#117400 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Sep 14, 2011 11:21 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Ditthi at the sense door? upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah (and Phil) - In a message dated 9/14/2011 2:52:59 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > Today I think I heard that ditthi can appear at the sense door, there is "my" rupa. Seems to me that could only be through the mind door... ... S: Can be sense door or mind door, just as panna can be at either. -------------------------------------------------- HCW: By ditthi or pa~n~na being "at the sense door," I presume that what is meant is that the OBJECT of the ditthi or pa~n~na is a sense-door object. ----------------------------------------------- Gives an indication at just how quickly panna or ditthi can dart in. How could there ever be any 'selection' or action to make either arise? When there's awareness of ditthi or panna, it doesn't matter in the slightest which doorway they arose. The characteristic is the same. Metta Sarah ============================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #117401 From: han tun Date: Wed Sep 14, 2011 11:26 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: atta-nu-di.t.thi, was: samatha. hantun1 Dear Nina, Yes, I will write at DSG some of my presentations when I have finished at the Other Group. I will pray for the health of both of you. with metta and respect, Han p.s. No news about Htoo. --- On Wed, 9/14/11, Nina van Gorkom wrote: Dear Han, N: I greatly admire you and appreciate what you are doing. All you quoted from Dr Mehm Tin Mon was always very good. It is useful if you can give us some quotes now and then. I mean, when it is no extra work, since you have to spare your eyes. But maybe you could download and copy passages from the book you have to present anyway. Yes, Htoo, our good friend. No news? Thank you for your good wishes also to Lodewijk. He has too many medicines now and struggles with bronchitis. I try to look after him, mostly with healthy foods. I do get worried though, and I know this is dosa. Hoping to hear from you again, when you have finished your presentations, best wishes for your health, Nina. #117402 From: "connie" Date: Thu Sep 15, 2011 12:09 am Subject: Sangiitisutta Nines #3 nichiconn Dear Friends, CSCD 341. <ti aakaasaana~ncaayatanuupagaa. Aya.m cha.t.tho sattaavaaso. <nti vi~n~naa.na~ncaayatanuupagaa. Aya.m sattamo sattaavaaso. <ti aaki~ncaa~n~naayatanuupagaa. Aya.m a.t.thamo sattaavaaso. < Date: Thu Sep 15, 2011 12:17 am Subject: [dsg] Sangiitisutta Nines, Sutta 3, and commentary. nilovg Dear friends, RDs [ 9.3 ] Nine spheres inhabited by beings. The first four are described in terms verbatim of the first four stations of consciousness [2. 3, x.]9.3. (5) There are beings without perception or feeling. These live in the sphere of the 'unconscious devas.'9.3.1 (6) There are beings who having passed wholly beyond awareness of material qualities, by the dying out of sensory reaction, by unheeding the awareness of difference, have attained to the sphere of infinite space with a consciousness thereof. (7-9) Similarly other beings have attained to the sphere of infinite consciousness, of nothingness, of neither consciousness nor yet unconsciousness.9.3.2 (Nava sattaavaasaa. Santaavuso, sattaa naanattakaayaa naanattasa~n~nino, seyyathaapi manussaa ekacce ca devaa ekacce ca vinipaatikaa... sattaa naanattakaayaa ekattasa~n~nino...) --------- N: 1. As to diverse in body and in perception, these are humans, some devas (of the six classes which are of the sensesphere), and some spirits in lower realms. Then there are other variations which pertain to different births as a result of different stages of jhaana: 2. Those born in the ruupa-brahma plane as the result of the first jhaana are diverse in body but identical in sa~n~naa. Thus, they are born with the ruupaavacara vipaakacitta that is the result of the first jhaana. Their bodies are different and their lifespan is different according as their attainment of jhaana was limited, medium or superior. 3. Those born as the result of the second and third jhaana are the same in body, but different in sa~n~naa. An example is the gods of streaming radiance, devaa aabhassaraa. 4. Born as result of the fourth jhaana. They are uniform in body and sa~n~naa. 5. This is the plane of asa~n~na satta, they have only ruupa, no naama. 6, 7. 8, 9: Then there are four more planes which are the results of aruupa-jhaanas that have as subject: space is infinite, consciousness is infinite, 'there is nothing', and the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception. In the four last-mentioned planes, one is born with naama, not with ruupa. There is no ruupa in those planes. ------ The co: The Pure Abodes are also included. These are five classes of heavens where anaagaami can be reborn, as a result of ruupa-jhaana and attain arahatship there. The lifespan in those planes is extremely long, thousands of aeons. When during incalculable aeons no Buddhas appear, this place (the suddhavaasa heavens, Pure Abodes) is empty. ----- N: We are reminded that there were and will be incalculable aeons when no Buddhas appear. We are fortunate that we live in an era when we can still listen to the Dhamma, consider it and develop vipassanaa. This present time is precious and we should not waste this opportunity by neglectfulness. The Book of Analysis, after giving the endless lifespans in the brahman planes ends with a verse: "(Beings) thrown up by power of merit Go to existence in the planes of desire and form, (Though) reaching even the highest existence They come back again to unpleasant existence. (Even) Beings having such long life Fall from exhaustion of life, No existence is permanent, Thus was said by the Great Sage. Therefore indeed the wise who are prudent, Skilful, thinkers of betterment, To be free from old age and death Develop the highest path. Having developed the pure path Merging into, leading to Nibbana, Comprehending all the defilements Free from defilements they attain to final release. -------- Nina. #117404 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Sep 15, 2011 12:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Samatha and Vipassanaa, was: Not Who, but What? nilovg Hi Howard, Op 12-sep-2011, om 14:11 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > My belief is that regular cultivation of samatha strongly weakens the > hindrances, and samatha can be cultivated without jhana by the regular > development of sila and proper contemplation. ----- N: Yes, if you mean calm. Calm (passaddhi) accompanies each kusala citta, there is no restlessness at that moment. ----- > H: I also note that the hindrances > are especially weakened by cultivation of the 4 foundations of > mindfulness > (see the Nivarana Sutta, AN 9.64). ----- N: PTS made a wrong translation and the Thai is correct: the four applications should be developed in order to eradicate the hindrances. The four applications of mindfulness lead to enlightenment whenthe hindrances are eradicated stage by stage. ------- > H: Of course, along with satipatthana > cultivation, jhana is developed, ----- N: Depending on the individual, being capable of becoming jhaana labhi or not. ------- > H: and jhana temporarily suppresses the nivarana, > abandoning them fully, though only for the while. > Regardind the hindrances being back in force upon emerging from the > jhanas, yes, that is so. Two things though: 1) The frequent "entry" > to jhana > has a somewhat lasting effect on moderating the severity of the > hindrances > at ordinary times, and, more importantly, 2) The full suppression > of the > hindrances during jhana solidifies the jhana, "locking in" the > state and > enabling it's full benefit. For non-arahants, and especially for > worldlings, > being "in" jhana and the circumstance of full suppression of > hindrances > co-occur and are virtually synonymous. ----- N: again, depending on the individual. Hard to measure though to what extent the hindrances are weakened, it must be a very, very slow process. But if they are not gradually weakened they could not be eradicated, I agree. ------- > H: For worldlings, the hindrances are at > least somewhat active exactly whenever the state of mind is not > jhanic. ---- N: "Somewhat"? I am afraid very active, ignorance is so deeply accumulated. In the Dhammasanga.ni (1152-1163) hindrances are classified as sixfold, with ignorance among them. ------ > H: For > arahants, though, the hindrances are never active, for they, along > with all > defilements, have been permanently removed by the root. I suspect > this is so > even at earlier ariyan stages. > ---------------------------------------------------------- > N: The hindrances are eradicated at different stages of > enlightenment. The magga-citta of the sotapanna eradicates doubt. > Since the sotapanna has no more wrong view and sees realities as > they are, there cannot be any doubt about them. The magga-citta of > the anagami eradicates sensuous desire, ill-will and regret. The > magga-citta of the arahat eradicates sloth and torpor, restlessness > and ignorance. The arahat is free of all the hindrances. > Defilements can only be eradicated stage by stage because they are > so deeply rooted. ------ Nina. #117405 From: Ken O Date: Thu Sep 15, 2011 2:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: samatha. was: Khandhas and samsara ashkenn2k Dear Nina they quote from their teachers' comments and interpretations, and not from the text. I have yet seen any textual support because at that time I ask for the textual support as well. Ken O ------ >N: I remember discussions about this subject with Han who quoted >texts where it seems that they are identical. I remember that Sarah >explained more about this, and I cannot answer your question. Maybe >Sarah can later on, >Nina. > #117406 From: Ken O Date: Thu Sep 15, 2011 2:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: atta-nu-di.t.thi, was: samatha. ashkenn2k Dear Nina Sakkaya ditthi is also about things outside, just like an uninstructed worldings does not known earth as earth, misconceive earth belongs to oneself or there is self in earth. This earth can be composite earth or objective earth as in kasina. Sakkaya ditthi is not restrictive to just aggregates, it is about the conventional objects as well. I have quoted this before, let me quote again as written in the Commentary to All Roots of Existence, MN1 <> pg 38 (how is earth used in this sutta) He Perceive Earth as Earth <> Ken O From: Nina van Gorkom >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >Sent: Tuesday, 13 September 2011 10:29 PM >Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: atta-nu-di.t.thi, was: samatha. > > > >Dear Ken O and Han, >Again, some thoughts. >Op 12-sep-2011, om 20:18 heeft Ken O het volgende geschreven: > >> lets talk about attanuditthi. I find it disturbing when the >> interpretation of attanuditthi is more than sakkayditthi. This is >> not in accordance to the text positions which put both of them as >> the same meaning. >------ >N: I remember that atta-nu-di.t.thi is wider than sakkaaya-di.t.thi >that refers specifically to the five khandhas of a 'person', >personality belief. Atta-nu-di.t.thi refers also to things outside. >You want texts, I know. I have seen atta-nu-di.t.thi in a commentary >but can't remember where. > >------ > >Nina. > > > > > > > #117407 From: Ken O Date: Thu Sep 15, 2011 2:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: atta-nu-di.t.thi, was: samatha. ashkenn2k Dear Han I need from the texts and not from interpretations of Ledi Sayadaw's. Even Path of Discrimination puts attanuddithi the same as sakkayaditthi. It also the same in Vibhanga or Dispeller of Delusion if I am not wrong. The sutta also put them the same. because the meaning of sakkayaditthi is not properly understood. The commentary to the All Roots of Existence, explain it very clearly on sakkayaditthi which comprises of the four types of earth which include earth as a composite like a bowl is also sakkayaditthi. Ken O From: han tun >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >Sent: Wednesday, 14 September 2011 10:30 AM >Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: atta-nu-di.t.thi, was: samatha. > > > >Dear Nina and Ken O, > >I had strongly opposed the idea that atta-nu-di.t.thi is wider than sakkaaya-di.t.thi when I first visited the discussions at the Ajahn Sujin Foundation. > >Later on, I found Ledi Sayadaw's treatise on Attaa and Anattaa in Part Three of Sammaadi.t.thi Diipanii as follows. >http://www.dhammaweb.net/html/view.php?id=4 > >Quote: [Atta and Anatta. > >Atta means 'self, ego, personality, soul-essence'; anatta means 'non-ego, not-self, absence of soul-essence'. The word anatta is used to convey the following three interpretations: > >1.asarakatthena-anatta--on account of being without essence or substance it is called anatta. >2.asamikatthena-anatta--on account of not having any owner or overlord it is called anatta. >3.avasavattanatthena-anatta-on account of its not yielding to another's will it is called anatta. > >Asarakatthena-anatta: the five constituent groups of existence delusively taken as atta. > >Of the three interpretations as shown in the text, I shall first expound the phrase 'asarakatthena-anatta'. > >Atta in the ordinary sense means essence or substance. Those beings who are not able to discern the momentary arisings and dissolutions of the physical and mental phenomena of the five constituent groups of existence and thus are not able to realise the characteristic of anicca (impermanence) maintain: 'The corporeality-group is the essence and therefore atta of beings; the sensation-group is the essence and therefore atta of beings; the perception-group is the essence and therefore atta of beings', the formation-group is the essence and therefore atta of beings; and the consciousness-group is the essence and therefore atta of beings.' This kind of view is known as soul-belief. > >Example of a bowl. > >I shall explain the above with an example. There are such things as wooden bowl, earthen bowl, brass bowl, silver bowl and gold bowl. A bowl made of wood has wood as its substance and is called a wooden bowl; a bowl made of earth has earth as its substance and is called an earthen bowl; a bowl made of iron has iron as its substance and is called an iron bowl; a bowl made of silver has silver as its substance and is called a silver bowl, and a bowl made of gold has gold as its substance and is called a gold bowl. > >Here, the world 'bowl' is merely the name by which is indicated a certain pictorial idea (santhana-pannatti), and this conventional term of 'bowl' possesses no essence or substance as an ultimate thing. Only the conventional terms of 'wood', 'earth', 'gold', etc., possess essence or substance (at least for this purpose). By simply hearing the sound 'bowl' one is able to understand the pictorial idea of a bowl and not its essence or substance. Only when one hears the conventional terms of 'wood', 'gold', etc., is one able to know the essence or substance of that bowl. > >A question may be asked: 'Why is "wood", "earth" or "gold" the essence or substance of the bowl?' > >I shall explain it clearly. In calling a thing 'wooden', 'wood' is the essence or substance of the pictorial idea of the bowl, and is therefore its atta. Without the substance of wood, the conventional term of 'bowl' cannot exist. Only a piece of wood that is made in the form of a bowl is called a wooden bowl. This wooden bowl will last as long as the wood is durable, and it will be valuable according to the class of wood. If it is a bowl made of teak wood, it will he valuable according to the price of teak. If it be made of aloes wood, it will be valuable according to the price of that wood. If it be made of sandalwood, it will be valuable according to the value of sandalwood. As regards the utility, too, a teak bowl will be used where it is fit to be used, and so too a bowl made of aloes wood or sandalwood. As regards the worthiness, too, the teak bowl and the sandalwood bowl will be worthy according to their standards. Thus when we say 'the wooden >bowl', the wood is the essence or substance of the bowl. The same principle follows in the cases of earthen bowl, gold bowl, etc. > >Analogy. > >Similarly a being is composed of the corporeality group and has this group as his essence or substance. What has this group as its essence or substance is called a being. > >A being is composed of the sensation-group and has this group as his essence or substance. What has this group as its essence or substance is called a being. > >A being is composed of the perception-group and has this group as his essence or substance. What has this group as its essence or substance is called a being. > >A being is composed of the mental-formation-group and has this group as his essence or substance. What has this group as its essence or substance is called a being. > >A being is composed of the consciousness-group and has this group as his essence or substance. What has this group as its essence or substance is called a being. > >In brief, every being is composed of the five constituent groups of existence and has them as his essence or substance. > >In this analogy, a bowl resembles a being and the substance of a bowl resembles the five constituent groups of existence which form the essence or substance of a being.] End Quote. > >Han: Further down in the Diipanii, there is another passage: > >Quote: [When the piece of wood which we conventionally call 'bowl' is affected by cold or warm wind, or struck by a stick, or pierced by a spear, or thrown upward and downward, the physical phenomena contained in that wood will change, yielding place to newer ones, and having arisen will also disappear then and there. Some of the phenomena decay, some dissolve and some arise again by conditions, some increase, some decrease and some remain normal. > >When they have realised in this manner they clearly understand that there is no wood apart from these physical elements. Now, when the wood itself does not exist in the ultimate sense, how can the wood possess the essence or substance of the bowl? How can momentarily arising-and- passing-away corporeal groups become the essence or substance of the wood? Thus they penetrate to the truth. > >Here, the conventional term of 'bowl' resembles the conventional term of 'being'. The corporeal groups contained in the wood resemble the five constituent groups of existence. This is the analogy. > >(As regards the mentality-group, it has no form. When an object contacts any part of the body, then consciousness arises and disappears immediately. The bhavangasota ('the stream of subconsciousness') incessantly arises and vanishes in the heart. The stream of subconsciousness can be broken only when a new object comes into contact with it.)] End Quote. > >Han: Thus, by calling the bowl a bowl is attaa-di.t.thi in the sense explained above. Thus, atta-nu-di.t.thi is wider than Sakaaya-di.t.thi. > >But if you think the above treatise is not relevant to the statement that "atta-nu-di.t.thi is wider than sakkaaya-di.t.thi", then I have nothing more to say. > >with metta and respect, >Han > >--- On Tue, 9/13/11, Nina van Gorkom wrote: >From: Nina van Gorkom >Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: atta-nu-di.t.thi, was: samatha. >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >Date: Tuesday, September 13, 2011, 9:29 PM > >Dear Ken O and Han, >Again, some thoughts. >Op 12-sep-2011, om 20:18 heeft Ken O het volgende geschreven: > >> lets talk about attanuditthi. I find it disturbing when the >> interpretation of attanuditthi is more than sakkayditthi. This is >> not in accordance to the text positions which put both of them as >> the same meaning. >------ >N: I remember that atta-nu-di.t.thi is wider than sakkaaya-di.t.thi >that refers specifically to the five khandhas of a 'person', >personality belief. Atta-nu-di.t.thi refers also to things outside. >You want texts, I know. I have seen atta-nu-di.t.thi in a commentary >but can't remember where. > >------ > >Nina. > > > > > > > #117408 From: Ken O Date: Thu Sep 15, 2011 3:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: samatha. was: Khandhas and samsara ashkenn2k Dear Sarah Mind contact which the contact can have concepts as an object. If there is no mind contact with a concept, then we would not known the name of Buddha :-). How to learn dhamma then. the above is the first explanation, the second, it could be talking in the highest sense, paramatha dhamma. the 3rd meaning, it could mean purification of view level the 4th meaning, it could also be supramundane level Ken O From: sarah >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >Sent: Wednesday, 14 September 2011 3:25 PM >Subject: [dsg] Re: samatha. was: Khandhas and samsara > > > >Dear Ken O, > >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > >> KO: Now remember when Buddha said the world, you forget to say that mind objects >> can be a concept. >.... >S: Are you referring to the following sutta in SN 1V, "The World"? > >"Then a certain monk came to see the Exalted One.... Seated at one >side that monk said to the Exalted One: 'The world! The world! is >the saying, lord. How far, lord, does this saying go?' > >" 'It crumbles away, monks. Therefore it is called the world' >[Note 14]. What crumbles away? The eye... objects... >eye-consciousness... eye-contact... that pleasant or unpleasant or >neutral feeling that arises owing to eye-contact... tongue... body... >mind... It crumbles away, monks. Therefore it is called the >world'." > >Doesn't this refer to impermanent dhammas, reminding us that there is no 'whole', no computer, no body, no thing as we're used to thinking? > >This sutta is found in Sa.laayatanavagga. These suttas are about the ayatanas. The ayatanas are realities, paramattha dhammas, not concepts, surely? >... >>KO:In the commentary of MN1, when the description of earth, it >> is by four description. There is conventional earth, objective earth, - are >> all concepts. And it is due to the conceit, ditthi and craving that causes the >> perversion of preception, the object itself is not the cause of the perversion >> though they could have object conditioning effect. >.... >S: when there is right understanding there is just hardness, pathavi dhatu. > >" 'For what reason does the worldling conceive earth/ Why does he conceive and >delight in earth?' the answer is: 'Because it has not been fully understood by >him,' i.e. because he has not fully understood the base, therefore (he does >so)." (comy to Mulapariyaya Sutta, Bodhi transl, p39f) > >And again from the comy to Muulapariyaaya Sutta: > >"For whatsoever instance among these four kinds of earth, the worldling >perceives as earth, he perceives (with the notion) "it is earth"; he >perecives as a segment of earth (pathaviibhaagena): he percieves through a >perversion of perception, rising upon the conventional expression (S i.e >concept) and thinking "it is earth" (loka vohaara'm gahetvaasa~n~naa >vipallaasenasa~njaanaati). Or, without releasing such a segment of earth, >he perceives it as a being (satta) or as belonging to a