and some Mahayana Buddhists, believe in the absolute reality of dhammas. -------------------------------------------- Quite sure about all Theravadins are you!? Sure enough to make an unconditional assertion! My evaluation of this: We have here 1) a claim of absolute reality of dhammas that is 2) backed up by an absolute certainty which is 3) based on absolutely nothing in the suttas! ;-)) -------------------------------------------- Ken H ============================= With metta - really and absolutely! ;-)), Howard /"Thus, monks, the Tathagata, when seeing what is to be seen, doesn't construe an [object as] seen. He doesn't construe an unseen. He doesn't construe an [object] to-be-seen. He doesn't construe a seer. "When hearing... "When sensing... "When cognizing what is to be cognized, he doesn't construe an [object as] cognized. He doesn't construe an uncognized. He doesn't construe an [object] to-be-cognized. He doesn't construe a cognizer./ (From the Kalaka Sutta) #115138 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed May 18, 2011 6:34 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bkk - with Han & Phil, Mar 2011 (4): Breakfast TopicsSend Email   Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 5/18/2011 3:52:18 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: (You, Sarah, quoting me and replying) 1) Would the punching have occurred had their been no volition in that regard. If not, then the punching certainly had the volition as a condition. ... S: True! .... 2) Do you mean to say in your last sentence that a) what one sees and hears and tastes and smells and thinks are not conditioned by volition at all, .... S: Let's differentiate between the seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling and the thinking. The seeing, hearing, tasting and smelling of their respective rupas are the result of past kamma, past volition involved in kamma patha that conditioned rebirth and these vipaka cittas. --------------------------------------------- The past kamma could include immediately-past kamma along with much more. -------------------------------------------- The thinking, i.e the javana cittas in the mind-door process in particular, are conditioned by our accumulated tendencies for such. This includes the volition, the memory, the greed, the anger, the thinking cetasikas of vitakka and vicara and all the other associated mental tendencies. ------------------------------------------ Sure. ----------------------------------------- If the tendencies, notably the intention are of a degree that kamma is performed, then it will later bring its own results in future. As I said, the rupas conditioned at the time of being angry, are conditioned by those cittas with anger and not that kamma, however. ------------------------------------------- Flaring anger can immediately condition kamma resulting in an immediate action (such as spinning around to stare). ------------------------------------------- .... >and b) the physical sensations one notices are not conditioned by any volition within the same lifetime? ---------------------------------------------- Volition can immediately (help to) produce anger which immediately (helps to) produces flushing of the face. ---------------------------------------------- .... S: They are conditioned by those cittas with anger instantly. Of course there is also cetana arising with those cittas, but the rupas conditioned by the kamma (if strong enough to bring results) will be later. Just as our sex, our heart rupas, our eye-sense is conditioned primarily by past kamma. ... >What is so special about body-door, and what is the magical mystery of previous lifetimes??? .... S: We can distinguish (to some degree) between rupas which are the result of past kamma, such as masculinity/femininity and those rupas, such as when we blush or make a gesture, which are the result of present cittas. Then there are rupas which are the result of nutriment or the result of temperature. .... >This last business about previous lifetimes sounds more like Theosophy and occultism to me than Dhamma. .... S: From CMA, "Compendium of Matter" #10 "Kamma as a Mode of Origin": "Therein, the twenty-five kinds of wholesome and unwholesome kamma pertaining to the sense sphere and the fine-material sphere produce, in one's own internal continuum, volitionally conditioned material phenomena originating from kamma, moment by moment *beginning with rebirth-linking*." Guide to this: "Kamma here refers to volition (cetanaa) in past wholesome and unwholesome states of consciousnesness......