being. Why does >he perceive it in this way? This should not be asked, for the worldling >is like a madman. he seizes upon anything he can in whatever way he can. >Or else, the reason is that he has no regard for the ariyans, etc; or, as >the Exalted One will say later on, "because it has not been fully >understood by him". > >Again, Sub Cy "The purport is: all dhammas beginning with earth (pathavi) which >function as the bases for conceiving (ma~n~nanaavatthu)." > >In other words, there is only pathavii dhatu (earth element) experienced through the body-sense, only elements which are ever directly known through insight, but there is (wrong) conceiving about all kinds of earth and concept. Only the direct understanding of the realities lead to the ariyan knowledge. > >Metta > >Sarah >===== > > > > > #117409 From: Ken O Date: Thu Sep 15, 2011 3:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: samatha. was: Khandhas and samsara ashkenn2k Dear Sarah the text is clear, there are two ways, by elements or by body parts. We cannot just say because we understand the text in this way, so we think it is just elements. But the text did not restrict to one way, this means we are not being truthful to the text. No offense meant, but we must respect the texts so that it could remain intact and others have confidence in it. As long as there is understanding of anatta, it does not matter the objects of the mind. Ken O > >Dear Ken O, > >It's not just a matter of whether or not the commentaries or sub-commentaries are read, it's a matter of the understanding of the meaning of what is said: > >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > >>KO: One should see commentary to Satipatthana as the authentic and authority of >> what Buddha said. These few passages are also echoed in the Dispeller of >> Delusion under the topic Classification of the four foundations of Mindfullness. >> >> <> and small members of the body, or of a man, or of a woman, apart from such >> things like the hair of the head and the hair of the body. >> >> There can be nothing apart from the qualities of primary and derived >> materiality, in a body. >.... >S: In other words, as some of us understand the commentaries, there are in fact only primary and derived rupas which are taken for the body, for a man, for a woman, for hair and so on. > >Through the body-sense, only hardness/softness (pathavi dhatu), temperature (tejo dhatu) and motion (vayo dhatu) are ever experienced. > >It is the understanding of the truth about what is directly experienced - mere elements - which is the understanding indicated throughout the sutta. The purpose is to lead to detachment from the idea of 'things' and 'people'. > >As Nina has suggested, we just read and share what we've learnt with our friends here according to our understanding with goodwill. > >Metta > >Sarah >====== >. > > > > #117410 From: Ken O Date: Thu Sep 15, 2011 3:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) ashkenn2k Dear Rob K one do not need to attain the fourth jhanas (must qualify here with development of panna) in order to use it as a basis of insight, even access level before one reach 1st jhana, can be a basis of insight. Ken O > > >Hi Jon. > >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > >> > Are you telling me that when the Buddha directly defines the fourth jhana as "purity of equanimity and mindfulness" that you think there is room to say that this is not the case? It seems that you are dismissing what the Buddha clearly says here in favor of a very different preferred interpretation. >> > =============== >> >> J: I'm saying that if 'mindfulness' here is a reference to the mindfulness of the Satipatthana Sutta, then what is being described is the attainment of the 4th jhana by a monk who is also developing insight, and not the attainment of the 4th jhana alone. > >I think this is a very intriguing conversation, and I will say more later when I have time, but I wanted to sort of agree with you on this comment above, in a way: I do think that what Buddha is talking about here is the development of mindfulness along with jhana, and that the two are developed together in the Buddhist method. > >I think this supports the idea that the Buddha's jhanas are not "the old fashioned" Hindu jhanas, and that they are meant to be developed in conjunction with mindfulness from the beginning. If that is the case, that either in tandem or by systematic alteration, deeper stages of insight are reached through suppression of the defilements followed by mindful investigation of the characteristics of the subtle dhammas attendant upon the jhanas, and that by the reaching of the 4th jhana the deep suppression of defilements, achievement of equanimity and fulfillment of satipatthana have been reached together, leading to a most extraordinary state of satipatthana within deep equanimity and unity of mind. This state would be the perfect launching point for the purified cittas, rich in panna, that would then go through the final path factors and realize nibbana. > >If the above is the case, then the words of the Buddha can be taken quite literally and the details can be filled in according to that order of the practice. > >Best, >Robert E. > >= = = = = = = = #117412 From: A T Date: Thu Sep 15, 2011 4:44 am Subject: Re: Samatha and Vipassanaa, was: Not Who, but What? truth_aerator Dear Phil, all, >Ph: I think this is well put. But what if the "good" actions are >dine >with cittas rooted in lobha, with attachment, therefore not >kusala >technically? >===================================================== Any good action is kusala, the motivation for it can be akusala, and any wrong view that is present is akusala. The kusala part is only kusala. But one doesn't need to have wrong motivation and one doesn't need to have any Atta View when doing it. Action is one, view about it is another. One can do any good action with or without wrong metaphysical views. Views are extra that do not have to be there. Same with meditation. One should do it, but do it without any metaphysical wrong view. Do it because it is kusala and leads to happiness. IMHO, With metta, Alex #117413 From: Ken O Date: Thu Sep 15, 2011 4:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: samatha. was: Khandhas and samsara ashkenn2k Dear Sarah your reference to the commnetary to MN 1 S: Again, Sub Cy "The purport is: all dhammas beginning with earth (pathavi) which function as the bases for conceiving (ma~n~nanaavatthu)." In other words, there is only pathavii dhatu (earth element) experienced through the body-sense, only elements which are ever directly known through insight, but there is (wrong) conceiving about all kinds of earth and concept. Only the direct understanding of the realities lead to the ariyan knowledge." KO: What you said had just confirm that misconceiving is the cause of our suffering and not because it is concept that cause the misconceiving. The sub-commentary explains the reasons for cause of misconceivings. Direct understanding as in purification of view level, before that it is just conventional reality. It can be both concepts or nama and rupa, even satipatthana comprises of both. Saitpatthana is not solely nama and rupa. Also in the SN Book IV, Samiddhi "Where there is the eye,... the mind, where there are mental phenoma, mind consciousness, things to be cognized by mind-consciousness, there the world exists or the description of the world." The sutta you describe is about impermance and this is supported by the commentary of that sutta. So the world as in Samiddhi, things to be cognized by mind consciousness also are impermanent. It did not solely said, only paramatha dhammas. On the contrary, it tell us those things that are cognized by the mind consciousness so that includes concept which could mean concept itself are also impermanet Ken O From: Ken O >To: "dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com" >Sent: Thursday, 15 September 2011 1:05 AM >Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: samatha. was: Khandhas and samsara > > >Dear Sarah > >Mind contact which the contact can have concepts as an object. If there is no mind contact with a concept, then we would not known the name of Buddha :-). How to learn dhamma then. > >the above is the first explanation, the second, it could be talking in the highest sense, paramatha dhamma. > >the 3rd meaning, it could mean purification of view level > >the 4th meaning, it could also be supramundane level > > >Ken O > > > > >From: sarah >>To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >>Sent: Wednesday, 14 September 2011 3:25 PM >>Subject: [dsg] Re: samatha. was: Khandhas and samsara >> >> >> >>Dear Ken O, >> >>--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: >> >>> KO: Now remember when Buddha said the world, you forget to say that mind objects >>> can be a concept. >>.... >>S: Are you referring to the following sutta in SN 1V, "The World"? >> >>"Then a certain monk came to see the Exalted One.... Seated at one >>side that monk said to the Exalted One: 'The world! The world! is >>the saying, lord. How far, lord, does this saying go?' >> >>" 'It crumbles away, monks. Therefore it is called the world' >>[Note 14]. What crumbles away? The eye... objects... >>eye-consciousness... eye-contact... that pleasant or unpleasant or >>neutral feeling that arises owing to eye-contact... tongue... body... >>mind... It crumbles away, monks. Therefore it is called the >>world'." >> >>Doesn't this refer to impermanent dhammas, reminding us that there is no 'whole', no computer, no body, no thing as we're used to thinking? >> >>This sutta is found in Sa.laayatanavagga. These suttas are about the ayatanas. The ayatanas are realities, paramattha dhammas, not concepts, surely? >>... >>>KO:In the commentary of MN1, when the description of earth, it >>> is by four description. There is conventional earth, objective earth, - are >>> all concepts. And it is due to the conceit, ditthi and craving that causes the >>> perversion of preception, the object itself is not the cause of the perversion >>> though they could have object conditioning effect. >>.... >>S: when there is right understanding there is just hardness, pathavi dhatu. >> >>" 'For what reason does the worldling conceive earth/ Why does he conceive and >>delight in earth?' the answer is: 'Because it has not been fully understood by >>him,' i.e. because he has not fully understood the base, therefore (he does >>so)." (comy to Mulapariyaya Sutta, Bodhi transl, p39f) >> >>And again from the comy to Muulapariyaaya Sutta: >> >>"For whatsoever instance among these four kinds of earth, the worldling >>perceives as earth, he perceives (with the notion) "it is earth"; he >>perecives as a segment of earth (pathaviibhaagena): he percieves through a >>perversion of perception, rising upon the conventional expression (S i.e >>concept) and thinking "it is earth" (loka vohaara'm gahetvaasa~n~naa >>vipallaasenasa~njaanaati). Or, without releasing such a segment of earth, >>he perceives it as a being (satta) or as belonging to a being. Why does >>he perceive it in this way? This should not be asked, for the worldling >>is like a madman. he seizes upon anything he can in whatever way he can. >>Or else, the reason is that he has no regard for the ariyans, etc; or, as >>the Exalted One will say later on, "because it has not been fully >>understood by him". >> >>Again, Sub Cy "The purport is: all dhammas beginning with earth (pathavi) which >>function as the bases for conceiving (ma~n~nanaavatthu)." >> >>In other words, there is only pathavii dhatu (earth element) experienced through the body-sense, only elements which are ever directly known through insight, but there is (wrong) conceiving about all kinds of earth and concept. Only the direct understanding of the realities lead to the ariyan knowledge. >> >>Metta >> >>Sarah >>===== >> >> >> >> >> > > #117414 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Sep 15, 2011 5:15 am Subject: Re: Samatha and Vipassanaa, was: Not Who, but What? truth_aerator Hello Robert E, all, >RE:That is a very interesting idea - I haven't heard that before said >that directly, but it makes sense, and if it is correct it would make >a different kind of sense out of the role of jhana to not only >suppress the hindrances, but to weaken them substantially at the same >time. > >Do you happen to have any quotes or links for any discussion of this >understanding of the weakening of the hindrances, whether through >jhana or other means? >=============================================================== (1) "Just as the great ocean gradually shelves, slopes, and inclines, and there is no sudden precipice, so also in this Dhamma and Discipline there is a gradual training, a gradual course, a gradual progression, and there is no sudden penetration to final knowledge. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.5.05.irel.html 239. One by one, little by little, moment by moment, a wise man should remove his own impurities, as a smith removes his dross from silver. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.18.budd.html Also an interesting sutta: "Just as if a person, catching six animals of different ranges, of different habitats, were to bind them with a strong rope. Catching a snake, he would bind it with a strong rope. Catching a crocodile... a bird... a dog... a hyena... a monkey, he would bind it with a strong rope. Binding them all with a strong rope, he would tether them to a strong post or stake.[1] "Then those six animals, of different ranges, of different habitats, would each pull toward its own range & habitat. The snake would pull, thinking, 'I'll go into the anthill.' The crocodile would pull, thinking, 'I'll go into the water.' The bird would pull, thinking, 'I'll fly up into the air.' The dog would pull, thinking, 'I'll go into the village.' The hyena would pull, thinking, 'I'll go into the charnel ground.' The monkey would pull, thinking, 'I'll go into the forest.' And when these six animals became internally exhausted, they would stand, sit, or lie down right there next to the post or stake. In the same way, when a monk whose mindfulness immersed in the body is developed & pursued, the eye does not pull toward pleasing forms, and unpleasing forms are not repellent. The ear does not pull toward pleasing sounds... The nose does not pull toward pleasing aromas... The tongue does not pull toward pleasing flavors... The body does not pull toward pleasing tactile sensations... The intellect does not pull toward pleasing ideas, and unpleasing ideas are not repellent. This, monks, is restraint. "Thus you should train yourselves: 'We will develop mindfulness immersed in the body. We will pursue it, hand it the reins and take it as a basis, give it a grounding. We will steady it, consolidate it, and set about it properly.' That's how you should train yourselves." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.206.than.html Six animals are simile for craving toward 6 sense objects. Their gradual weakening is metaphorically said as "And when these six animals became internally exhausted, they would stand, sit, or lie down right there next to the post or stake. " First they pull, then become internally exhausted, then stand, then sit, then lie down - which shows them becoming more and more exhausted. And as you know, the fetters such as lust and anger are not removed in one go. Furthermore each fetter is of different strengths. Some people are more lustful, some less. It is reasonable to assume that before a fetter is 100% removed, it is gradually weakened until it is totally and finally removed. With best wishes, Alex #117415 From: han tun Date: Thu Sep 15, 2011 7:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: atta-nu-di.t.thi, was: samatha. hantun1 Dear Ken O, I have no text reference. I had already written that if you think Ledi Sayadaw's treatise is not relevant I have nothing more to say. with metta and respect, Han --- On Wed, 9/14/11, Ken O wrote: Dear Han I need from the texts and not from interpretations of Ledi Sayadaw's. Even Path of Discrimination puts attanuddithi the same as sakkayaditthi. It also the same in Vibhanga or Dispeller of Delusion if I am not wrong. The sutta also put them the same. because the meaning of sakkayaditthi is not properly understood. The commentary to the All Roots of Existence, explain it very clearly on sakkayaditthi which comprises of the four types of earth which include earth as a composite like a bowl is also sakkayaditthi. Ken O From: han tun >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >Sent: Wednesday, 14 September 2011 10:30 AM >Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: atta-nu-di.t.thi, was: samatha. > > > >Dear Nina and Ken O, > >I had strongly opposed the idea that atta-nu-di.t.thi is wider than sakkaaya-di.t.thi when I first visited the discussions at the Ajahn Sujin Foundation. > >Later on, I found Ledi Sayadaw's treatise on Attaa and Anattaa in Part Three of Sammaadi.t.thi Diipanii as follows. >http://www.dhammaweb.net/html/view.php?id=4 > >Quote: [Atta and Anatta. > >Atta means 'self, ego, personality, soul-essence'; anatta means 'non-ego, not-self, absence of soul-essence'. The word anatta is used to convey the following three interpretations: > >1.asarakatthena-anatta--on account of being without essence or substance it is called anatta. >2.asamikatthena-anatta--on account of not having any owner or overlord it is called anatta. >3.avasavattanatthena-anatta-on account of its not yielding to another's will it is called anatta. > >Asarakatthena-anatta: the five constituent groups of existence delusively taken as atta. > >Of the three interpretations as shown in the text, I shall first expound the phrase 'asarakatthena-anatta'. > >Atta in the ordinary sense means essence or substance. Those beings who are not able to discern the momentary arisings and dissolutions of the physical and mental phenomena of the five constituent groups of existence and thus are not able to realise the characteristic of anicca (impermanence) maintain: 'The corporeality-group is the essence and therefore atta of beings; the sensation-group is the essence and therefore atta of beings; the perception-group is the essence and therefore atta of beings', the formation-group is the essence and therefore atta of beings; and the consciousness-group is the essence and therefore atta of beings.' This kind of view is known as soul-belief. > >Example of a bowl. > >I shall explain the above with an example. There are such things as wooden bowl, earthen bowl, brass bowl, silver bowl and gold bowl. A bowl made of wood has wood as its substance and is called a wooden bowl; a bowl made of earth has earth as its substance and is called an earthen bowl; a bowl made of iron has iron as its substance and is called an iron bowl; a bowl made of silver has silver as its substance and is called a silver bowl, and a bowl made of gold has gold as its substance and is called a gold bowl. > >Here, the world 'bowl' is merely the name by which is indicated a certain pictorial idea (santhana-pannatti), and this conventional term of 'bowl' possesses no essence or substance as an ultimate thing. Only the conventional terms of 'wood', 'earth', 'gold', etc., possess essence or substance (at least for this purpose). By simply hearing the sound 'bowl' one is able to understand the pictorial idea of a bowl and not its essence or substance. Only when one hears the conventional terms of 'wood', 'gold', etc., is one able to know the essence or substance of that bowl. > >A question may be asked: 'Why is "wood", "earth" or "gold" the essence or substance of the bowl?' > >I shall explain it clearly. In calling a thing 'wooden', 'wood' is the essence or substance of the pictorial idea of the bowl, and is therefore its atta. Without the substance of wood, the conventional term of 'bowl' cannot exist. Only a piece of wood that is made in the form of a bowl is called a wooden bowl. This wooden bowl will last as long as the wood is durable, and it will be valuable according to the class of wood. If it is a bowl made of teak wood, it will he valuable according to the price of teak. If it be made of aloes wood, it will be valuable according to the price of that wood. If it be made of sandalwood, it will be valuable according to the value of sandalwood. As regards the utility, too, a teak bowl will be used where it is fit to be used, and so too a bowl made of aloes wood or sandalwood. As regards the worthiness, too, the teak bowl and the sandalwood bowl will be worthy according to their standards. Thus when we say 'the wooden >bowl', the wood is the essence or substance of the bowl. The same principle follows in the cases of earthen bowl, gold bowl, etc. > >Analogy. > >Similarly a being is composed of the corporeality group and has this group as his essence or substance. What has this group as its essence or substance is called a being. > >A being is composed of the sensation-group and has this group as his essence or substance. What has this group as its essence or substance is called a being. > >A being is composed of the perception-group and has this group as his essence or substance. What has this group as its essence or substance is called a being. > >A being is composed of the mental-formation-group and has this group as his essence or substance. What has this group as its essence or substance is called a being. > >A being is composed of the consciousness-group and has this group as his essence or substance. What has this group as its essence or substance is called a being. > >In brief, every being is composed of the five constituent groups of existence and has them as his essence or substance. > >In this analogy, a bowl resembles a being and the substance of a bowl resembles the five constituent groups of existence which form the essence or substance of a being.] End Quote. > >Han: Further down in the Diipanii, there is another passage: > >Quote: [When the piece of wood which we conventionally call 'bowl' is affected by cold or warm wind, or struck by a stick, or pierced by a spear, or thrown upward and downward, the physical phenomena contained in that wood will change, yielding place to newer ones, and having arisen will also disappear then and there. Some of the phenomena decay, some dissolve and some arise again by conditions, some increase, some decrease and some remain normal. > >When they have realised in this manner they clearly understand that there is no wood apart from these physical elements. Now, when the wood itself does not exist in the ultimate sense, how can the wood possess the essence or substance of the bowl? How can momentarily arising-and- passing-away corporeal groups become the essence or substance of the wood? Thus they penetrate to the truth. > >Here, the conventional term of 'bowl' resembles the conventional term of 'being'. The corporeal groups contained in the wood resemble the five constituent groups of existence. This is the analogy. > >(As regards the mentality-group, it has no form. When an object contacts any part of the body, then consciousness arises and disappears immediately. The bhavangasota ('the stream of subconsciousness') incessantly arises and vanishes in the heart. The stream of subconsciousness can be broken only when a new object comes into contact with it.)] End Quote. > >Han: Thus, by calling the bowl a bowl is attaa-di.t.thi in the sense explained above. Thus, atta-nu-di.t.thi is wider than Sakaaya-di.t.thi. > >But if you think the above treatise is not relevant to the statement that "atta-nu-di.t.thi is wider than sakkaaya-di.t.thi", then I have nothing more to say. > >with metta and respect, >Han > >--- On Tue, 9/13/11, Nina van Gorkom wrote: >From: Nina van Gorkom >Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: atta-nu-di.t.thi, was: samatha. >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >Date: Tuesday, September 13, 2011, 9:29 PM > >Dear Ken O and Han, >Again, some thoughts. >Op 12-sep-2011, om 20:18 heeft Ken O het volgende geschreven: > >> lets talk about attanuditthi. I find it disturbing when the >> interpretation of attanuditthi is more than sakkayditthi. This is >> not in accordance to the text positions which put both of them as >> the same meaning. >------ >N: I remember that atta-nu-di.t.thi is wider than sakkaaya-di.t.thi >that refers specifically to the five khandhas of a 'person', >personality belief. Atta-nu-di.t.thi refers also to things outside. >You want texts, I know. I have seen atta-nu-di.t.thi in a commentary >but can't remember where. > >------ > >Nina. > > > > > > > #117416 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Thu Sep 15, 2011 6:27 am Subject: Alert or Agitated? bhikkhu5 Friends: What to Train when Mind is High and Alert? The Blessed Buddha once explained: On any occasion, Bhikkhus, when mind is excited and high, then it is time for training the Tranquillity Link to Awakening, the Concentration Link to Awakening, and the Equanimity Link to Awakening. Why is it so? Because when the mind is excited and high, Bhikkhus, then it is easy to calm it down with exactly those mental states... Imagine, Bhikkhus, a man wants to extinguish a great fire. If he throws wet grass, wet cow-dung, wet timber into it, sprays it with water, and scatters soil over it, would he be able to extinguish that great bonfire? Yes, Venerable Sir. Even so here, Bhikkhus, on any occasion, when the mind is excited and high, then it is convenient to train & develop the Tranquillity Link to Awakening, the Concentration Link to Awakening, & the Equanimity Link to Awakening. Why is it so? Because when the mind is excited and high, Bhikkhus, then it is easy to calm it down & still it with the qualities of exactly those states! Awareness , however, Bhikkhus, I tell you, is always useful & good to train! <...