*Eighteen kinds of material phenomena are produced by kamma: the eight sensitivities; the two sex faculties; the life faculty; the heart-base; and space*. Of these, nine kinds - the eight faculties and the heart-base - arise exclusively from kamma. The other nine kinds arise from kamma only when they occur in the kamma-born groups; otherwise they originate from the other causes." Metta Sarah ============================= With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #115139 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu May 19, 2011 1:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] ahosi kamma, I.Send Email   Dear Han and friends, Op 14-mei-2011, om 0:36 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > > (1) There has been action (ahosikamma.m), there has been action- > result (ahosikammavipaako). > ------ N: We are born and there is seeing, these are all results of past kamma. ----- > > (2) There has been action (ahosikamma.m), there has been no action- > result (naahosikammavipaako). > ------- N: Kamma has been performed, but it has not produced result. The co. explains that the kamma that has been performed has not produced rebirth-consciousness. ------- > > (3) There has been action (ahosikamma.m), there is action-result > (atthikammavipaako). > ------ N: Kamma has been performed and it produces result at the present time. Now there are dukkha and sukha and these are results of past kammas. -------- > > (4) There has been action (ahosikamma.m), there is no action-result > (naatthikammavipaako). > ------ Co: The kamma performed has not produced result at the present time. Kh S: the kamma performed has not yet produced result. Perhaps in a next life. ------------------------ > > (5) There has been action (ahosikamma.m), there will be action- > result (bhavissatikammavipaako). > -------- Kh S: There will be result in the future. Perhaps now we perform a lot of kusala kamma, but we do not know which kamma will produce result in the future, perhaps akusala kamma will produce an unhappy rebirth. -------- > > (6) There has been action (ahosikamma.m), there will be no action- > result (nabhavissatikammavipaako). > -------- Kh S: For example Angulima. He performed a lot of akusala kamma, but since he became an arahat there would not be an unhappy result in the future in the form of an unhappy rebirth. N: He had reached the end of rebirth. ------ (will be continued) Nina. #115140 From: han tun Date: Thu May 19, 2011 7:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] ahosi kamma, I.   Dear Nina, > (1) There has been action (ahosikamma.m), there has been action-result (ahosikammavipaako). ------ N: We are born and there is seeing, these are all results of past kamma. ===== > (2) There has been action (ahosikamma.m), there has been no action-result (naahosikammavipaako). ------- N: Kamma has been performed, but it has not produced result. The co. explains that the kamma that has been performed has not produced rebirth-consciousness. ===== > (3) There has been action (ahosikamma.m), there is action-result (atthikammavipaako). ------ N: Kamma has been performed and it produces result at the present time. Now there are dukkha and sukha and these are results of past kammas. ===== > (4) There has been action (ahosikamma.m), there is no action-result (natthikammavipaako). ------ Co: The kamma performed has not produced result at the present time. Kh S: the kamma performed has not yet produced result. Perhaps in a next life. ===== > (5) There has been action (ahosikamma.m), there will be action-result (bhavissatikammavipaako). -------- Kh S: There will be result in the future. Perhaps now we perform a lot of kusala kamma, but we do not know which kamma will produce result in the future, perhaps akusala kamma will produce an unhappy rebirth. ===== > (6) There has been action (ahosikamma.m), there will be no action-result (nabhavissatikammavipaako). -------- Kh S: For example Angulima. He performed a lot of akusala kamma, but since he became an arahat there would not be an unhappy result in the future in the form of an unhappy rebirth. N: He had reached the end of rebirth. ========== Han: My understanding of the above six cases is as follows: (1) There has been action (ahosikamma.m) in past life, there has been action-result (ahosikammavipaako) in past life. (2) There has been action (ahosikamma.m) in past life, there has been no action-result (naahosikammavipaako) in past life. (3) There has been action (ahosikamma.m) in past life, there is action-result (atthikammavipaako) in present life. (4) There has been action (ahosikamma.m) in past life, there is no action-result (naatthikammavipaako) in present life. (5) There has been action (ahosikamma.m) in past life, there will be action-result (bhavissatikammavipaako) in future life. (6) There has been action (ahosikamma.m) in past life, there will be no action-result (nabhavissatikammavipaako) in future life. So, when we give examples, all six