> Sources (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikya. Book [V: 114-5] 46: Links. 53: Fire.... Agitation and Irritation can be converted into Advantageous Alertness! Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samhita _/\_ * <...> #117417 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Sep 15, 2011 12:49 pm Subject: Re: Abhidhamma in practice: mindfulness of vipaka to prevent kamma truth_aerator Hi Phil, all, >P:I am reading something called Abhidhamma in Practice I found at >ATI. I immediately found points that feel different from the way I >have learned Abhidhamma from Nina's books and SPD, and in discussion >here. >====================================================== As I was considering. Some people may know 100x the amount of information that is required for arhatship and yet are not stream enterers. I wonder why? Often we talk about all these complex things *as if* we have perceived and directly realized them. I think it is important to remember the difference between personal knowledge and the one that one has simply read in the books. The latter one is only a borrowed one and is no guarantee of progress. Sometimes I wonder if it is a hindrance. The more material one feeds oneself, the more restless one could become. No wonder I think so much when I try to calm down. I've read so much, that no wonder where the mind got the tendency to think so much. Thinking about something is not the same as having attained it. Sometimes it can even be an obstacle. There is a danger that over consuming information can infect one with more misunderstandings and hinder the path. Of course some may blame lack of accumulations for meditation, peace or whatever. But it could be actually wrong recent accumulations. Not only the belly, but the mind can accumulated food, in this case intellectual food. There is an interesting commenterial story about a very learned monk who was extremely learned, but didn't progress on the path. Please note that solution was NOT more study, it was not "wait until you accumulate more". It was practice, and very basic. It didn't use 99.999% of what the Venerable theoretically new. http://www.ajahnchah.org/book/Tuccho_Pothila_Venerable.php Something similar seemed to be with Venerable Ananda. He was only a stream-enterer and knew as much or even more Dhamma than most learned Arhats. He became Arhant only when the Buddha has died and Ananda could now practice (he didn't have much time to practice when he was Buddha's personal attendant). I have strong suspicion that "hitting the books" is like trying to satisfy hunger by reading the menu. The theoretic knowledge that we learn is just a bunch of words and their combination. Words at best only point to something, they are never the signified. Word "sweetness" is not the same as actually tasting sweetness when sugar touches the tongue. To say that "I know anatta because of such and such reasons" is only words. The real knowledge and wisdom must come through actions. We can also talk and debate in full seriousness about trillions of cittas arising and falling in a split second. But have we actually verified it or simply repeating someone else's words without seeing what we are talking about? Isn't it like arguing about "how many angels can fit on a needle tip"? Both are a matter of faith until one has direct perception and verification. We need to remember that. We also need to be careful not trying to out-smart the Teacher. If Buddha considered something important and crucial, then He would hammer it over and over again. I don't remember Him talking about "when I say you should do this, what I've really meant was that you should NOT do it. Interpret what I say to mean what I haven't said." As more Buddhist philosophy has developed and monks learned more and more, the attainments seem to have go down. While "correlation is not causation", it does give some food for thought.... IMHO, With best wishes, Alex #117418 From: "philip" Date: Thu Sep 15, 2011 1:42 pm Subject: The way out.... philofillet Hi all Lots of posts received, thanks, can't write today. Just want to get down some thoughts I've been having the last couple of days since I killed those cockroaches and wrote to Lukas about the night full of insects crawling and flying here and there, and about all of us having addictions, though they are not always as easily seen or obviously ugly as being addicted to opiates, or pornogrpahy, or whatever. The other day I saw an amazing movie, highly recommended. "Let the Right One In", a Swedish movie that is marketed as a horror movie, because it features vampires, but is actually an achingly human drama. It is not the kind of movie full of startling leaps and screams, the situation is gruesome, but it is worth seeing as I find it really captures the suffering implicit in samsara. THe little girl is trapped in the cycle of suffering in her craving for blood, the adults in the movie are shown as trapped in the cycle of suffering in their craving for alcohol, the bullies at school are trapped in their behaviour, there is just so much of that in the movie. A few of the posts I have to respond to, or have written recently, are about the value of conventionally wholesome kusala deeds. I have often written that even if there is not understanding accompanying, they are still valuable, they help to build a shelter from within which understanding can develop. Not feeling so sure about that now. I strongly feel (today at least) that only moments of awareness of realities, awareness that fosters understanding of anatta, can help us get out of this trap. I understand (finally) why Nina often writes that courage is necessary in a way of practice that does not rely on intentional actions, but instead must depend on rare moments of awareness and understanding that arise due to conditions, thanks to listening to and reflecting on the teaching. This is courageous because there is such a strong impetus to seek a faster way out. It's like being in a burning house, and seeing a door gaping wide open in front of you, how eager we are to dash to the door. But if the floor between us and the door isn't solid, we will not get out that door. It takes courage to stand there with the flames all around and wait for moments of understanding that show a better way out. OK, that's not a perfect metaphor. But those moments of understanding, those small islands in the sea of concepts, they really have great value. Only understanding can lead out. I don't believe (today at least) that doing good deeds without understanding of the dhammas that condition them (dhammas which are likely to be rooted in lobha if the good deeds are related to trying to increase kusala) does anything but set us more firmly in the spinning cycle of samsara. I might be wrong and I might write something different tomorrow. We are all addicted to sense objects, so many layers of craving and clinging and ignorance. Is the way out sitting in meditation with a firm determination to see through to a liberating truth? Maybe. But if we are sitting with lobha, it is much, much too easy to say "the lobha will be seen as lobha" because all the pleasure involved in meditation will blind us to really seeing all the lobha involved, I think. But I may be wrong. I think the way out is understanding now, of whatever is arising through whichever door, whatever we are doing, wherever. We have been sucking at sense objects for too long, children loving candies, vampires loving pleasant mental and body feeling. Let's start understaning now! And we need courage to understand that the sucking isn't going to disappear any day soon, it is deeply accumulamated. Nothing new written here. And I haven't really captured the sense of samvega I had earlier this morning. That is the nature of realities, they come and go... Metta, Phil p.s I have a lot of posts to respond to, so I'm looking at this post as a one-off, to capture my feeling (this is all about me!) not as a discussion starter, thanks. #117419 From: "Ken H" Date: Thu Sep 15, 2011 2:32 pm Subject: Re: samatha. was: Khandhas and samsara kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Sarah > > the text is clear, there are two ways, by elements or by body parts. We cannot just say because we understand the text in this way, so we think it is just elements. But the text did not restrict to one way, this means we are not being truthful to the text. No offense meant, but we must respect the texts so that it could remain intact and others have confidence in it. > > > As long as there is understanding of anatta, it does not matter the objects of the mind. > > > Ken O --------------- Hi Ken O, The body parts, if they exist at all, are permanent, not impermanent. And they are satisfactory, not unsatisfactory. (Ask anyone!) And of course, they are our selves, not their own selves. In ultimate truth and reality, however, there are no body parts. That's why satipatthana (right understanding of conditioned dhammas) is the only way out. Ken H #117420 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Sep 15, 2011 3:40 pm Subject: Re: Can actions rooted in lobha condition kusala? epsteinrob Hi Phil. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > > Hi Rob E > > Thanks again for your e-mail. Let me clip it down to a manageable chunk. ... (As for harsh speech, you are invariably cheerful, at least when posting, so don't worry about that. We know who we are, the harsh speakers...) Thanks, Phil, and no problem paring things down. I get pretty crazy dealing with the long posts myself, believe it or not... > > If we have the intention to be aware while doing kusala activities, then we can check that the mental state is wholesome as well. If the mental state is not wholesome, we can be aware of this and see into the nature of the akusala cittas. I think in this way there will be a connection between our inner spiritual development and taking care that we are doing wholesome outer actions. > > Questions. > > 1) In your experience, does an intention to be aware lead to actually being aware? I don't think it's 100% all the time, but yes, I think that intention, self-reminders, and returning to a habit of looking and seeing what is the internal state or the quality of external action, leads to more and more awareness. It's the same investigating anything. If you had a basement full of junk and you wanted to sort it out, and you went down there and sorted out a section every day, eventually you'd know what is down there, what is junk, and what is worth saving. You'd be more aware of what's down there, and you'd also be more aware in general from being in the habit of checking things out and sorting them out. > (Or are you talking only about intending to be aware during certain kusala activities?) I think that's an important subset of the above, but both are important. Maybe it's easier to pick "kusala activities" to make sure the internal state is kusala, and to "sort out" or "let go" of lobha or other defilements that show themselves. I think that's a pretty good habit - to say, 'well I am being generous but do I feel generous, or do I feel resentful while I am doing that?' Good to know! > I remember for years I intended to be fully aware during the day. I have given up, except for specific dangerous situations, such as cycling. Did I give up too soon? Hard to be aware all the time, but I discovered that after a while I developed a kind of "background awareness" that seems to always be somewhat mindful. I get distracted, but there is a sense of looking, being aware of being aware, if that is not too odd-sounding, and sort of being "present" to what is happening in the moment. And when I go off-track, I seem to get reminded that I'm being less aware. It's far from perfect, but yes, I think it can be developed over time, and there's no need to quit. Just take it easy and don't worry about being perfect. > 2) "If the mental state is not wholesome, we can be aware of this and see into the nature of akusala cittas." Do you include very common, hugely common forms of unwholesome (technically speaking) such as lobha that arises almost invariably in the wake of sense door objects, or are you talking about more nefarious forms of unwholesomeness? I think it's worth looking at both, though the obvious [feel covetous attraction to a married woman] is easier to notice. That at least is a good place to start, and then you can inquire into more subtle mental states, such as mild impatience or irritation hearing someone talk about how happy they are. :-) [Instead of sympathetic joy...] > 3) If I recall correctly Alex's post said that good actions accumulate and develop more good actions. Again, if we agree that there is lobha galore, can an action rooted in lobha condition more truly kusala actions? That's a really good question. I say optimistically "Yes," especially if you are being mindful of what is accompanying your actions. I feel [perhaps wrongly] that the intention to do kusala actions is "there" somewhere, even if there is also lobha, moha and dosa swirling all around it. Still you managed to do the kusala action and I don't think actions really get accomplished without some intention to do them. In terms of the Buddha's official take on it, there are kusala actions on the mental, verbal AND physical levels, so the physical kusala counts too. {NOT a popular opinion around here.} In any case, let's say you really do intend to be generous and so there is kusala in giving someone a gift - let's say it's charity - and at the same time attachment and self-view and some resentment are also arising at moments, does that wipe away the accumulation of the intention to be generous? I don't think it does. But it's good to be aware of all the dhammas that are arising around it. Keep doing good, keep being aware, keep encouraging kusala thoughts and feelings, and leaving space to be aware of akusala without making a big deal out of it and creating more proliferations, and I think that's going to head in the right direction. But it takes patience. Sort of parallel, here is a quote from Nina, [AIDL:] Lobha, attachment, leads to sorrow. If we really understand this, we will wish to eradicate lobha. My sense is that if you observe lobha in action, and are aware of how it feels, that understanding becomes more clear and you're more likely to "let it go" a bit at a time. > I guess I am back to where I was before. Unless I'm mistaken, you didn't mention lobha once in your response, so maybe we should establish if we agree that there is lobha galore. Yes, I think there's plenty of defilements around all the time, but I also have a lot of faith in the power of awareness, more specifically mindfulness, to sort out and release things as they come into awareness. I believe if you read the Buddha's words on satipatthana and anapanasati with this in mind, you can see a process at work that has awareness and intending of awareness at its foundation. Here's a selective quote from the Anapanasati Sutta to give you a sense of the pattern I see there: "Monks, I am content ... at heart with this practice. So arouse even more intense persistence for the attaining of the ... realization of the as-yet-unrealized." "Then the elder monks taught & instructed even more intensely." "In this community of monks there are monks who remain devoted to the development of the four frames of reference ... the four right exertions ... the four bases of power ... the five faculties ... the five strengths ... the seven factors of awakening ... the noble eightfold path... "...there are monks who remain devoted to the development of good will ... compassion ... appreciation ... equanimity ... the perception of inconstancy... "...there are monks who remain devoted to mindfulness... "Now how is mindfulness...developed & pursued so as to bring the four frames of reference to their culmination? He trains himself to breathe in ...and out... sensitive to mental processes. He trains himself to breathe in ...and out...calming mental processes.... "He trains himself to breathe...in and out... sensitive to the mind. ... He trains himself to breathe in ...and out... steadying the mind... He trains himself to breathe in ...and out... releasing the mind." > I've retitled the thread to reflect the focus I'd like to keep, for awhile at least. ... > > To help me out, please try to keep your response as condensed as possible. Thanks! Well I did my best, really, though I guess it went fairly long... You asked a decent number of questions too, so I tried to answer them without going off on too many sidetracks... Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #117421 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Sep 15, 2011 3:43 pm Subject: Re: Samatha and Vipassanaa, was: Not Who, but What? epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > And as you know, the fetters such as lust and anger are not removed in one go. Furthermore each fetter is of different strengths. Some people are more lustful, some less. It is reasonable to assume that before a fetter is 100% removed, it is gradually weakened until it is totally and finally removed. Thanks, Alex, helpful post. Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - - - #117422 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Sep 15, 2011 5:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Not Who, but What? part 1. nilovg Dear Dieter, You touch on some basic points and therefore I had to take more time. I answer in 2 parts. Op 10-sep-2011, om 18:36 heeft Dieter Moeller het volgende geschreven: > > N: The fourfold right effort is very important. In order to be a > factor of the eightfold Path it has to accompany right > understanding (sammaa di.t.thi) of the eightfold Path:Right effort > (samm-vyma): the effort of avoiding or overcoming evil and > unwholesome dhammmas, and of developing and maintaining wholesome > dhammas. > > D: I agree . But what now is the right understanding in detail? > ----- N: Direct understanding and awareness of whatever dhamma presents itself through one of the six doors. When there is less inclination to take visible object or sound for self and one understands them as only elements, sure, there will be less akusala. That harsh word spoken by Mr. X will disturb less. It is a conditioned dhamma, thus, a dhamma, why blame him? There are no persons, only dhammas. Everything that is real is dhamma. Here right effort arises already without having to think about it. It performs its function of abstaining from akusala in answering back in a disagreeable way. It is not 'my effort' but only a conditioned dhamma. ------ > > > D: "The monk rouses his will to avoid the arising of evil, > unwholesome things not yet arisen ... to overcome them ... to > develop wholesome things not yet arisen ... to maintain them, and > not to let them disappear, but to bring them to growth, to maturity > and to the full perfection of development. And he makes effort, > stirs up his energy, exerts his mind and strives" (A. IV, 13). > > (1) "What now, o monks, is the effort to avoid? Perceiving a form, > or a sound, or an odour, or a taste, or a bodily or mental > impression, the monk neither adheres to the whole nor to its parts. > And he strives to ward off that through which evil and unwholesome > things might arise, such as greed and sorrow, if he remained with > unguarded senses; and he watches over his senses, restrains his > senses. This is called the effort to avoid. > ----- N: This is all so true. Not clinging to a whole of a person. ------- > > > D: N: Viriya is a cetasika and it performs its own function by > conditions. > > D: not clear what you mean by ' own functions' ? > As far as I understand , Viriya is the energy of sankhara khanda , > the potential vigour of the mental formation group (conditioned by > avijja -sankhara-vinnana ). > ------- N: Yes, this cetasika is one of those that are the khandha of formations (sa"nkhaarakkhandha). It can be kusala, akusala or neither, depending on the citta it accompanies. 