cases should be about the action in past life (ahosi kamma). But the action-result should be in the past life (ahosi and naahosi) in the cases Nos 1 and 2. But the action-result should be in the present life (atthi and natthi) in the cases Nos 3 and 4. But the action-result should be in the future life (bhavassati and na-bhavassati) in the cases Nos 5 and 6. So, I think when giving examples, these three-life-mode (past life, present life, future life) should be clearly mentioned. Or, if it is the past, present and the future in *the same life*, it should also be clearly mentioned. If I am wrong, please forgive me. Respectfully, Han #115141 From: Kevin F Date: Thu May 19, 2011 8:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] When a Discple Listens Carefully   Hi Nina, All, Nina: N: Thank you, I value this text, it is inspiring. In this sutta we learn that it all begins with listening. Without hearing the Dhamma we do not know how to be aware and develop understanding of paramattha dhammas. The mentioning of the Seven Links to Awakening point to satipa.t.thaana. One can listen to the Dhamma and also develop awareness and understanding of the naama and ruupa that appear at those moments. We hear about seeing, but there is seeing and it has a specific characteristic. It is quite different from thinkling of what is seen. Little by little we can be used to its characteristic. At the moments of awareness of characteristics there is also calm, no hindrances. Kevin: Hi Nina. I hope you are well! Thanks for your insightful comments on the passage. It helps explain the passage well. Kevin ___________ With metta Kevin Sarah:"The citta itself (for example, rooted in ignorance, or, for example, rooted in >wisdom), plus all the other accompanying cetasikas which arise with those javana >cittas also accumulate by way of upanissaya paccaya. So, wisdom itself >accumulates when ever it arises." #115142 From: "Ken H" Date: Thu May 19, 2011 2:01 pm Subject: Re: wisdom and doing   Hi Robert E, ------ <. . .> >> KH: Perhaps I should ask if you would accept *anything* as being the sabhava of a dhamma. >> > RE: That is an interesting question, but you have avoided the subject, which is - how can 'no-self,' the very denial of entity, be a positive part of the "substance" of something. ----- KH: As I keep saying, I haven't been avoiding the question. Don't you remember all the theorising we did over whether anatta was necessarily a negative? We consulted Howard, the mathematician, who confirmed that negatives and positives were interchangeable, depending on your starting point (or something like that). Eventually I gave up and asked if we could change the subject. So, according to my memory, we have discussed this question too much, not too little. --------------------- > RE: It's nonsensical, Ken, and I'm still waiting for your explanation, which you have never given. > I can certainly accept the "sabhava" of a dhamma in the sense of its function or characteristic in the moment, but not of something that it owns or possesses as that is just silly for a momentary dhamma that is part of a pattern of continuing cause and effect. -------------------- KH: There's your problem! The "continuing pattern of cause and effect" is just a concept. There is no real pattern; there is just thinking of a pattern. ------------------------ > RE: If it owned it, it would be isolated from the flow of continuous cause and effect. In that case, such a solid sense of sabhava would not only deny anatta, but also anicca, which is the principle or understanding that there is no solid entity within continual changing conditions and conditionality. ------------------------ KH: Forget 'patterns' 'flows' and 'continual things' of any kind. The Dhamma is about what is real now - in the present moment of consciousness. ------------------ > RE: So no, nothing owns anything, least of all a fleeting conditioned dhamma which is not made of anything at all other than conditionality - totally dependent on what is happening around it and to it to form it for a fleeting moment. How can it own or possess anything? Rather, it is owned and possessed by shifting conditions, without a leg to stand on. ------------------ KH: That reminds me of the "shadows" we were talking about recently. In the shadow world known to uninstructed ordinary people, there are possessions (spectacles, wallet, watch . . .) that belong to people, aren't there? And there are characteristics (jovial, intelligent, brave . . .) that belong to people. Those are shadows of realities. We know them in our shadow world only because, in the real world, there are real "possessions" or "inherent characteristics" and they "belong" to dhammas. ------------------------- <. . .