'Its function is to consolidate conascent dhammas'. It fortifies and supports the citta and the other cetasikas it accompanies, so that they can carry out their functions. You write: We have to distinguish different meanings of sa"nkhaara in different contexts. In the D.O. sa"nkhaara is: kusala kamma, akusala kamma, and aruupajhaana. Sa"nkhaara stands here for abhisa"nkhaara, these kammas condition vi~n~naa.na, here vipaakacitta, in the form of rebirth- consciousness and vipaakacitta arising during life. Sa"nkhaarakkhandha are all cetasikas except feeling and sa~n~naa which are a separate khandha each. Sa"nkhaara dhamma includes all conditioned dhammas. Sa"nkhaarakkhandha is included in sa"nkhaara dhamma, but sa"nkhaara dhamma is wider, it includes all conditioned dhammas. ------ Nina. > #117423 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Sep 15, 2011 5:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: atta-nu-di.t.thi, was: samatha. nilovg Op 14-sep-2011, om 18:43 heeft Ken O het volgende geschreven: > Sakkaya ditthi is also about things outside, just like an > uninstructed worldings does not known earth as earth, misconceive > earth belongs to oneself or there is self in earth. This earth can > be composite earth or objective earth as in kasina. Sakkaya ditthi > is not restrictive to just aggregates, it is about the conventional > objects as well. ------ N: In many suttas it is explained that sakkaaya di.t.thi is with regard to the five khandhas. Buddhist Dictionary: ----- Nina. #117424 From: "sarah" Date: Thu Sep 15, 2011 5:52 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: samatha. was: Khandhas and samsara sarahprocter... Dear Ken O, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > Mind contact which the contact can have concepts as an object. If there is no mind contact with a concept, then we would not known the name of Buddha :-). How to learn dhamma then. .... S: The discussion was referring to "The World" as in the crumbling worlds of conditioned dhammas as included in the ayatanas. Impermanence and crumbling worlds and 'world's end' refer to the khandhas, conditioned dhammas, not concepts as you suggested below. Yes, of course cittas arising in the mind-door, accompanied by contact, usually have concepts as object. No one has ever suggested otherwise. However, these concepts are not the 'worlds' referred to in the ayatanas, to be directly realised. In other words, we need to consider translations and meanings of suttas carefully, otherwise we may come to the same conclusion you suggest that it is a world of concepts that the Buddha suggested are crumbling away, to be realised and make up the ayatanas. Metta Sarah > > >> KO: Now remember when Buddha said the world, you forget to say that mind objects > >> can be a concept. > >.... > >S: Are you referring to the following sutta in SN 1V, "The World"? > > > >"Then a certain monk came to see the Exalted One.... Seated at one > >side that monk said to the Exalted One: 'The world! The world! is > >the saying, lord. How far, lord, does this saying go?' > > > >" 'It crumbles away, monks. Therefore it is called the world' > >[Note 14]. What crumbles away? The eye... objects... > >eye-consciousness... eye-contact... that pleasant or unpleasant or > >neutral feeling that arises owing to eye-contact... tongue... body... > >mind... It crumbles away, monks. Therefore it is called the > >world'." > > > >Doesn't this refer to impermanent dhammas, reminding us that there is no 'whole', no computer, no body, no thing as we're used to thinking? > > > >This sutta is found in Sa.laayatanavagga. These suttas are about the ayatanas. The ayatanas are realities, paramattha dhammas, not concepts, surely? #117425 From: "sarah" Date: Thu Sep 15, 2011 6:03 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: samatha. was: Khandhas and samsara sarahprocter... Dear Ken O, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > the text is clear, there are two ways, by elements or by body parts. We cannot just say because we understand the text in this way, so we think it is just elements. But the text did not restrict to one way, this means we are not being truthful to the text. .... S: This was the conclusion in the passage: "There can be nothing apart from the qualities of primary and derived materiality, in a body." You can check for the Pali and I think it'll be clear that this is the summary. .... >No offense meant, but we must respect the texts so that it could remain intact and others have confidence in it. > > As long as there is understanding of anatta, it does not matter the objects of the mind. .... S: Respect for the texts means understanding the Buddha's teaching, not blindly following a translation or even Pali words which we may misunderstand. There can be no understanding of what is meant by anatta if we don't appreciate that there are only realities, dhammas existing at this very moment. The ti-lakkhana refer to paramattha dhammas, not to concepts thought about as "objects of the mind". Metta Sarah p.s Pls remember to trim your posts, everyone! TiA! ======= #117426 From: "sarah" Date: Thu Sep 15, 2011 7:02 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! sarahprocter... Hi Ken H, #116942 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > >> KH: So how does it work? How can we have a concept of > something without believing it really exists (or without excluding the > possibility that something very different really does exist)? > .... > S: Like now, we think about chairs and computers and people with kusala and > akusala cittas. Even when there are akusala cittas, usually they are just with > ignorance and attachment, not wrong view. When there is metta, dana or sila and > there is concern for the others' welfare, that's all. There's no idea of anyone > or anything existing. Even the Buddha thought about forests and postures, people > and animals, but again, the concepts are just the object of kusala cittas. > ----------------- > > KH: Yes, that's what *I* am trying to say. :-) .... S: :-) ... > > When there is either kusala or viriya consciousness of a concept, what exactly is that concept? .... S: I don't know what you mean by "viriya consciousness". As you know, viriya cetasika (effort) arises with nearly every citta. Oh, perhaps you meant virati?? When kusala cittas arise, there can be any kinds of concepts as object. It is the *way* of thinking, the wholesome nature of the consideration, rather than the concepts that make the cittas kusala. For example, there can be thinking about "the Buddha" with kusala or akusala cittas. There can be thinking about world events, food, even surf(!!), wisely or unwisely too. .... > > I am suggesting (without strong conviction) that it is a concept of a symbol, or of a figure of speech or conventional designation, or something like that. ... S: You're suggesting kusala cittas.....???... Lost. I think I've lost the plot. .... > > When the citta is kusala then, for that moment at least, there is no concept of icca sukkah, or atta. So what I am trying to say (hypothesise) is there is not only no belief (no ditthi) in those characteristics: there is no concept of them either. .... S: When the citta is kusala there is no (wrong) concept of icca, sukha or atta..... Now, the cittas may be kusala and there may be wise reflection about such views. Again, kusala cittas can think wisely about anything, even about Alex's sex dens! ... > > ---------------------------- > <. . .> > KH: It works by having a concept of a paramattha dhamma! > >> > > > S: Only if they've heard the Buddha's Teachings and there is a beginning of > pariyatti. Otherwise, not. Even for us and the Buddha and his disciples, at > moments of dana and metta and non-path sila, concepts are the object, even > though we know that in reality, there are only namas and rupas. > --------------------------- > > KH: But don't all thinking people have concepts of a higher reality? Even without having heard any form of Buddhism (let alone the true Dhamma) don't people of all philosophical persuasions sometimes try to see through the veil of conventional reality into something ultimately real? Isn't that what popular meditation is designed to do? .... S: I don't think so. .... > > S: At those moments of ignorance without wrong view, there is no wrong idea of > dhammas as sukha, icca or atta, but neither is there any right idea of them as > dukkha, anicca or anatta. > --------------------------------------- > > KH: Take, for example, the mildly akusala thoughts that commonly arise during Dhamma discussion. Isn't there, at those (akusala) times, an idea of something anicca, dukkha and anatta? .... S: Well, at moments of akusala, there's certainly not any wise reflection on anything. A little speculative here... better to just know dhammas when they arise now! ... > > ----------------------- > > S: However, at those moments of ignorance (without wrong view) there is still sanna > vipallasa and citta vipallasa arising perceiving the dukkha as sukkha and the > asubha as subha. (These are only eradicated by the arahant and anagami > respectively). There is sanna vipallasa arising with all akusala cittas. > ---------------------- > > KH: Oh, well that explains it! :-)I didn't know that! > > So let's forget my theory where it applied to mildly akusala cittas. What about where it applies to ordinary kusala cittas? .... S: You mean moments of dana, sila or metta? No idea of any dhammas as anicca, dukkha or anatta. ... > > ---------------------------------------------- > >> KH: So when you tell an ordinary person that rites and rituals (the physical action of giving a gift, for example) are ultimately ineffectual he knows what you > mean. He knows there are ultimately fleeting states of consciousness, he knows > it is virtually impossible to tell anyone's real state of consciousness at any > given time, and he knows it is impossible to create generosity (etc) by ritual > activity. > >> > > > S: I wouldn't define "the physical action of giving a gift" as being a rite and > ritual. Rites and rituals depend on the the citta with wrong view which motivates a deed. > ---------------------------------------- > > KH: Hmmm, that seems like a grey area to me. I tend to equate all belief in the efficacy of concepts with belief in rite and ritual. > > But I've been wrong before! :-) ... S: Thx for correcting the typo. Again, I'm more interested in the cittas than in the kinds of behaviour. For example, when a group of a 200 of us go to India and circumambulate around the Buddhist stupas, so many, many cittas. We can only know our own. From an earlier message of mine: >S:If you look at the Sabbaasava Sutta, MN 2, we read that the untaught ordinary person "who has no regard for true men and is unskilled and undisciplined in their Dhamma, does not understand what things are fit for attention and what things are unfit for attention. Since that is so, he attends to those things unfit for attention and he does not attend to those things fit for attention." >As B.Bodhi summarises, the commentary "makes the important point that there is no fixed determination in things themselves as to whether they are fit or unfit for attention. The distinction consists, rather, in the mode of attention. That mode of attention that is a causal basis for unwholesome states of mind should be avoided, while that mode of attention that is a causal basis for wholesome states should be developed."< .... > >>> S: Ken, remember panna arises in the development of samatha and the development of pariyatti/patipatti. > > >>> So, now, if there is wise reflection on abstaining from harming beings, for example, it is samatha with panna. The object is a concept. All kinds of samatha bhavana up to jhana cittas develop with panna. Concepts are nearly always the objects. > --------------- > > KH: In that example, is the citta that contains samatha-panna the exact same citta that has a concept of a living being? Or does panna arise in another citta with an altogether different object? .... S: Samatha (calm) arises with every kusala citta. Panna may arise at the moments of reflecting wisely on abstaing from harming, with living beings as object. It may also arise afterwards, reflecting on the nature of kusala, on samatha. There may even be direct understanding of those dhammas with panna, of course. ... > > I have been under the impression (based on earlier DSG discussions) that samatha-panna would *always* have either a dhamma, or a concept of a dhamma, as its object. That was based on the fact that samatha-panna knew kusala from akusala, and only dhammas were kusala and akusala (concepts weren't anything). .... S: In order for samatha to develop, there has to be the growth of panna which clearly knows the distinction between moments of kusala and moments of akusala. It has to know what calm is, what attachment is, what wise reflection is and so on. This has become a bit of a "Rob E epic" and I've probably misunderstood several of your points. Pls feel very free to break it all up into tidy segments:-)) Metta Sarah ====== #117427 From: "sarah" Date: Thu Sep 15, 2011 7:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddhas instruction in the suttas sarahprocter... Dear Alex, #116952 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > >A:. And they *do* teach intentional, energetic and willful >development. > > > >What about viriya (Energy) ? What about 4 iddhipadas and 4 right >efforts? > > .... > >S: These only develop with the development of right understanding >and the other path factors. While they are taken for oneself who >must strive and make an effort, rather than as conditioned dhammas >not belonging to anyone, they will never develop. > >=========================================================== > >A: Why does one excludes the other? Sure one can describe driving using dozens text books about physics, chemistry, mechanics, etc. Sure the car can be disassembled into millions of parts, and so is the human body. But these things do conventionally occur, no matter how you describe it. .... S: See Howard's post #116950. "...There is no actual "actor" involved, is there?" We could act, there is no actual car or body involved, is there? People cars and bodies are concepts thought about. They only occur as ideas thought about, not as realities. Metta Sarah ====== #117428 From: "sarah" Date: Thu Sep 15, 2011 7:16 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Not Who, but What? sarahprocter... Dear Dieter, Always good to read you posting:-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dieter Moeller" wrote: > D: I can imagine that DSG books don't refer to ' having gone to the > wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building ' ;-) .... S: Why not? Having gone to the wilderness, having gone shopping, having gone into the busy city...... all just dhammas! Seeing, visible object, contact regardless. When I was in the English countryside, I might have left a note to say "gone to the woods...", but here in Hong Kong, it would more likely read "gone to join a few thousand others on the underground train":-)) Metta Sarah p.s Am I right in thinking you live in Hamburg? ===== #117429 From: "sarah" Date: Thu Sep 15, 2011 7:20 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Notes on nimitta from KK (March 2011) sarahprocter... Hi Nina & Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: etta, > > > Phil > > > > > > Metta, > > > Phil > > > > > > Metta, > > > Phil > > > > > -------- > > N: Hi Phil, as Kh Sujin says, metta never is enough :-)) > > ------ > > Nina. > > Ph: A tiny i-phone display screw-up, but let's pretend I was radiating metta in three directions at the time! I ran out of time for the 4th. (Shouldn't joke, it is a valid samattha topic for those who can attain jhana.) .... S: Hilarious:-)) Nina, that was very funny and Phil's running out of time for the 4th direction too:-). Phil, I have a Canadian yoga teacher in Hong Kong who is also very funny and reminds me of you in some ways. I laugh a lot in the classes. Must be something they put in the Canadian milk when you're young. Metta, metta, metta, metta Sarah ===== #117430 From: "sarah" Date: Thu Sep 15, 2011 7:24 pm Subject: Re: To Phil. Letter to Lucas in prison sarahprocter... Hi Phil & Lukas, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > I'm glad you liked the letter, and I hope it will be helpful to your friend. I wrote it a little bit strategically, knowing that he would have received a much closer-to-the-heartwood deep Dhamma letter from Sarah. Balanced with something more basic, I thought it would be a good combination. .... S: :-)) I appreciated your letter too - lots of radiated metta! I hope you continue to correspond with him. You'd better consider a strategic telephone call to Lukas sometime too to balance all that "heartwood deep Dhamma" we discussed:-)) ... > > I'd be happy to correspond with him if you are the middleman to translate. ... Metta Sarah ===== #117431 From: "sarah" Date: Thu Sep 15, 2011 7:27 pm Subject: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) sarahprocter... Dear Pt & Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: >PT: Now, of course, there's that sutta which says that wisdom develops through hearing and considering (reading and considering in our case), but, if you take it as prescription, you end up with rites and rituals again. If you take it as description, then imo it's a post-facto statement about how wisdom develops. ... S: Very good. I also liked Rob E's summaries of what he understood Ken H to be saying in some later posts. Sometimes you express us better than we can ourselves, Rob. Metta Sarah ==== #117432 From: "sarah" Date: Thu Sep 15, 2011 7:46 pm Subject: Re: A reply to half a dozen multi-splendoured Rob E posts sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, Persevering with # 116970! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: >>S:Through the mind door there is thinking about the objects, more sanna, more marking, more remembering of trees and tables, usually with ignorance. > >R: Any idea of where these rupas come from? Are they part of conditionality that is not tied to experience but to other factors that form up the experienceable universe? Does the samsaric universe include arisings of the 4 great elements that have no direct relation to experience of sentient beings except that sentient beings happen to apprehend the part of the flow that arises for the sense-doors, and otherwise continues to arise independently of sentient beings? .... S: Yes, take the rupas that make up the wilderness. Regardless of whether any beings ever experience any of those rupas or not, they arise and fall away conditioned by temperature. Like all other dhammas, they come from conditions! .... >R:And if so, do rupic arisings continue to flow in samsara even after sentient beings have all been delivered from delusion? .... S: Samsara refers to the cycle of birth and death. If there's no delusion, no becoming, it's irrelevant whether or not rupas continue to arise and fall away. ... >R: And if that is the case, does the universe have an existence outside of delusion, or is the universe a product of delusion? .... S: The worlds that the Buddha taught us to understand, are the worlds right here, experienced through the senses that can be directly known. This is why he taught about the world's end as being the 5 khandhas arising and falling away now. ... >If it is a product of delusion, then it should cease when delusions of consciousness have ceased, and in that case even the rupas that we do not apprehend would be dependent on consciousness and in that case should not exist when they do not arise for citta. ... S: With an end to delusion, no 'worlds' are experienced at the end of the arahant's life. 4 conditions for rupas - those outside the body are conditioned by temperature only. Those that make up the body are conditioned by kamma, citta, nutriment and temperature. .... > >R: Another way of asking this would be to ask, do the 4 great elements ever reach a resolution and stop arising, going back to total stillness and non-differentiation? Do they have any equivalent to parinibbana, or do they just keep on flowing...? .... S: Again, we need to differentiate between the rupas outside the body and those that make up the body. Only those that make up the body have no further conditions to arise once parinibbana has been attained (apart from those still conditioned by temperature). The "going back to total stillness and non-differentiation" is an interloper idea from another school:-)) ... >R: I think my question is whether single qualities are really experienced separately. Do we feel hardness first and then feel smoothness immediately after, or do we experience them together? I know your answer would be separately, one moment apiece - just not sure about it myself. .... S: Just as it is. For example, now as we touch the keyboard, there is the experience of hard smoothness or smooth hardness or whatever tangible object it is. When there's awareness, it's just as it is! ... > > But what you said about the particularity of the experience was interesting too. Do hardnesses vary in kind depending on whether it is a "mahogony-type" hardness or a "metal-type" hardness, and how do those rupas arise in differentiation - is it because of their particular mixture of the 4 Elements? ... S: Actually, excellent qus imho. Yes, each hardness, each experience of the tangible object now as I touch the keyboard, is different. If they weren't all different, we wouldn't be able to differentiate them and associate a "mahogany-type" hardness for any other. So when awareness slips in and experiences an object, it's just as it has always been. The rupas are different because they arise by different conditions in different kalapas and with particular mixtures of the 4 elements (and other derived elements). Just like each soup pot, each taste of each soup pot is different from each other. My goodness, so many good points in your post - more another day! Metta Sarah ===== #117433 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Sep 15, 2011 7:55 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Not Who, but What? part 2. nilovg Dear Dieter, (continuation). > > D:There are 6 classes of volitional states (cetanā): with regard to > visual objects, to sounds, to odours, to tastes, to bodily > impressions and to mind objects....) , agreed ? ------- N: Cetanaa accompanies each citta, it is one of the universals. It can be kusala, akusala or neither. It can be classified according to the objects experienced through the six doors, that is one way of classification. ------ > > D: >N: It is kusala when it accompanies kusala citta with sati and > pa~n~naa. > > D: yes, wholesome when the state of consciousness/mind involves > mindfulness with wisdom (?) ------ N: Yes, but it also accompanies kusala citta without pa~n~naa. ------- > D: > right effort and no need to think: 'I shall try to guard the > senses' so that akusala citta does not arise. > > D: in respect to (4) the effort to maintain : the favorable object > here to be mindful of rising and ceasing mental and bodily > phenomena .. > here the will/thinking is adressed to maintain ------- N: There are many aspects to the four right efforts. A favourable object: it can also be an object of samatha, as I read in A IV, 14. As to the citta that experiences this object, this can be realized as non-self. It is right understanding that accompanies right effort that maintains. ------- > > D: understanding of the present moment. We think of stories, people, > situations. > > D: yes, the nature of the monkey mind .. the thinking of stories , > people, situations however can be wholesome too when it is wisely > done.. ----- N: When the objective is daana, siila or bhaavanaa. ------- > > D: I think it is better to define that by quality of kusala / > akusala kamma ------ N: Yes, these are kusala kammas. Motivated by kusala cittas. ------- > > D: seeing or any other dhamma we are not that short moment. In this way > and the moments of sati, even if it is just very rarely. > > D: I suppose you concentrate on sensual experience , but do not > mention what should be avoided (1) , ------ N: When there is mindfulness and right understanding of just sound, no involvements with a story about a disagreeable person. Backbiting is avoided then. ------- > D: . how do you treat the effort to develop (see 3) or maintain a > favorable object such the mental image of a corpse ( (i.e. having > one of the 4 frameworks of sati patthana in mind ) . > Do you include that in ' awareness of sound, hardness, seeing or > any other dhamma ' ? ------ N: Effort to develop: develop right understanding of whatever object appears now through one of the six doors. It is very effective. To maintain, well, right mindfulness and understanding of whatever object appears lead to more kusala citta with mindfulness and right understanding. It is accumulated. ------- > D: I miss the emphases on 'the monk rises his will ' ( this very > crucial of mental formations , the nurtue of viriya in the sense > skilful effort. > Reading comments from some of our friends this seems to be > impossible.. "The monk rouses his will to avoid the arising of evil, unwholesome things not yet arisen ... to overcome them ... to develop wholesome things not yet arisen ... to maintain them, and not to let them disappear, but to bring them to growth, to maturity and to the full perfection of development. And he makes effort, stirs up his energy, exerts his mind and strives" (A. IV, 13). -------- N: Will in this translation stands here for chanda, wholesome desire. The explanation here is in conventional terms, but in reality citta and cetasikas are operating here. The Buddha spoke about persons, but we have learnt that there is no person or self who can do anything. However, citta and cetasikas perform their tasks, and the right conditions can be cultivated so that they work in the wholesome way. By listening to the Dhamma, studying the teachings we learn what we did not know before. There is not a person who listens and develops, but it is evident that it all works. In conventional language we have to speak about person, I, you, otherwise we could not explain anything. ----- D: Right effort by guarding the senses provides the ground for (samma) > sati and > (samma ) samadhi, but - as far as I understand , and would > appreciate to be > corrected - that does not really fit to the view of our friends > from K.S. > school. ---- N: I would turn this phrase around: when there is sati and pa~n~naa the senses are guarded. They go together with siila. I do not see this as a specific school. Think of the harshly speaking person and not being inclined to answer back. And then I mean not keeping quiet with dosa. ----- Nina. > #117434 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Sep 15, 2011 10:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma in practice: mindfulness of vipaka to prevent kamma nilovg Dear Alex, Op 15-sep-2011, om 4:49 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > Please note that solution was NOT more study, it was not "wait > until you accumulate more". It was practice, and very basic. It > didn't use 99.999% of what the Venerable theoretically new. > http://www.ajahnchah.org/book/Tuccho_Pothila_Venerable.php > > Something similar seemed to be with Venerable Ananda. He was only a > stream-enterer and knew as much or even more Dhamma than most > learned Arhats. He became Arhant only when the Buddha has died and > Ananda could now practice (he didn't have much time to practice > when he was Buddha's personal attendant). ----- N: Since Ananada was a sotaapanna he had practised, had right understanding of naama and ruupa appearing now. He was aware in the midst of all his duties, sati and pa~n~naa were powers. That means: they could arise at any time, at any place. Otherwise he could not have become sotaapanna. You are afraid that people only think of book study, but without right foundation knowledge, pariyatti, there cannot be pa.tipatti. How can there be right foundation knowledge? If one reads by oneself and never hears explanations, one may easily mistake the texts. One may proceed to the wrong practice. That is why association with a wise friend is important. One should not simply believe what someone else says, but test the meaning for oneself. Does it work what he or she says? Is it true that there is more understanding of one's life, that there are more conditions for kusala cittas? Is there more opportunity for metta? I am thinking of Kh Sujin's saying:< it does not matter if she does not like us, we like her.> Is this something that works for us in our life? To me that is the essence of metta. Useful and necessary to ask oneself such questions. ------ Nina. #117435 From: "philip" Date: Thu Sep 15, 2011 11:57 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma in practice: mindfulness of vipaka to prevent kamma philofillet Hi Nina (and Alex and Howard and all) > > To say that one should try to prevent the arising of akusala cittas > > that "can" arise (rather than almoat invariably will) demonstrates > > wrong view about the power of meditation practice, in my opinion. > > What he describes is how the Ariyan mind processes cittas, it is > > not helpful at > > all to encourage worldlings to be like that, in my opinion. > ------ > N: As to being aware of vipaakacitta, yes, seeing is vipaaka and it > can be object of awareness. Ph: Certainly. But to suggest such awareness can be the rule for worldlings rather than an exceptional arising will only lead to misplaced expectations, expectations. We know that lobha arises almost always after moments of seeing etc. The lobha that arises after a moment of seeing, for example, the lobha that simply likes to recognize a tree, or likes it when the bath water is turned a little hotter on a cold day, is so pervasive and subtle. No, the bath water example is not so subtle, but liking to simply recognize objects, we can't be aware of that lobha, it seems to me, but I read about it... > No selection. Akusala citta arises and also that should be known, > otherwise it can never be eradicated. This is also the case for > ariyans who are not arahat, they also have akusala cittas. Ph: Akusala citta is the rule rather than the exception, so if it could not be object of awareness there would be no hope, we would be swamped in it, and indeed most beings are. But the Buddha taught us not 'how to' be aware of dhammas but taught us about the dhammas so that awareness can be fostered, at least that is my current understanding. Howard and Alex, back to you on Saturday. Metta, Phil #117436 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Sep 16, 2011 3:04 am Subject: Direct Textual Evidence (Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing) epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > I also liked Rob E's summaries of what he understood Ken H to be saying in some later posts. Sometimes you express us better than we can ourselves, Rob. :-) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #117437 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Sep 16, 2011 3:22 am Subject: Re: A reply to half a dozen multi-splendoured Rob E posts epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > S: Yes, take the rupas that make up the wilderness. Regardless of whether any beings ever experience any of those rupas or not, they arise and fall away conditioned by temperature. Like all other dhammas, they come from conditions! So it seems that there is an "independent 'physical' universe" after all, regardless of experience. [If a tree falls in the forest with no one to hear it, it may not make a sound, but at least it exists -- as rupas.] That is very interesting. But there are still no "people" or "objects" per se in existence. The "physical universe" as it is, is just a succeeding series of rupas, not an actual "wilderness with trees." That again is our concept of those types of rupas, when we happen to run into them, but they keep arising and falling due to temperature whether we see and conceptualize them or not. And Buddha has nothing to say/has no interest in why the physical rupas came into being or continue to arise and fall away. That's beside the point since it doesn't influence the path of the development of cittas to the point of no longer 'becoming' and entering into suffering conditions, which is his only concern. > 4 conditions for rupas - those outside the body are conditioned by temperature only. Those that make up the body are conditioned by kamma, citta, nutriment and temperature. Is there an explanation for how all these diverse non-bodily rupas arise from temperature only? I find that difficult to understand. There must be some special understanding of temperature that I'm not aware of. It doesn't seem to me that we could get the various hardnesses, textures, visible objects, etc. that make up trees, leaves, grass, mud, sky, sun, moon and stars, just by existence of temperature or variations in temperature. How does temperature cause all such rupas to come into being, rise and fall away? And does temperature only cause the rupas to appear that we conceptualize as cars, buildings and plates of food? What about the appearance of other people's bodies, other than our own? What about the animals in the wilderness? I guess those living bodies all have the same 4 conditions for arising rupas that we do as "ourselves." > S: Again, we need to differentiate between the rupas outside the body and those that make up the body. Only those that make up the body have no further conditions to arise once parinibbana has been attained (apart from those still conditioned by temperature). The "going back to total stillness and non-differentiation" is an interloper idea from another school:-)) Well, it's just an odd idea to me that if the world is composed of only rupas, that they would just keep arising and falling away due to temperature, and never stop going. That is a universe of eternal rupas. I don't know what other school I'm interloping from, but I think even in science the Universe eventually comes to an end, though another might also begin if a "big bang" happens to come out of nowhere. [That's about as far as science has gotten with that subject I think.] S: ...Yes, each hardness, each experience of the tangible object now as I touch the keyboard, is different. If they weren't all different, we wouldn't be able to differentiate them and associate a "mahogany-type" hardness for any other. So when awareness slips in and experiences an object, it's just as it has always been. > > The rupas are different because they arise by different conditions in different kalapas and with particular mixtures of the 4 elements (and other derived elements). Just like each soup pot, each taste of each soup pot is different from each other. This is interesting to hear - I like the accounting for the different variations in particularity of this or that kind of rupa. That allows for more of what we experience to make sense in "rupa" terms. > My goodness, so many good points in your post - more another day! I am just proliferating like mad I guess! Time for a short "brain rest" and then back to more namas, rupas, nimittas, and then hopefully a few more bhavanga-cittas to get a break! Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #117438 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Fri Sep 16, 2011 3:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Not Who, but What? moellerdieter Hi Howard (all), , just a few more thoughts about the topic.. HCW: ( D: not just a mental phenomenon . The Law of Dependent Orgination " describes the orgination of the whole mass of suffering which is tanha , the second Noble Truth ) Yes, it is of crucial importance - the primary condition for suffering. But nonetheless a mere impersonal, fleeting, conditioned mental phenomenon. Were it more, liberation would be impossible. -------------------------------------------- D: And as such D.O. includes in each link the delusion of self (conditioned by avijja -sankhara). ------------------------------------------ HCW: Yes, it does. I agree with that. --------------------------------------- D: That no self can be found , i.e. empty of self, is the nature of the delusion, which disappears by abolition of ignorance , doesn't it? -------------------------------------- HCW: Yes. new: D: considered the insubstantiality /corelessness of a delusion one may say there is no self (Vism: there is suffering but no sufferer to be found) However as the delusion only disappears after its supporting ignorance is fullly abolished , up to then there is in reality an experience of a person/self . Between both points of view the Buddha proclaimed the middle way : the Law of Dependent Orgination. Insofar the 'not who , but what ' (= D.O. ) provides in a nutshell a useful hint how to avoid the obvious trap (ego cogito, ergo sum ) and approach the first fetter : personality belief. I.M.H.O. without this background the assumption of anatta is a game of the intellectual mind similar to Baron Muenchhausen, who tried to drag himself out of the swamp by his own hair. ( not excluding a number of Muenchhausens on-list .. ;-) ) with Metta Dieter #117439 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Sep 16, 2011 4:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Not Who, but What? upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter - In a message dated 9/15/2011 1:45:56 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, moellerdieter@... writes: new: D: considered the insubstantiality /corelessness of a delusion one may say there is no self (Vism: there is suffering but no sufferer to be found) ----------------------------------------------- HCW: There is no self to the delusion, and there is no "one who is deluded" - but there IS the repeated, conditioned, arising (and falling away) of delusion. -------------------------------------------- However as the delusion only disappears after its supporting ignorance is fullly abolished , up to then there is in reality an experience of a person/self . --------------------------------------------- HCW: There is the *seeming* of a person/self. There is the recurring delusion. The delusion itself does occur and is not imagined. ------------------------------------------------ Between both points of view the Buddha proclaimed the middle way : the Law of Dependent Orgination. ------------------------------------------------ HCW: Between WHAT two points of view. There are two independent facts: 1) The seeming of self, and 2) The nonexistence of self. Each is a fact. Dependent origination is the middle way between two delusions: that of true existence and that of nihilistic nonexistence. ------------------------------------------------ Insofar the 'not who , but what ' (= D.O. ) provides in a nutshell a useful hint how to avoid the obvious trap (ego cogito, ergo sum ) and approach the first fetter : personality belief. ------------------------------------------------ HCW: And even the "whats" are empty of self, are fleeting, and are ungraspable. ------------------------------------------------ I.M.H.O. without this background the assumption of anatta is a game of the intellectual mind similar to Baron Muenchhausen, who tried to drag himself out of the swamp by his own hair. ( not excluding a number of Muenchhausens on-list .. ;-) ) --------------------------------------------------- HCW: I'm not clear as to what you refer when speaking of "this background assumption". -------------------------------------------------- with Metta Dieter =============================== With metta, Howard The Aggregates are Void /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) #117440 From: "Dieter" Date: Fri Sep 16, 2011 5:12 am Subject: Re: Not Who, but What? moellerdieter --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: '(D: I.M.H.O. without this background the assumption of anatta is a game of the intellectual mind similar to Baron Muenchhausen, who tried to drag himself out of the swamp by his own hair. ( not excluding a number of Muenchhausens on-list .. ;-) ) --------------------------------------------------- HCW: I'm not clear as to what you refer when speaking of "this background assumption". D: because of a missing coma? without this (D.O.)background, the assumption .. with Metta Dieter #117441 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Sep 16, 2011 5:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddhas instruction in the suttas truth_aerator Dear Sarah, all, >S: See Howard's post #116950. >"...There is no actual "actor" involved, is there?" >================ The Buddha has never said so. Furthermore when we look what He denied was the Brahmanical concept of Atman that is permanent (nicca) and totally happy (sukkha). Buddha has NEVER taught the absence of self and conventional (non metaphysical) people called such and such. >S:We could act, there is no actual car or body involved, is there? >================================================= Of course there is emperical car and a tree. If you need to get from point A to point B, you don't sit and drive in a tree. You sit and drive in a car. Tree does not have the function of a car, and car does not have a function of a tree. Same with, lets say, chopsticks and spoon. These objects have different functions and can do different things. You can't eat soup with chopsticks, you use the spoon. So if different functions are observed, then I believe that it means that there are different objects. Of course all of them are aniica, dukkha, and anatta and thus should not be clung to. With best wishes, Alex #117442 From: "philip" Date: Fri Sep 16, 2011 5:51 am Subject: Proximate cause of visible object philofillet Hi all The proximate cause of visible object is the 4 primary rupa. (Vism XIV 14.54) I thought it was kamma. Only vipaka citta is caused by kamma, the rupa of visible object arises independant of kamma? metta, phil #117443 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Sep 16, 2011 6:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Not Who, but What? upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter - In a message dated 9/15/2011 3:12:13 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, moellerdieter@... writes: HCW: I'm not clear as to what you refer when speaking of "this background assumption". D: because of a missing coma? without this (D.O.)background, the assumption .. --------------------------------------------- HCW: Ah, yes - and a misreading by me. -------------------------------------------- with Metta Dieter ========================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #117444 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Sep 16, 2011 8:29 am Subject: At sotapatti magga are 7 fetters still present? truth_aerator Dear Nina, all, when sotapatti magga citta arises, does it still contain the un-eradicated 7 fetters? With best wishes, Alex #117445 From: "Ken H" Date: Fri Sep 16, 2011 10:25 am Subject: Re: Proximate cause of visible object kenhowardau Hi Phil and all, I'll jump in on this one. -------- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > Hi all > > The proximate cause of visible object is the 4 primary rupa. (Vism XIV 14.54) > I thought it was kamma. Only vipaka citta is caused by kamma, the rupa of visible object arises independant of kamma? > -------- KH: Yes, visible objects - pleasant, unpleasant and middling - arise all the time, but there will be no visual consciousness of any particular one of them unless the appropriate kamma has been put in place. At first, that might give a strange impression. For example, if a herd of angry buffalos are bearing down on us, only the people with bad kamma will see them. The rest of us will see a butterfly or something. :-) But in reality there is always bad kamma waiting to condition consciousness. Even the Buddha did really bad things billions of aeons ago, and was able to experience unpleasant sense objects. Ken H #117446 From: "Ken H" Date: Fri Sep 16, 2011 12:16 pm Subject: Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! kenhowardau Hi Sarah (and Pt), ------ >>> S: Like now, we think about chairs and computers and people with kusala and > akusala cittas. Even when there are akusala cittas, usually they are just with > ignorance and attachment, not wrong view. When there is metta, dana or sila and > there is concern for the others' welfare, that's all. There's no idea of anyone > or anything existing. Even the Buddha thought about forests and postures, people > and animals, but again, the concepts are just the object of kusala cittas. >>> >> KH: Yes, that's what *I* am trying to say. :-) >> > S: :-) ------------ KH: I am thankful to Pt for mentioning over-intellectualisation, which is probably what I have been guilty of. I agree we can have a concept of something without believing in its ultimate reality. And that's where I should leave the matter. I shouldn't try to intellectualise exactly what that concept that would like. --------------------- >>KH: When there is either kusala or viriya consciousness of a concept, what exactly is that concept? >> > S: I don't know what you mean by "viriya consciousness". As you know, viriya cetasika (effort) arises with nearly every citta. Oh, perhaps you meant virati? -------------------- KH: Sorry, I meant kiriya, not viriya. ----------------------------- > S: When kusala cittas arise, there can be any kinds of concepts as object. It is the *way* of thinking, the wholesome nature of the consideration, rather than the concepts that make the cittas kusala. For example, there can be thinking about "the Buddha" with kusala or akusala cittas. There can be thinking about world events, food, even surf(!!), wisely or unwisely too. ---------------------------- KH: I am *not* going to over-intellectualise about this. However, if I *was* going to over-intellectualise I would wonder if wise thinking really could take a concept as its object. Or could it only take a reality (or a concept of a reality) as its object? Take your example of surf: someone might wisely think, "Even a really good wave should not give rise to greed, let alone to animosity (towards the unprincipled longboarder who has already caught it!). But in that example there are many concepts coming and going at lightning speed. Some are concepts of "wave" and "longboarder" while others are concepts of wholesome and unwholesome consciousness (e.g., "greed is bad, non-greed is good," "animosity is bad, non-animosity is good.") And so it is only the latter type of concept that can be the object of wisdom. ------------------------------------- >> KH: I am suggesting (without strong conviction) that it is a concept of a symbol, or of a figure of speech or conventional designation, or something like that. >> > S: You're suggesting kusala cittas.....???... Lost. I think I've lost the plot. ------------------------------------ KH: Me too. What was I thinking? :-) I was trying to imagine what ordinary people might be thinking in the split second in which kusala citta arose. But take no