> >> KH: Poor Howard! :-) >> > RE: Well it doesn't pertain to Howard, because he never said that they were substantial and had own-being, you did. No wonder I was confused! > Anyway, that's what Howard gets for not putting his name on top of his interspersed comments. :-) I didn't know what was going on once I got into the "reply" template. ----------------------- KH: Howard has his own ways of doing things. :-) ------------------------------------ <. . .> >> KH: Remember "magnetic" for example. >> > RE: That demonstrated how something can have a property when it is not active, but magnetism is not the same as "no-self." As I pointed out in that example when it came up, the correct example would be a body that lacked magnetism, ie, "no-magnetism." Because my point has always been that a negation cannot be an existent form. <. . .> ------------------------------------ KH: What about non-magnetic? Don't scientists consider that a property of non-magnetic elements? But I don't want to get back into all that. Sarah is going to sort it out for us. :-) ---------------- <. . .> >> KH: If the characteristic wasn't there, it couldn't be directly known by panna. But it is there, and it can be known. >> > RE: I can accept that and like that as a preliminary explanation, but I would still need you to fill in the missing blank, which is: when panna directly understands the anatta characteristic of a dhamma, is it understanding that there is no self in that dhamma, or does the anatta characteristic consist of something beyond that? What is your understanding of the what the 'no self characeristic experience' is for panna? ---------------- KH: I'm not sure what the right answer to that is. We already have some theoretical right understanding, haven't we? So we already know the experience known as right understanding. When the real thing (direct right understanding of a universal characteristic) comes along it will be very similar, but infinitely greater. (?) -------------------------- > RE: See, I can very easily understand and agree with the idea that panna - which is wise - sees the dhamma directly and is then enlightened as to the fact that the dhamma has no self and is not in itself a self or entity. In the moment that it clearly sees the nature of the dhamma, it sees that it is of the nature of "no self" and that is a most stunning realization. -------------------------- KH: Yes, I think that's what I was trying to say. ---------------- > RE: Panna would instantly understand in that moment that the dhamma is a momentary result of shifting conditions and that this is all that it is and nothing more solid, substantial, unchanging or more permanent that that - therefore it could never ever be a self or anything like a self or solid entity. ---------------- KH: I would have agreed with that too, except I know from previous conversations that you are denying the absolute reality of the nama or rupa being experienced. All this silly talk about "no own being" has led you astray. :-) ---------------------- > RE: It is that kind of wise discernment of a dhamma that allows citta to detach and stop having any investment in something that has no solid identity. ---------------------- KH: It is not a matter of "no solid identity," it is a matter of "no other identity." There is no permanent soul lurking in or around that dhamma; there is just the dhamma itself. And why isn't there anything more? Because it is the inherent nature of that dhamma to be without anything more. -------------------------------- > RE: There's nowhere to rest in a dhamma, nothing to come back to, and no way to control something that is just shifting kandhas. It appears and is gone - poof! It pops up due to conditions and then is gone forever. > So if that's what your understanding is, then we may agree on the 'anatta characteristic.' Let me know! ------------------------------- KH: I think it's a good way of understanding why conditioned dhammas have the anatta characteristic, but there is more to a characteristic than that. Nibbana has the anatta characteristic, and yet it is has none of those undesirable (fleeting, unsatisfactory) qualities. Ken H #115143 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Thu May 19, 2011 7:31 am Subject: Freeing & Fruitful is Faith!   Friends: Faith & Devotion is Advantageous! Faith is the first of the 5 Elements of Effort (padhÄniyanga ): 1: Faith, 2: Health, 3: Sincerity, 4: Energy, and 5: Understanding. Faith is main factor of the 4 Streams of Merit (puññÄ-dhÄrÄ ): 1: Unshakable faith in the Buddha, 2: Unshakable faith in the Dhamma, 3: Unshakable faith in the Sangha, 4: Quite Perfected Morality. Faith is the first of the 7 Treasures (dhana ): 1: Faith, 2: Morality, 3: Shame, 4: Fear of Wrongdoing, 5: Learning, 6: Generosity, 7: Understanding. Faith is seed, the entrance, the initiator, the ticket, the beginning. Understanding is the highest, the goal, the diamond-cutter, the end. Both are Floods of Advantage, Fabulous Fruits, Leading to Happiness! Yeah! So it is really and not otherwise! <...> Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu SamÄhita _/\_ * <....> #115144 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu May 19, 2011 5:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ahosi kamma   Dear Han & all, --- On Sat, 14/5/11, han tun wrote: >Thank you very much for quoting Ptsm. Kammakathaa. >In your post 6 cases were quoted. >In the Burmese books, *for the same text*, 12 cases are noted. .... S: I think you'll find that exactly the same 12 cases are listed in what I quoted - just the layout is different. I'll requote the same text and this time insert the numbers which you'll find correspond exactly to those in your quote below: >S:Time to look at Ps ii.78 in more detail as partially quoted in the Vism ref, X1X, 14: Patisambhidamagga ii. 78, Treatise V11 - On Action (Kammakathaa) (PTS, Nanamoli transl., Pali inserted): [1]"There has been action (Ahosikamma.m), there has been action-result (ahosikammavipaako); [2] there has been action(ahosikamma.m), there has been no action-result (naahosikammavipaako). [3] There has been action (Ahosikamma.m), there is action-result (atthikammavipaako); [4] there has been action (ahosikamma.m), there is no action-result (naatthikammavipaako). [5] There has been action (Ahosikamma.m), there will be action-result (bhavissatikammavipaako); [6] there has been action (ahosikamma.m), there will be no action-result (nabhavissatikammavipaako). [7] There is action (atthikamma.m), there is action-result (atthikammavipaako); [8] there is action (atthikamma.m), there is no action-result (natthikammavipaako. [9] There is action (atthikamma.m), there will be action-result (bhavissatikammavipaako); [10] there is action (atthikamma.m), there will be no action-result (vabhavissatikammavipaako). [11] There will be action (Bhavissatikamma.m), there will be action-result (bhavissatikammavipaako); [12] there will be action (bhavissatikamma.m), there will be no action-result (nabhavissatikammavipaako). [and so on as for all the above., but profitable action (ahosi kusala.m kamma.m) etc. and profitable action result (ahosi kusalasasa kammassa vipaako) etc for all 6 cases, then with .unprofitable action (ahosi akusala.m kamma.m) etc. and unprofitable action result (ahosi akusalassa kammassa vipaako) etc., followed by: There has been represhensible action (ahosi saavajja.m kamma.m) for all 6 cases...... ....unreprehensible action (anavajja.m).......dark action (ka.nha.m) ....bright action (suka.m)....action productive of pleasure (sukhundriya.m)...of pain (dukkhundriya.m).....action resulting in pleasure(sukhavipaaka.m)....in pain (dukkhavipaaka.m) for all 6 cases above.]" ******** Han: >(1) There has been action (ahosikamma.m), there has been action-result (ahosikammavipaako). (2) There has been action (ahosikamma.m), there has been no action-result (naahosikammavipaako). (3) There has been action (ahosikamma.m), there is action-result (atthikammavipaako). (4) There has been action (ahosikamma.m), there is no action-result (naatthikammavipaako). (5) There has been action (ahosikamma.m), there will be action-result (bhavissatikammavipaako). (6) There has been action (ahosikamma.m), there will be no action-result (nabhavissatikammavipaako). ---------- (7) There is action (atthikamma.m), there is action-result (atthikammavipaako). (8) There is action (atthikamma.m), there is no action-result (natthikammavipaako. (9) There is action (atthikamma.m), there will be action-result (bhavissatikammavipaako). (10) There is action (atthikamma.m), there will be no action-result (nabhavissatikammavipaako). ---------- (11) There will be action (bhavissatikamma.m), there will be action-result (bhavissatikammavipaako). (12) There will be action (bhavissatikamma.m), there will be no action-result (nabhavissatikammavipaako). >Han: Nos. (1) to (6) pertain to the *past*; Nos. (7) to (10) pertain to the *present*; and Nos. (11) & (12) pertain to the *future*. ============== >Dictionary meanings: >PTS Dictionary: >Ahosi-kamma = an act or thought whose kamma has no longer any potential force. Ahosi-kamma is said to be a kamma inhibited by a more powerful one. .... S: I daresay that in some contexts this may be so, but as can be seen from the examples above, ahosi kamma just refers to past kamma which may or may not a)have brought results, b)bring results now or c)bring results in future. This is why, as I mentioned a few years ago when I posted on this topic, that I think 'lapsed kamma', 'inoperative kamma' or 'inhibited kamma' as translations are not