notice! :-) --------------------------------------------------------- >>>> S: As B.Bodhi summarises, the commentary "makes the important point that there is no fixed determination in things themselves as to whether they are fit or unfit for attention. The distinction consists, rather, in the mode of attention. That mode of attention that is a causal basis for unwholesome states of mind should be avoided, while that mode of attention that is a causal basis for wholesome states should be developed." --------------------------------------------------------- KH: OK but, as we both agree, that is not to say concepts (waves for example) can be objects of satipatthana. -------------------------- > >>> S: Ken, remember panna arises in the development of samatha and the development of pariyatti/patipatti. -------------------------- KH: Yes, and this reminds me of another reply you have addressed to me (I might be responding to them out of order). I was asking if the panna of samatha arose in a citta that had a kasina as object, or did it arise in a subsequent (or preceding) citta that had a nama as its object. --------------------------------------------- > >>> S: So, now, if there is wise reflection on abstaining from harming beings, for example, it is samatha with panna. The object is a concept. All kinds of samatha bhavana up to jhana cittas develop with panna. Concepts are nearly always the objects. --------------------------------------------- KH: OK, no more arguments for now. :-) ----------------------- > KH: In that example, is the citta that contains samatha-panna the exact same citta that has a concept of a living being? Or does panna arise in another citta with an altogether different object? .... S: Samatha (calm) arises with every kusala citta. Panna may arise at the moments of reflecting wisely on abstaing from harming, with living beings as object. It may also arise afterwards, reflecting on the nature of kusala, on samatha. There may even be direct understanding of those dhammas with panna, of course. -------------------------- KH: I think we have just found that other reply. It was here all along! :-) ----------------------------------------- >> KH: I have been under the impression (based on earlier DSG discussions) that samatha-panna would *always* have either a dhamma, or a concept of a dhamma, as its object. That was based on the fact that samatha-panna knew kusala from akusala, and only dhammas were kusala and akusala (concepts weren't anything). >> > S: In order for samatha to develop, there has to be the growth of panna which clearly knows the distinction between moments of kusala and moments of akusala. It has to know what calm is, what attachment is, what wise reflection is and so on. This has become a bit of a "Rob E epic" and I've probably misunderstood several of your points. Pls feel very free to break it all up into tidy segments:-)) ------------------------- KH: I was just getting started! :-) Thank you as always for your kind and patient explanations. Thanks also to Pt for his word "over-intellectualisation." I can't stop thinking about it. Ken H #117447 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Sep 16, 2011 2:12 pm Subject: Re: Pt's Galaxy met some books for the first time! epsteinrob Hi Ken H. Quick jump in to tease you. :-) [I found this exchange between you and Sarah truly interesting.] --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > Thank you as always for your kind and patient explanations. Thanks also to Pt for his word "over-intellectualisation." I can't stop thinking about it. That is a concept of a concept. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #117448 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Sep 16, 2011 8:12 am Subject: From the Heart! bhikkhu5 Friends: Well-placed Faith leads to the Supreme State! The Blessed Buddha once said: In so far as there are beings without feet, with two feet or with four feet, or with many feet, with form or formless, conscious or unconscious, or neither-conscious-nor-unconscious, of all these the Tathagata is the highest, Arahat, a Perfectly Self-Awakened One... Whoever has faith in the Buddha, has faith in what is truly highest! For those who have faith in the highest, the highest is the result... In so far as there are conditioned states, the Noble 8-fold Way is truly the highest. Whoever has faith in this noble 8-fold Way, has faith in what is highest! For those who have faith in the highest, the highest will be the result. In so far as there are states, whether constructed or unconstructed, dispassion, stilling, ceasing is truly the highest of these states, that is Nibbana... Whoever has faith in this State, has faith in what is highest! For those who have faith in the highest, the highest will be the result... In so far as there are communities, companies and groups, the community of the Disciples of the Buddha is truly the highest of these, an unsurpassed Field of Merit. Whoever has faith in the Sangha, has faith in what is highest! Those who have faith in the highest, will experience the highest... <....> Source of reference (edited extract): The gradual sayings. Anguttara Nikya AN II 34 Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samhita _/\_ * <....> #117449 From: Lukas Date: Fri Sep 16, 2011 5:37 pm Subject: To Phil. Happy in the morning szmicio Hi Phil, I remember you mentioned that if a monk is contented in the morning the the whole day for him is happy. I was wondering how you deal with that. and how you appreciate kusala in your life? My problem is that when I wake you I drink 2 cups of strong coffe. I somoke 8 cigaretes and listen to the music. The my whole day is agitated and unhappy. How could I have more samatha in life. How could I change this bad pattern of my behaviour? Best wishes Lukas #117450 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Sep 16, 2011 6:09 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: the commentaries, to Rob E. sarahprocter... Dear Sarah Jane, Alex, Rob E & all, Firstly, Sarah Jane, always glad to see you chipping in! --- On Tue, 13/9/11, SARAH CONNELL wrote: >I am in agreement with both of you that the commentaries may be and are of great usefulness but must not be given the same weight of acceptance as the Suttana or Vinaya. .... Sarah: From an earlier post I wrote: >Sarah: Sometimes the Buddha preached ‘a sermon in concise form’ and then one of the chief disciples would explain in greater detail. Malalasekera writes in 'The Pali Literature of Ceylon'; "When later the text of the canon came to be compiled, arranged, and edited, some of the expositions found their way into the Pitakas and were given a permanent place therein. Thus we have the Sangiti-suttanta of the Digha Nikaya, ascribed to Sariputta and forming a complete catechism of terms and passages of exegetical nature. Such was also the Sacca-vibhanga (an exposition of the four Noble Truths) of the Majjhima, which later found its proper place in the second book of the Abhidhamma-Pitaka, and also the Madhu-pindika-sutta of Maha-Kaccayana, included in the Majjhima Nikaya. It sometimes happened that for a proper understanding of the text, explanations of a commentarial nature were quite essential; and in such cases the commentary was naturally incorporated into the text and formed part of the text itself.......Then there is the Niddesa, a whole book of commentary on texts now included in the Sutta-nipata; and there are passages clearly of a commentarial nature scattered throughout the Nikayas." ***** Often in the suttas too, we read many references to the Buddha’s Teachings as explained by his key disciples such as in the Nakulipita where the words were elaborated by Sariputta. In the Atthasalini, it gives the following example from DN: " ‘Bhikkhus, learned is Mahakaccana, profoundly wise is Mahakaccana. If you had asked me the same question, I would have answered exactly as he has done.’ Thus since the time when the Teacher gave his approval, the whole suttanta became the word of the Buddha. And it is the same with the suttas expounded by Ananda and others." ... S: In other words, it's not true as Alex suggests, that the Buddha didn't give permission for commentaries by his wise disciples such as Sariputta, Mahakaccayana or Ananda or others to be given. It is also not true that the Suttanta and Vinaya don't include commentaries or that these weren't included at the First Council.As we read in the Atthasalini, whatever is in conformity with the Buddha vacana is the Buddha's Teachings. See more under "commentaries" in 'Useful Posts' if you have time. Metta Sarah p.s Sarah Jane, Ken O, all - pls remember to trim posts!! Feel free to ask Pt off-list for any guidance on this. ================= #117451 From: "sarah" Date: Fri Sep 16, 2011 6:35 pm Subject: Re: A reply to half a dozen multi-splendoured Rob E posts sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > S: Yes, the Buddha's teachings are "pretty radical". If they weren't radical, they wouldn't have needed a Buddha to point them out. What exists are just experiences through the senses and thinking about them at this very moment. "No table or anything like it" as you say. If there is no thinking now about 'table', where is it? > >R: Wow, what fun. So there's really not much of anything there. Good to know as my cittas go floating through empty space, clinging like mad... .... S: Now we get to the hub of the Teachings - as you suggest, cittas "clinging like mad" to impermanent sounds, visible objects, tastes, odours and tactile objects! Ridiculous, isn't it? When the cloak of delusion is lifted, even momentarily, at such moments the absurdity is known. .... > > >S: As we read "life exists in a moment", just this moment. One world at a time. And all the dreams I have about recently picking cherries, plums, apples, blackberries and figs are just dreams - the dream-world we live in most of the day. > >R: Excuse me...? I'd like to have that dream! I'd better work on my kamma so I can pick some fresh plums and blackberries in my next time around [if by chance I suffer the pain of rebirth a few more times...] .... S: :-)) Or have the illusion of doing so! Really, just more visible and tactile objects - no plums or blackberries at all. ... > >S: Actually, wherever we are (and that idea of place is just another concept too), there are just moments of seeing visible object, hearing sound, smelling odour, tasting flavour, touching tangible object and thinking about these experiences - usually in complete ignorance. > >R: Yes, very good. Well, it makes deeper sense of the expression: > > "Wherever you are - there you are!" > > Don't know where I heard that, but I guess "whatever citta is experiencing at the moment - that's it!" .... S: Yes, good, "that's it!". Pls give one of your summaries of what I'm saying to Alex now:-)) Remember, no table, no tree, no crashing car when you explain to him.... .... >>S:....Only the direct understanding of what appears now will lead to the eradication of the idea of a whole, a thing, a being or other entity. > >R: That must be true - however, I wonder what would be experienced if one experienced "just the rupas which arise in a group" without forming a concept. If one experienced "hardness" followed by "smoothness" followed by "shiny semi-translucent reflected light" instead of the surface of a polished table, would one see these rupas as being connected in some way in the sequence, or would they just be separated into "one unrelated rupa after another?" .... S: There is the experiencing of rupas through different sense doors all the time in between the multiple mind door processes. Even now as we 'talk'. It just depends on accumulations what kind of thinking follows or doesn't follow, conceptualising as it's inclined to do so. Regardless, just thinking.... .... > > >S: p.s I so appreciate (hmmm , so attached to) my macbook air after the break, even though there are just rupas being experienced!! Another fantasy.... > >R: Well if we have to live with a certain amount of fantasy, they may as well be lighter and sleeker ones don't you think? .... S: That's how I justify it.....:-)) ... >R:That leads to another question :-) : I think positive vipaka is supposed to be a sign of higher cultivation of kusala than negative vipaka. In that case how does this relate to clinging to pleasant experience/aversion to unpleasant experience and positive/negative vedana? .... S: Kusala vipaka is the result of kusala and akusala vipaka is the result of akusala deeds. Usually, there is clinging to pleasant objects experienced (resulting from kusala) and aversion to unpleasant objects. This is why rebirth is heavenly realms may be one long "bliss-out", while rebirth is hell realms is the opposite. This is why the only way out is the development of insight into the true nature of the unsatisfactoriness of all dhammas. Vedana (feeling) accompanies every single cita. When there is lobha, there is pleasant or neutral feeling. When there is dosa, there is unpleasant feeling. At moments of seeing or hearing, there is neutral feeling. At moments of tactile experience, there is pleasant or unpleasant feeling. Complicated - can you elaborate more on your qu as I may have missed the point? ... > If you are able to experience macbook air and fresh blackberries, or in my case the higher quality sencha, all which I guess represent 'pleasant vipaka' and probably give rise to positive vedana [?] does that necessarily show where kusala cittas have been developed, and is that a good thing, or is it all just more grist for the mill? ... S: OK, I interrupted.... Conventionally speaking, we may say that having a macbook air or fresh blackberries of high quality sencha is kusala vipaka, resulting from good deeds. However, as we know, in fact, there is no macbook air, blackberries or sencha in reality. There are just the touching of tangible objects, the tasting of flavours and so on. So, in fact there are different moments of kusala and akusala vipaka whilst I look at and strike the keyboard of the macbook now, accompanied by different feelings. In between, there is thinking about different concepts about 'macbook', 'keyboard', 'blackberries' and all these squiggles. There are also visible objects being seen, sounds being heard and so on. The thinking about all these dhammas and concepts is bound to be accompanied by different feelings. Metta Sarah ===== #117452 From: "sarah" Date: Fri Sep 16, 2011 6:43 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Samatha and Vipassanaa, was: Not Who, but What? sarahprocter... Dear Ken O, Alex & all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > >KO: Even other religion could teach everyone what is kusala. Even >other ascetics could teach attainment of jhanas but they could not >teach it as a basis of insight, only Buddha can, this is known as >adhicitta .... S: As I understand, adhicitta refers to the concentration which is developed with the path, purified at path consciousness of the anagami when attachment to senusous objects is completely eradicated. The development of adhicitta depends on the development of vipassana, not on the attainment of mundane jhanas. > >===================================================== > >A: You are right. Jhanas could have been taught by other ascetics, but it just wasn't properly used. A person who is well versed in Dhamma can use jhana in an appropriate way that will work. > > It is not the fault of a screwdriver if someone uses it to knife someone. The fault is with the proper or improper usage. .... S: I see a lot of mention, not just by both of you, of "use of Jhana as a basis of insight". My question to you or anyone is: how can impermanent, conditioned dhammas be "used"? Surely, it is purely by conditions that any particular dhamma is experienced or not experienced by insight? No one to "use" or "select" anything. Metta Sarah ===== #117453 From: "sarah" Date: Fri Sep 16, 2011 6:55 pm Subject: Re: A reply to half a dozen multi-splendoured Rob E posts sarahprocter... Hi Rob E & Azita, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > Sounds somewhat familiar - I like the idea of clearing the furniture away to do yoga, the efforts we go to; reminds me of how many times I've crunched my little yoga mat and blankets into a little space between the couch and the closet, or jumped up into handstand against a door, praying that no one would pull the door open and send me flying feet-first backwards, but it's all in good fun. .... S: Yes, all same same. Like Azita, I lock the door if I can..... at my mother's house, there was a tiny space between the couch and the door for my handstands. No lock, so they had to be early early. I felt chilly, so a great way to get the circulation going. The daily yoga is so helpful for those of us who spend a lot of time at the computer. I offered to teach Pt one pose every time he visits us in Manly, but it almost put him off visiting:-)) ... > I brought my yoga mat and strap with me on our little beach vacations this past month while running to beaches and away from hurricanes. Even when I don't have time to do much yoga, I take them along... ... S: i have a very thin travel mat which squishes up into a tiny space, so even when I just travel with a samll hand-luggage piece, it finds a place. [I was just chatting about conventional ideas of kamma. A good quip from my funny Canadian yoga teacher in Hong Kong a couple of days ago: there were not enough blocks to go round the class, so the quip was that if one didn't get one, it showed they'd helped an old lady or done other good deeds the day before (i.e less agony). Well, I laughed!!] .... OK time for some of that de-befuddling green tea:-) Metta Sarah ==== #117454 From: "sarah" Date: Fri Sep 16, 2011 7:02 pm Subject: Re: Notes on nimitta, part 3. sarahprocter... Hi Rob E (& Nina), Just a start.... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > I wonder how it is that "the realization of direct knowledge of the rise and fall of dhammas" takes place. I can understand developing the understanding of what takes place, but when we talk about the incredible speed of the rising and falling away of dhammas with their characteristics, how is it that citta gets to a point in which it is capable of apprending these dhammas "live" instead of relying on the information from the left-over nimitta? Does enlightened citta develop the supernatural ability to apprehend dhammas at a much greater speed than before, or is it the level of comprehension of characteristics that somehow allows the rise and fall to be directly perceived "as they take place" in a way that deluded citta cannot? .... S: It is by the deeper and deeper panna which penetrates the realities, to the degree of directly understanding the arising and falling away of their characteristics. In fact, through the mind-door, it is always the nimitta of the reality which is directly known as the nama or rupa has in fact already (just) fallen away. The degree of (vipassana) panna, through repeated penetration of dhammas is what makes this highly developed and refined knowledge possible. Good qus - don't get 'hung-up' on the nimitta/characteristics/realities distinctions here. For all intents and purposes it is the arising and falling away of the realities which are known at this stage of insight. Metta Sarah ===== #117455 From: "sarah" Date: Fri Sep 16, 2011 7:09 pm Subject: Re: Correct? sarahprocter... Hi Phil (& Dieter), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > "At a moment of seeing there is contact between visible object and the consciousness that sees." > > Is the above correct? Isn't it more accurate to say there is contact between eye sense and object and seeing consciousness arises as a result? .... S: The Teachings refer here to the coming together or the inner and outer ayatanas. So there has to be the coming together of eye-sense (inner ayatana), visible object (outer ayatana), seeing consciousness (inner ayatana) and mental factors, such as contact (outer ayatana), at an instant, in order for there to be the "miraculous" seeing of visible object. The visible object has already arisen when (conditioned by kamma), seeing consciousness, accompanied by contact and so on (as Dieter mentioned/quoted) experiences it with eye-sense as the base and door at that moment. Metta Sarah ===== #117456 From: "sarah" Date: Fri Sep 16, 2011 7:25 pm Subject: Re: Notes on nimitta, part 3. sarahprocter... Hi Phil & all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > Thank you for this post, with helpful comments by Sarah. "Living in the world of nimittas" , as though it were a kind of dream world, that surprised me somewhat, nimittas are the reality, I thought, for all intents and purposes, so compared to tge usual sea of concepts, any awareness of the close-to-reality world of nimitta seems pretty refined...but still a dream world. ... S: I went back to look at the quote of mine Nina gave (below, clearly written after a discussion with K.Sujin on the topic!). You raise a good point. I think that as insight develops, even the nimittas of dhammas appearing now seem like dreams. So by the third stage of insight, when there is the direct understanding of the arising and falling away of realities, it is understood what is meant by signs or shadows of realities and there is the beginning to turn away from conditioned dhammas that offer no refuge. This is because of the understanding of the ti-lakkhana of such dhammas. So, more and more refined 'dream-worlds'? Metta Sarah >S: No, nimittas are the signs of the khandhas. What is left all the time after the dhamma has fallen away is the sign, like the sign of visible object or sound. But each one has fallen away already. It's a shadow of reality. A shadow isn't a khandha itself. When panna grows it knows the difference between the conditioned dhammas which rise and fall and have nimitta and the unconditioned dhamma which doesn't have any nimitta. When we appreciate that what appears now is only the nimitta of a khandha, it helps us to see that we live in the world of nimittas, a kind of dream world as has been stressed so much. It's only when there is the direct understanding of the arising and falling away of realities (khandhas), that they are directly known exactly as they are and there is then the beginning of the turning away from conditioned dhammas. Only then do we really know what is meant by 'dream' with nothing left behind of the dhamma which has fallen away. We then get closer to understanding realities are not sukkha in anyway because of their 3 characteristics (as stressed in the notes above).