accurate. Ahosi just means past. ... >Pali-Burmese Dictionary: Ahosi = past action. Ahosi-kamma = same as in PTS. [Please note that in Pali-Burmese Dictionary, the meanings of ahosi and ahosi-kamma are different.] .... S: I wonder how they explain no 5 then - "there has been action (ahosikamma.m), there will be action-result". It's interesting that our Thai friends all had the same understanding as that given in the dictionaries too. Also Narada's transl of Ab.Sangaha as Nina mentioned. Metta Sarah ====== #115145 From: "sarah" Date: Thu May 19, 2011 5:18 pm Subject: Re: Bkk - with Han & Phil, Mar 2011 (4): Breakfast Topics   Dear Han & all, #114097 I just got round to checking CMA and the commentary to Abhidhammattha Sangaha on this point we discussed about vi~n~naa.na in D.O.: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: >> On page 296 of the CMA, > Step (2): Dependent on kammic formations arises consciousness: That is, the kammic formations (the 29 wholesome and unwholesome volitions) condition the arising of the 32 kinds of resultant consciousness. At the moment of conception one especially potent kammic formation accumulated in the mental continuum of the deceased being generates one of the 19 types of rebirth consciousness in the realm appropriate for that kamma to mature. Thereafter, during the course of existence, other accumulated kammas generate other resultant types of consciousness according to circumstances. >> Step (3): Dependent on consciousness arises mind-and-matter: Whereas in step (2) vi~n~naa.na refers exclusively to resultant consciousness, here it signifies both resultant consciousness and kammic consciousness of previous lives. The term "mind" (naama) denotes the cetasikas associated with resultant consciousness, the term "matter" (ruupa) denotes material phenomena produced by kamma. > > ---------- > > > [Sarah]: I hadn't heard/read that vi~n~naa.na in "step (3)" has a broader meaning than vi~n~naa.na in "step (2)". I understood it was sankhaara that referred to "kammic consciousness of previous lives" and that in both instances, vi~n~naa.na referred only to patisandhi and subsequent vipaka cittas. ..... S: The above quote you gave is as you said in the "Guide" notes on p.296 of CMA. As I mentioned before, I've learnt to be a little cautious when reading the Guide notes as there are some errors, some of which have been corrected. Now, checking the commentary itself on this point (meaning of vi~n~naa.na in "step 2" and "step 3", it says: "The nineteen types of resultant consciousness (citta) [occurring] by way of relinking and the thirty-two [occurring] by way of activity are called consciousness (vi~n~naa.na). "Mind-materiality (naama-ruupa) is mind and materiality. Therein mind in this context is the three aggregates beginning with feeling; materiality, the materiality produced by kamma in two ways as the elemets and what is dependent. It should be understood that the pair of mind and materiality are here what accompainies relinking consciousness." S: Thus, I've seen no reference in the Abhidhammattha Sangaha or its commentary or in the other texts on D.O. which we looked at to support the idea that vi~n~naana takes on a wider meaning than that of patisandhi and the 32 vipaka cittas in the third link. Just my notes, no need to respond. Metta Sarah ======= #115146 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu May 19, 2011 5:56 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: what is "direct" understanding?   Hi Rob E, --- On Sat, 14/5/11, Robert E wrote: >> S: The calm of insight is far "higher" because it develops with an understanding of dhammas as anatta. This is why it is only purified through such insight. Without it, there is bound to be attachment to jhana states and becoming. ... R:> Thank you for pointing that out - I think it is very clear that jhana without insight - an awakened mind to understand the subtle characteristics of the jhana - the serenity of jhana is not only temporary but bound to eventually lead back to more clinging; but I think it is also very clear that the jhanas are a most special object of insight. I have recently seen in quoted - from sutta or commentary, I don't remember - how the jhana leaves in its wake a state of calm and serenity after which it is much more conducive a state for experiencing high insight in relation to that very still state. ..... S: There is no question but that jhana cittas and mental factors are a very high form of kusala - the highest forms of kusala that were known before the Buddha. When it comes to objects of insight, I think that if there is any idea of any object being more worthy of that insight than another, it is not the detachment that accompanies the understanding which knows that all conditioned dhammas are anicca, dukkha and anatta. I also consider it is the accumulated understanding of insight and not a particular object such as jhana that is the condition for enlightenmet. For example, even now, we cannot say that kusala states are any more beneificial/worthy/likely as objects of understanding than akusala states or vipaka cittas or rupas. It just depends what appears at this moment. Of course, for the jhana attainer, it may well be jhana cittas that appear, but not by clinging to them as objects of insight. .... >R:So the jhanic serenity and suppression of defilements works in tandem with mindfulness to achieve a very deep level of insight. I think it is this combination done correctly that the Buddha especially praised. Everyday moments of insight are not to be denied, but the it seems that the sustained moments of insight in relation to deeply pacified khandas in jhana cannot be underestimated in the advanced stages of the path. .... S: I don't remember seeing the Buddha ever teaching about 'sustained moments of insight in relation to deeply pacified khandhas in jhana". I think he taught about all kinds of realities, including the praise of jhana cittas as high forms of kusala, before describing the fully developed insight, the enlightenment which leads to the cessation of all formations. I think we have to just disagree on this point. .... > S: I would say, silence for the kilesa (defilements) which are very 'noisy' for most of the day. Right understanding doesn't mean not thinking, just not thinking unwisely. ... R:>One would be very content with cessatin of the defilements, whatever else may or may not be there. I relate to your description of the 'noise' of defiled thoughts throughout the day. Anyone would appreciate a vacation from greed, hatred, delusion, attachment and suffering of all kinds both great and subtle, and the thoughts that feed them. May we all have such a nice vacation soon! ... S: Ah, now you're talking like my script-writer again:-)) A vacation from the kilesa.... But are we really ready for a vacation from the attachment and all we hold dear? Honestly? Metta Sarah ====== #115147 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu May 19, 2011 5:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Enlightenment from the light side   Hi Dieter, Good to see you around as usual.... --- On Sat, 14/5/11, Dieter wrote: >The Light Side of Enlightenment (Bhikkhu Sujato ..http://santifm.org/santipada/2010/the-light-side-of-enlightenment/) Buddhist light-bulb jokes... .... S: Great! We both had a good laugh:-) Lighten us up anytime..... for all who like the "light" enlightenment and a little humour along the Path, pls look through the "Zany section" of "Useful Posts", right at the end. Metta Sarah ======== #115148 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu May 19, 2011 6:14 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Some thoughts on Anatta and Path (Long)   Hi Alex, Thx for your thoughts. Just on the first para: --- On Sat, 14/5/11, A T wrote: >Reading the suttas, I noticed a strange tension between what we call teaching of Self vs No Self, and no explicit teaching on what later came to be known “two truthsâ€, which is somewhat self contradictory and contradicts the suttas, btw. How can there be two truths about the same thing? In one type of analysis conventional truth is false from the POV of absolute truth. Absolute truth is false from conventional truth. ... S: I don't read any "strange tension" on "Self vs No Self" in the texts or any conflict with regard to "two truths". When there is any understanding of "absolute truth", i.e of a paramattha dhamma now appearing, it is clear what is meant by "absolute truth" and "conventional truth" without there being any contradiction. For example, when it's clear that what is touched is hardness or tangible object, we can talk about desks and computers without any misunderstanding. Metta Sarah ====== #115149 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu May 19, 2011 6:33 pm Subject: Re:Q. [dsg] ahosi kamma, I.   Dear Han, Op 18-mei-2011, om 23:49 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > (1) There has been action (ahosikamma.m) in past life, there has > been action-result (ahosikammavipaako) in past life. ------- N: The result can also be past in this life, like the rebirth- consciousness in this life. Now this is gone already and this example is given in the Co. to the Niddaanasutta, Anguttara Nikaaya. Perhaps it is the way one reads past, or understands something as past. It can also be recent past, past in this life. I did not follow Abhidhammattha Sangaha. What I used here this is from the manoradhapuranii. All my additions are from this commentary and some added explanation by Kh Sujin. ------ Nina.