< ====== #117457 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Sep 16, 2011 7:46 pm Subject: Fwd: [dsg] Re: Just checking re concepts and panna nilovg Begin doorgestuurd bericht: > Van: "m. nease" > Datum: 16 september 2011 0:27:10 GMT+02:00 > Aan: Nina van Gorkom > Onderwerp: Antw.: Fwd: [dsg] Re: Just checking re concepts and panna > Antwoord aan: mlnease@... > > Hello Nina (and Jon, KH et al.), > > Sorry to've let your message languish so long without a reply--I'm > afraid it just slipped through the cracks. > > Thanks for thinking of me. I have occasionally skimmed recent > posts at DSG but haven't seen any discussions I felt I could > contribute to in any useful way. > > Best wishes to you all just the same. > > mike > #117458 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Sep 16, 2011 7:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Not Who, but What? sarahprocter... Hi Vince (& Dieter), You gave a very good posts with helpful quotes on seclusion, #117213. For lots more on this topic, see "Seclusion" in "useful posts". --- On Wed, 7/9/11, Vince wrote: > I have read inside the Suttas different formulations for > the seclusion notion. > In example, here there is somebody who achieve seclusion > just by hearing Dhamma: > > ".. he approaches him at the appropriate times to ask & > question him: 'What, > venerable sir, is the meaning of this statement?' He[1] > reveals what is hidden, > makes plain what is obscure, and dispels perplexity in many > kinds of perplexing > things. This is the second cause, the second requisite > condition... > Having heard the Dhamma, he[2] achieves a twofold > seclusion: seclusion in body > & seclusion in mind. This is the third cause, the third > requisite condition..." > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an08/an08.002.than.html > > > it says "he achieve a twofold seclusion: seclusion in body > & seclusion in mind" > but obviously he is not suddenly in the middle of a forest > in cross-legged > position after hearing the Dhamma. .... S: Well pointed out! It is the 'seclusion', of the (mental) factors, cetasikas, i.e.body and cittas, i.e. mind, that is being referred to. It is seclusion from kilesa (defilements), the true calm, developed by panna which understands the nature of dhammas. .... > I believe the first meaning of seclusion is of not > being engaged with meanings of > the conventional side but with Dhamma meanings. In example, > if we see a wonderful > female but we only are able to see bones and meat, or nama > and rupa, this is seclusion. > Or when we have brilliant ideas and mind-images but just we > can see its arising and > falling, this is also seclusion. .... S: Yes, there can be true seclusion, seclusion from defilements even now. > Truth is that I don't remember about seclusion meanings > inside DSG books. > Perhaps somebody can help in the point without need to > re-open an old discussion > if this is not needed. ... S: Again, see "seclusion" and "alone" in U.P. I liked the A.Chah tale. Conversely, when I met him in the middle of London, he seemed very undisturbed by all the images around:-) We never know when 'secluded' or 'unsecluded' mind-states will arise. Metta Sarah ===== #117459 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Sep 16, 2011 7:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate cause of visible object nilovg Op 15-sep-2011, om 21:51 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > The proximate cause of visible object is the 4 primary rupa. (Vism > XIV 14.54) > I thought it was kamma. Only vipaka citta is caused by kamma, the > rupa of visible object arises independant of kamma? ------- N: Ruupas of the body can be originated by kamma, citta, temperature or nutrition. Visible object always has to arise with the four great elements, these are its foundation or proximate cause. Nina. #117460 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Sep 16, 2011 8:06 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: atta-nu-di.t.thi, was: samatha. sarahprocter... Dear Han (& Nina), --- On Wed, 14/9/11, han tun wrote: >Yes, I will write at DSG some of my presentations when I have finished at the Other Group. ... S: Lovely to hear from you! I'll also look f/w to them. Seems a long while since we heard from you. How are you and Tin Tin these days? We haven't been in Bangkok since we last saw you with Phil. How are your eyes now? Thx for coming in to help Nina with the attanuditthi discussion which saved me from reviewing it again! ... >I will pray for the health of both of you. .... S: Likewise, Nina. I was concerned to hear about Lodewijk's bronchitis. Would any of the Thai cough pills, takab, that I find so helpful be of any use? I know you'll be giving him the best soups and the even more precious dhamma medicine. Our best wishes. When I was in England, I spent a day with one elderly aunt who is still managing to live at her home on her own (her husband passed away a few years ago), but has a lot of difficulty moving around. But, she was so positive, cheery and bright. She told me about her experiences training as a doctor during WW2 and working in Africa, running a hospital for women, immediately after the war. She'd recently seen a TV program on Buddhism she was telling me about and has recently got a computer! Metta Sarah ===== Metta Sarah ===== #117461 From: "sarah" Date: Fri Sep 16, 2011 8:21 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Taiga, my young friend, and how it "all sucks"! sarahprocter... Dear Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > welcome back. I had hoped you would report your Dhamma discussions in > England. Good you saw Alan Weller. I told him that I read aloud all > my writings to Lodewijk and then add corrections. He wants to see > them all, some work ahead! .... S: Yes, he mentioned this. We also talked about his work as a physics teacher and science vs dhamma. Many physicists and physics teachers have so many ideas about science solving the problems of the world/understanding the meaning of the universe and so on. We talked about how there could be studying physics with or without wrong view and same with the teaching. We agreed that life is so simple when there are no delusions about science or any other set of conceptual systems as being meaningful in any ultimate sense. Alan would like to join another Dhamma trip, but has to be during school holidays. (For others, Alan is responsibile for printing most Nina's books these days. I've known him since we were at school.) .... > N: A good way to check whether one is really ready to develop jhaana > in all sincerity. Does one really want to depart from sense objects? > Or does one just have an idealized vision about wanting to develop > jhaana? > ------ S: Well summarised! ... > N Good discussion with such a young child. You placed yourself very > well into his world of thinking. > ------ S: I think it's the only way to relate to children. As it happened, we had a holiday on Tuesday and I saw the same family again at the beach. This time there were no sulks and the boy agreed with me that being pleasant and having fun was much better than sulking in a corner! The younger brother was climbing a tree and there were some very large wasps buzzing round him and he became quite scared, but then his brother reminded him not to panic or try and kill them and the wasps went away. The boys told me that my 'method' really worked! [Phil - cockroaches. Keep a paper cup and card handy - easy to slide the card underneath and hold it there whilst taking them outside or out of a window. No more cockroach nightmares! You'll do your wife a favour from showing the example too. Ken H has a much more sophisticated method with his hands, but let's stick to the basics for now.] Metta Sarah ===== #117462 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Sep 16, 2011 10:13 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A reply to half a dozen multi-splendoured Rob E posts upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah (and Robert) - In a message dated 9/16/2011 4:35:35 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > S: Yes, the Buddha's teachings are "pretty radical". If they weren't radical, they wouldn't have needed a Buddha to point them out. What exists are just experiences through the senses and thinking about them at this very moment. "No table or anything like it" as you say. If there is no thinking now about 'table', where is it? > >R: Wow, what fun. So there's really not much of anything there. Good to know as my cittas go floating through empty space, clinging like mad... .... S: Now we get to the hub of the Teachings - as you suggest, cittas "clinging like mad" to impermanent sounds, visible objects, tastes, odours and tactile objects! Ridiculous, isn't it? When the cloak of delusion is lifted, even momentarily, at such moments the absurdity is known. .... ===================================== Sarah, I read through this entire post of yours and came away with the distinct impression that you were expressing a phenomenalist perspective that closely matches mine (and that I view as the perspective of the Buddhadhamma). My eyes and mind perked up most particularly at viewing "What exists are just experiences through the senses and thinking about them at this very moment," which, of course, delights me. OTOH, elsewhere you have stated, to paraphrase, that rupas exist "out there," on their own and not just as objects of consciousness (or mere experience), an "objectivist" perspective, and not phenomenalist. So, let me know: Where does your "take" lie, at the objectivist pole, the subjectivist pole, or somewhere in between? (There's no "right" or "wrong" answer to my nosy inquiry, but just a clarification for me. :-) With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #117463 From: "philip" Date: Fri Sep 16, 2011 11:59 pm Subject: Re: Notes on nimitta, part 3. philofillet Hi Sarah and all Popping in for a quickie cuz I heard something on this topic today. > > Thank you for this post, with helpful comments by Sarah. "Living in the world of nimittas" , as though it were a kind of dream world, that surprised me somewhat, nimittas are the reality, I thought, for all intents and purposes, so compared to tge usual sea of concepts, any awareness of the close-to-reality world of nimitta seems pretty refined...but still a dream world. > ... > S: I went back to look at the quote of mine Nina gave (below, clearly written after a discussion with K.Sujin on the topic!). You raise a good point. I think that as insight develops, even the nimittas of dhammas appearing now seem like dreams. Ph: I think I heard: to understand conceptd we need to undwrstand dhammas first, only then can we understand what concepts really are. A.S talked about levels of nimitta, Nina found that hard to understand, wouldn't it be better to talk about kevels of understanding? I think that's a good point, as understanding develops, the levels of dreaming are revealed. S: So by the third stage of insight, when there is the direct understanding of the arising and falling away of realities, it is understood what is meant by signs or shadows of realities and there is the beginning to turn away from conditioned dhammas that offer no refuge. This is because of the understanding of the ti-lakkhana of such dhammas. > So, more and more refined 'dream-worlds'? Ph: Yes, we're on the same page here. Metta, Phil > >S: No, nimittas are the signs of the khandhas. What is left all the time > #117464 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Sep 16, 2011 11:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: atta-nu-di.t.thi, was: samatha. nilovg Dear Sarah, Op 16-sep-2011, om 12:06 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > I will pray for the health of both of you. > .... > S: Likewise, Nina. I was concerned to hear about Lodewijk's > bronchitis. Would any of the Thai cough pills, takab, that I find > so helpful be of any use? I know you'll be giving him the best > soups and the even more precious dhamma medicine. Our best wishes. > > When I was in England, I spent a day with one elderly aunt who is > still managing to live at her home on her own (her husband passed > away a few years ago), ------ N: Thank you. slowly, slowly he coughs less. Hot lemon and Indonesian sugar helps. He got codaine from the doctor, but he does not like these. Perhaps your aunt will be a member of dsg? Somewhat worried about your mother living alone in the woods. Is that safe? I hope Jon is in good health, Nina. #117465 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Sep 17, 2011 12:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Taiga, my young friend, and how it "all sucks"! nilovg Dear Sarah, As to science, once at the foundation Rob K had a very good discussion with a scientist (I think from Sweden) on science and Buddhism. He made very good points. I think he also wrote about this subject. Lodewijk was very interested. Wasps: they smell it if one is afraid or has dosa. Being calm and friendly helps. Animals know such a lot! One wasp came back to thank Lodewijk when he saved him out of a glass of wine. Cockroaches, I was worried about Phil killing them. As you say, there are other more friendly ways. We should not underestimate their intelligence. We can begin to look at animals, insects included, in a different way. They are living beings. I think of Howard and the crickets all over the place, but in the end it became very difficult. Corrections for Alan will be very slow, but he will not mind. Nina. Op 16-sep-2011, om 12:21 heeft sarah het volgende geschreven: > The younger brother was climbing a tree and there were some very > large wasps buzzing round him and he became quite scared, but then > his brother reminded him not to panic or try and kill them and the > wasps went away. The boys told me that my 'method' really worked! > > [Phil - cockroaches. Keep a paper cup and card handy - easy to > slide the card underneath and hold it there whilst taking them > outside or out of a window. No more cockroach nightmares! You'll do > your wife a favour from showing the example too. Ken H has a much > more sophisticated method with his hands, but let's stick to the > basics for now.] #117466 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Sep 17, 2011 12:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] At sotapatti magga are 7 fetters still present? nilovg Dear Alex, Op 16-sep-2011, om 0:29 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > > > when sotapatti magga citta arises, does it still contain the un- > eradicated 7 fetters? > > ------- > N: He has eradicated the fetters pertaining to wrong view and doubt about realities. But sensuous desire, illwill and the other fetters are still accumulated in each citta, including the magga-citta. These are carried on from one citta to the next one. He has to continue developing right understanding until arahatship is reached. Nina. #117467 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Sep 17, 2011 12:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Samatha and Vipassanaa, was: Not Who, but What? nilovg Dear Ken O, Op 11-sep-2011, om 19:05 heeft Ken O het volgende geschreven: > if we are talking after using jhanas as a basis of insight, it > means one have reached the purfication of view level. At that > points onward, it is direct experiential knowing of nama and rupa > and no longer a conventional reality of nama and rupa, no longer > conceptual from here onwards. ----- N: Even before, pariyatti: understanding is beginning to be developed of the present naama and ruupa, not a story about them. ------ > > K: Before the jhanas as a basis of insight, are we saying it is > just nama and rupa even for body parts meditation in the > commentaries, or the commentaries said otherwise ------- N: I think this is not so complicated as it seems. There are moments of calm with reflection on the body parts and other subjects, and these can be alternated with awareness of naama and ruupa. It is all about daily life! ------ Nina. > > #117468 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2011 5:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] At sotapatti magga are 7 fetters still present? truth_aerator Dear Nina, >========================================================= N: He has eradicated the fetters pertaining to wrong view and doubt about realities. But sensuous desire, illwill and the other fetters are still accumulated in each citta, including the magga-citta. These are carried on from one citta to the next one. He has to continue developing right understanding until arahatship is reached. >========================================================= Thank you very much for your answer. With best wishes, Alex #117469 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2011 5:35 am Subject: [dsg] Re: the commentaries, to Rob E. truth_aerator Dear Sarah, all, Sarah, you have *totally* misunderstood what I've said. Possibly it was my fault at not expressing clearly enough. >S: Often in the suttas too, we read many references to the Buddha’s >Teachings as explained by his key disciples such as... >=================================================== During the Buddha's life, He could personally put his stamp of approval on the commentary done by the monk. He could freely reject or correct it. The problem is that when the Buddha, and his best disciples such as (Ven. Sariputta and MahaMoggallana) have died, He is no longer with us to accept or reject this or that commentary written/said without His approval. That is why in suttas such as DN16 and AN 4.180 , the Buddha told us to check the suttas after His death. No matter what elder has said, we need to check the suttas and commentaries found in those suttas. There is a big difference between the time he was alive and after. The sort of check and quality control that He could give when He was still alive, after His parinibbana is no more. Only the sutta & vinaya, which is why he told us to use that as a guide. With best wishes, Alex #117470 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2011 5:37 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Samatha and Vipassanaa, was: Not Who, but What? truth_aerator Dear Sarah, all, >S: My question to you or anyone is: how can impermanent, conditioned >dhammas be "used"? >=========== Precisely because of conditions and impermanence can there ever be change (such as progress of insight, development of kusala, eradication of akusala) etc. Permanence would preclude any possibility for change, alteration or development. With best wishes, Alex #117471 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2011 7:40 am Subject: Stilled is Nibbana... bhikkhu5 Friends: Stilling of Mental Construction is Nibbâna! The Blessed Buddha once said: Here, Ananda, the Bhikkhu considers it all like this: This is the supreme peace, this is sublime calm: The stilling of all formations, the silencing of all mental construction, the relinquishing of all substrata fuelling existence, the fading away of all craving, detachment, release, ceasing, Nibbāna... In this way, Ananda, the Bhikkhu may enter a mental absorption in which there is no notion of 'I' and 'mine', no attacks of conceiving any internal consciousness or any external objects and wherein he is both mentally released and fully liberated through understanding this all... In this silenced and wholly stilled state there is no inclination to "I" and "mine-making", and no more attacks of conceit by latent tendencies to identification, egotism, and narcissism! Anguttara Nikāya AN 3:32 Knowing both what the inner is and the outer is, one is neither stirred, nor troubled any more! When thus stilled and imperturbable, there is neither any attraction, nor any repulsion... One has crossed and escaped ageing and death!!! Sutta Nipāta 1048 <....> Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samāhita _/\_ * <....> #117472 From: "philip" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2011 9:44 am Subject: Reflection on disadvantages of akusala: when? Now! No, when??? philofillet Hi Nina. (p.s to Lukas) I think I asked about thus before, sorry. It will help me write to Lukas. Akusala arises. There is awareness of its characteristics. Often that sati and panna and virya and other factors will arise and simply replace the akusala, the fresh peg of wood, naturally, and there will be a moment of kusala instead of akusala. But we know considering the disadvantages of akusala is also often recommemded. In this case it was not necessary. I guess that reflection, which is thinking about concepts with a form of wisdom(agreed?) will come about (or not) when the akusala is too powerful to be banushed easily and naturally by awareness. Can I ask for your thoughts on this? Thank you. Metta, Phil p.s I will write to you in a few days. In the meantime something to reflect on: "this anxiety is a form of delusion because it reflects clinging to the khandas." #117473 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2011 11:35 am Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna ptaus1 Hi KenH (Sarah, Phil, RobE), > KH: When you say "intellectualising" in this context, do you mean something other than "considering"? pt: Yes, I think "considering" in the best case scenario equals to pariyatti. In other words, panna with citta that has concept of a dhamma as object. So this is experiential - an understanding about what's hapenning now, so not just intellectual. E.g. see what Sarah has said on this a few posts above: > > pt: 1. pariyatti is the arising of panna with those cittas that have concepts as object, so not just intellectual knowledge (so concepts as objects of citta without panna). that's how i understand Nina and Sarah to often say that abhidhamma is not in the books, for example. > .... > S: I'd just stress that these are concepts about present realities - in other words, pariyatti has to point to the truth about the present dhammas which are experiencing and being experienced now. pt: So, in conventional terms for example, I think that would be akin to realising that what's happening now is just anger/dosa, rather than taking it for my anger, that mr.x is an idiot, that the situation is really irritable, etc. So, just anger. So, experiential realisation, there's been no time to think yet that it is just anger, that it is a bad habit, that it is not me, etc, which would all start to branch off into intelectualising the situation in dhamma terms, and then over-intellectualising, etc. Over-intellectualising imo would be concepts as object of cittas without panna. So nothing to do with understanding the present moment, and more akin to philosophying about the world, the universe, ect. And it doesn't matter imo what filter is.used to explain away the world - physics, abhidhamma, common sense, monotheism, polytheism, etc. It's all just thinking regardless, and I'd say, all akusala, with the possibility of wrong view as well. The important question is - is there a gray area between pariyatti and over-intellectualsing? E.g. 1. like when trying to intellectually make sense of what was heard - especially on difficult subjects like d.o, kamma, etc - intellectually considering these usually has nothing to do with the present moment, though it might at some point help condition pariyatti. 2. like when explaining our theoretical understanding of dhamma to others - again, nothing to do with understanding the present moment, but might encourage pariyatti at some point. 3. like when trying to consider what has just ocurred in dhamma terms - ala, oh, that was anger, and anger is unwholesome, it is not me, it is impermanent, etc - again, more thinking that has nothing to do with the present (anger is already gone), but it might help with pariyatti in the future. My theory is that all these would be cittas with concepts as objects, but without panna. Would anyoane agree? So, the question then becomes, can this sort of cittas actually be kusala in the first place, alike to cittas responsible for dana and sila that can arise without panna? I'm not sure, I'd like to think that they can. Like for example when we try to share our theoretical knowledge of dhamma here, I guess it would be a bit like dana. But i also think that 99% of this sort of cittas would in fact be akusala, and more have to do with the desire to know, or to know better than someone else, or to disagree, etc. Anyway, for the sake of being thorough I think there are two more types of cittas that have concepts as objects and are kusala, though not that related to our topic: -dana, sila and metta without panna, with concepts as objects. -samatha bhavana where concept is the object of citta, when there's panna, but not of the pariyatti or patipatti sort. As for the issue of why the Buddha thought kindness towards beings, when in effect there are no beings, just dhammas - as I've said before, my preference is to avoid framing the issue in terms of exist/doesn't exist, because imo - one, the topic is irrelvant to the topic of insight - panna is concerned with a khanda at the moment of insight, not with the issue of whether beings (trees, cars, etc) exist or not. Two, when claimed that self, beings, etc, exist or not, it automatically tends to cause a.confrontational argument regarding what did the Buddha say in different suttas on the topic of non/existence and what did he mean, while to be honest, none of the arguments strike me as anything having to do with encouraging insight. E.g. the sort of arguments you and Alex have been having for many years now regarding the trees and cars, most of which I'd classify as over-intellectualising. Three - the cognition process incorporates both dhammas and concepts, so both parties have to be familiar with it and choose a common vantage point for discussion, otherwise it's like the 4 blind men arguing about the shape of fhe elephant. And four - it has to be agreed whether we're talking insight or post-facto. Etc. Looks like in my dealings with RobE I got his gargantuosis messagitis Best wishes pt #117474 From: han tun Date: Sat Sep 17, 2011 1:40 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: atta-nu-di.t.thi, was: samatha. hantun1 Dear Sarah, My eye conditions are related to ageing process. So there is nothing much I can do about it. I have Age-Related Macula Degeneration both eyes. There is no effective treatment. I have the beginning of cloudiness of the posterior wall of the lens capsule (which they call secondary cataract) both eyes, as a late complication of the cataract surgery that I had undergone some years ago. I will have to undergo laser surgery if it gets worse. I might be having glaucoma as well in both eyes, which I will have to check periodically. All these decrease my visual acuity and I cannot work on my computer for long periods. My wife, Tin Tin, is not well. She has heart problem and diabetes. She needs constant attention. Sudden atrial fibrillation or sudden hypoglycemic attacks can be very dangerous. I have only one daughter with us. The other daughter has gone to America to live with her daughter. So I cannot leave my house. If you come to Bangkok these days, I will not be able to meet you. But I thank you very much for your kind concern. with metta and respect, Han --- On Fri, 9/16/11, sarah abbott wrote: Dear Han (& Nina), S: Lovely to hear from you! I'll also look f/w to them. Seems a long while since we heard from you. How are you and Tin Tin these days? We haven't been in Bangkok since we last saw you with Phil. How are your eyes now? #117475 From: "Ken H" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2011 3:48 pm Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna kenhowardau Hi Nina, ----- >> KH: Suppose someone were to ask: "If there are no sentient beings, > why did the Buddha tell us to be kind and considerate towards > sentient beings?" > > As far as I know, that exact question is not found anywhere in the > texts. I could attempt an answer, but I wonder if, in doing so, I > would be over-intellectualising rather than considering . What do > you think? >> > N: If there would be no further explanation, people may take it wrongly, thinking: it does not matter whether we are kind or not. (Something similar as driving into a tree!) ------ KH: Yes, I can see how it is similar to the point about driving into a tree. Pt has just reminded me I have had countless discussions with Alex on that point. Although, I would argue it is not always just me and Alex. But I was just wondering aloud whether sometimes I tried too hard. I shouldn't have to think of a new angle every time. And I think it's a big turn-off for other people when someone is rambling on and on trying to express a deep understanding that he doesn't really have. :-) Ken H #117476 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Sep 18, 2011 12:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Reflection on disadvantages of akusala: when? Now! No, when??? nilovg Dear Phil, Op 17-sep-2011, om 1:44 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > Akusala arises. There is awareness of its characteristics. ------ N: Before the first stage of tender insight there is no clear understanding of the characteristic of naama as naama. Akusala such as dosa is not clearly known as only a dhamma. More often it is the story of dosa. Also, we confuse dosa and the accompanying unpleasant feeling, for example. ------- > Ph: Often that sati and panna and virya and other factors will > arise and simply replace the akusala, the fresh peg of wood, > naturally, and there will be a moment of kusala instead of akusala. > But we know considering the disadvantages of akusala is also often > recommemded. In this case it was not necessary. I guess that > reflection, which is thinking about concepts with a form of wisdom > (agreed?) will come about (or not) when the akusala is too powerful > to be banished easily and naturally by awareness. Can I ask for > your thoughts on this? Thank you. ------ N: It all depends on the moment, nobody can tell ahead of time. No rule. One moment there will be realising the danger of akusala, one moment there may not be thinking at all, but for example metta may arise by conditions and you do not kill that cockroach. As to sati and pa~n~naa, it depends on the degree of development of that person. Nina. #117477 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Sep 18, 2011 12:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Just checking re concepts and panna nilovg Dear Ken H, Op 17-sep-2011, om 7:48 heeft Ken H het volgende geschreven: Pt has just reminded me I have had countless discussions with Alex on that point. Although, I would argue it is not always just me and Alex. > But I was just wondering aloud whether sometimes I tried too hard. > I shouldn't have to think of a new angle every time. And I think > it's a big turn-off for other people when someone is rambling on > and on trying to express a deep understanding that he doesn't > really have. :-) ------ N: Don't worry, just continue writing your excellent reminders about the present moment. No need to worry about what others think of you. Nina. #117478 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Sep 18, 2011 12:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Happy in the morning nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 16-sep-2011, om 9:37 heeft Lukas het volgende geschreven: > Hi Phil, > I remember you mentioned that if a monk is contented in the morning > the the whole day for him is happy. I was wondering how you deal > with that. and how you appreciate kusala in your life? > ------ N: Perhaps you are alluding to the text about what is an auspicious time. The conclusion is any time is a good time for kusala. We do not have to limit this to just the morning. ------ > > L: My problem is that when I wake you I drink 2 cups of strong > coffe. I somoke 8 cigaretes and listen to the music. The my whole > day is agitated and unhappy. How could I have more samatha in life. > How could I change this bad pattern of my behaviour? > ------ N: By understanding that it is not you who can change anything. By thinking of yourself who want to change you may become more tense. You ask about more samatha, calm, in your life. There are four meditation subjects that are very suitable for daily life, for all occasions:Recollection of the excellent qualities of the Buddha, the > development of metta (loving kindness), perception of repulsiveness > and mindfulness of death. > ==== I quote some old posts: Steve: What is 'perception of repulsiveness' refering to? Repulsiveness in > nutriment? The 32 aspects of the body? Foulness kammatthana(the dead > body contemplations), all 3 or something else? N: I think all three are very suitable and can be used naturally in daily life, when attending to the body, eating (takes away greed for food!), dead body, when seeing a dead person or animal. Also the 32 aspects, these are not so attractive and can bring you back to the fact that the body consists of just rupa elements. There is no rule, it depends on one's inclinations and the circumstances that occur. -------- Quote from an old post: ------ Nina. #117479 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Sep 18, 2011 12:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Just checking re concepts and panna nilovg Dear pt, Op 17-sep-2011, om 3:35 heeft ptaus1 het volgende geschreven: > pt: 1. pariyatti is the arising of panna with those cittas that > have concepts as object, so not just intellectual knowledge (so > concepts as objects of citta without panna). that's how i > understand Nina and Sarah to often say that abhidhamma is not in > the books, for example. ------ N: Not in the book, but right now. As mentioned before, I tend to be rather careful with the term concept. When there is more understanding of what appears now, such as hardness, that is pariyatti and I would not try to pinpoint this: is it a concept of a reality or is there a beginning of understanding a reality without having to name it or think about it? ------ Nina. #117480 From: Vince Date: Sun Sep 18, 2011 1:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Not Who, but What? cerovzt@... Send Email Send Email Hi Sarah you wrote: > cetasikas, i.e.body and cittas, i.e. mind, that is being referred to. It is > seclusion from kilesa (defilements), the true calm, > developed by panna which understands the nature of dhammas. yes, although I'm in agreement with Dieter and his comments around contemplation. I don't see the attachment to "my practice" should depend only of the situation. When we are considering Dhamma our thoughts are a juggling with grasped objects. This situation also can be a practice. > S: Again, see "seclusion" and "alone" in U.P. thank you :) I'm reading now some of them. best, Vince. #117481 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2011 2:33 am Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna truth_aerator Dear KenH, all, >KH: Yes, I can see how it is similar to the point about driving into a >tree. > >Pt has just reminded me I have had countless discussions with Alex on >that point. Although, I would argue it is not always just me and Alex. > >But I was just wondering aloud whether sometimes I tried too hard. I >shouldn't have to think of a new angle every time. And I think it's a >big turn-off for other people when someone is rambling on and on >trying to express a deep understanding that he doesn't really have. >=============================== If what you were saying with explicitly stated in the suttas, then I would have no problem. But when something is claimed to have been said by the Buddha, and no canonical reference given then I have to wonder. It is fine for a person to have his metaphysical views, just don't put your views in Buddha's mouth. I do find it a bit too much when people (me included) talk about things that are way way of what is need for Arhatship. Some discussions often seem to be of the "how many angels can fit on the tip of the needle" sort of use. Sometimes, me included, talk about some abstract concepts (read about in smart books) around as if we truly understand what they mean. With best wishes, Alex #117482 From: "philip" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2011 2:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Reflection on disadvantages of akusala: when? Now! No, when??? philofillet Hi Nina > N: Before the first stage of tender insight there is no clear > understanding of the characteristic of naama as naama. Akusala such > as dosa is not clearly known as only a dhamma. More often it is the > story of dosa. Also, we confuse dosa and the accompanying unpleasant > feeling, for example. Ph: Interesting! Just when I begin to believe a) there can be awareness of characteristics of dhammmas such as dosa and b) this awareness is valuable for preventing akusala you are saying no, it is thinking about dosa, not awareness of its characteristics... Which is fine. of course. I agree with what you write above, it feels right. But it also feels different than what you usually write, somehow.(^_−)−☆ metta, phil #117483 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2011 8:24 am Subject: Endless is the Samsaric Round! bhikkhu5 Friends: Blinded by Ignorance & Driven on by Craving! The Blessed Buddha once said: There will come a time, Bhikkhus, when all the mighty oceans will evaporate, dry up, vanish, and exist no more. But there will be no end of Suffering for beings who, blinded by Ignorance and obsessed by Craving, are hurrying and hastening through this samsaric round of endless rebirths...So is it! One day this mighty planet earth will explode in a gigantic burst of fire, be completely destroyed, and exist no more. But there will be no end of Misery for beings who, obstructed by Ignorance and addicted by Craving, are hurrying, even running and hastening from birth to repeated death in this round of rebirths... This I have now explained to you! <....> Snared by the colors of existence the beings whirl around like flies in a bottle! Source: Grouped Discourses of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikya SN 22:99 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 Samhita _/\_ * <.....> #117484 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2011 9:06 am Subject: Re: A reply to half a dozen multi-splendoured Rob E posts epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > > Hi Rob E, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > S: Yes, the Buddha's teachings are "pretty radical". If they weren't radical, they wouldn't have needed a Buddha to point them out. What exists are just experiences through the senses and thinking about them at this very moment. "No table or anything like it" as you say. If there is no thinking now about 'table', where is it? > > > >R: Wow, what fun. So there's really not much of anything there. Good to know as my cittas go floating through empty space, clinging like mad... > .... > S: Now we get to the hub of the Teachings - as you suggest, cittas "clinging like mad" to impermanent sounds, visible objects, tastes, odours and tactile objects! Ridiculous, isn't it? When the cloak of delusion is lifted, even momentarily, at such moments the absurdity is known. That is nicely put. It does seem absurd. > > >S: As we read "life exists in a moment", just this moment. One world at a time. And all the dreams I have about recently picking cherries, plums, apples, blackberries and figs are just dreams - the dream-world we live in most of the day. > > > >R: Excuse me...? I'd like to have that dream! I'd better work on my kamma so I can pick some fresh plums and blackberries in my next time around [if by chance I suffer the pain of rebirth a few more times...] > .... > S: :-)) Or have the illusion of doing so! Really, just more visible and tactile objects - no plums or blackberries at all. Yet very tasty rupas! :-) > > >S: Actually, wherever we are (and that idea of place is just another concept too), there are just moments of seeing visible object, hearing sound, smelling odour, tasting flavour, touching tangible object and thinking about these experiences - usually in complete ignorance. > > > >R: Yes, very good. Well, it makes deeper sense of the expression: > > > > "Wherever you are - there you are!" > > > > Don't know where I heard that, but I guess "whatever citta is experiencing at the moment - that's it!" > .... > S: Yes, good, "that's it!". Pls give one of your summaries of what I'm saying to Alex now:-)) Remember, no table, no tree, no crashing car when you explain to him.... :-) > >>S:....Only the direct understanding of what appears now will lead to the eradication of the idea of a whole, a thing, a being or other entity. > > > >R: That must be true - however, I wonder what would be experienced if one experienced "just the rupas which arise in a group" without forming a concept. If one experienced "hardness" followed by "smoothness" followed by "shiny semi-translucent reflected light" instead of the surface of a polished table, would one see these rupas as being connected in some way in the sequence, or would they just be separated into "one unrelated rupa after another?" > .... > S: There is the experiencing of rupas through different sense doors all the time in between the multiple mind door processes. Even now as we 'talk'. It just depends on accumulations what kind of thinking follows or doesn't follow, conceptualising as it's inclined to do so. Regardless, just thinking.... I guess what I'm shooting for here is a sense of whether there are the kinds of associations between patterns of rupas that have a parallel sensible coordination as those that we assign them when looking at conventional objects. It would make sense to me that we assume these objects if they were based on a kind of pattern that would tend towards that sort of assemblage. If we touch a table, maybe we see it first, so we have a kind of "oh there's a table moment," followed by touching it and saying "oh it's smooth," then maybe look it over and notice how the light reflects off the surface, etc. I wonder if the rupas that we actually encounter such as visible object, hardness, motion, smoothness, visible object, etc., are arranged in a way that would tend towards similar types of conceptions, if that makes any sense. We could then say that while such experiential moments do exist in a kind of experienced order, they simply don't add up to the whole object we presume them to add up to. Rather than such moments being fully divorced from our concept of whole objects, they would have a kind of connection, where they supply the rupic elements, but we supply the conceptual glue. > > >S: p.s I so appreciate (hmmm , so attached to) my macbook air after the break, even though there are just rupas being experienced!! Another fantasy.... > > > >R: Well if we have to live with a certain amount of fantasy, they may as well be lighter and sleeker ones don't you think? > .... > S: That's how I justify it.....:-)) Ah! An appreciation of pleasing rupas followed by a series of verifying namas! > >R:That leads to another question :-) : I think positive vipaka is supposed to be a sign of higher cultivation of kusala than negative vipaka. In that case how does this relate to clinging to pleasant experience/aversion to unpleasant experience and positive/negative vedana? ... > Vedana (feeling) accompanies every single cita. When there is lobha, there is pleasant or neutral feeling. When there is dosa, there is unpleasant feeling. At moments of seeing or hearing, there is neutral feeling. At moments of tactile experience, there is pleasant or unpleasant feeling. Complicated - can you elaborate more on your qu as I may have missed the point? > Conventionally speaking, we may say that having a macbook air or fresh blackberries of high quality sencha is kusala vipaka, resulting from good deeds. However, as we know, in fact, there is no macbook air, blackberries or sencha in reality. There are just the touching of tangible objects, the tasting of flavours and so on. So, in fact there are different moments of kusala and akusala vipaka whilst I look at and strike the keyboard of the macbook now, accompanied by different feelings. I guess I am wondering whether the "enjoyable vipaka" which we conceptualize into a Macbook, does itself correspond to kusala kamma. I guess it probably does, even though it does not add up to the objects we think it does. While I think I'm enjoying the Macbook, I am really enjoying some nice namas and rupas from previous kusala kamma. > In between, there is thinking about different concepts about 'macbook', 'keyboard', 'blackberries' and all these squiggles. They may be equivalent. Still, I would not like to have the experience, conceptual though it may be, of typing on the blackberries. best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - #117485 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2011 9:11 am Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna epsteinrob Hi pt. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > As for the issue of why the Buddha thought kindness towards beings, when in effect there are no beings, just dhammas - as I've said before, my preference is to avoid framing the issue in terms of exist/doesn't exist, because imo - one, the topic is irrelvant to the topic of insight - panna is concerned with a khanda at the moment of insight, not with the issue of whether beings (trees, cars, etc) exist or not. Two, when claimed that self, beings, etc, exist or not, it automatically tends to cause a.confrontational argument regarding what did the Buddha say in different suttas on the topic of non/existence and what did he mean, while to be honest, none of the arguments strike me as anything having to do with encouraging insight. E.g. the sort of arguments you and Alex have been having for many years now regarding the trees and cars, most of which I'd classify as over-intellectualising. Three - the cognition process incorporates both dhammas and concepts, so both parties have to be familiar with it and choose a common vantage point for discussion, otherwise it's like the 4 blind men arguing about the shape of fhe elephant. And four - it has to be agreed whether we're talking insight or post-facto. Etc. > > Looks like in my dealings with RobE I got his gargantuosis messagitis. Hey, don't blame it on me, man. I think it's your own tendency towards over-intellectualization. :-))) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #117486 From: "philip" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2011 10:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Reflection on disadvantages of akusala: when? Now! No, when??? philofillet Hi Nina I almost wrote "Hi Nama" :) > N: It all depends on the moment, nobody can tell ahead of time. No > rule. One moment there will be realising the danger of akusala, one > moment there may not be thinking at all, but for example metta may > arise by conditions and you do not kill that cockroach. As to sati > and pa~n~naa, it depends on the degree of development of that person. When you say "realizing the danger of akusala" you mean thinking, right? For example, with the cockroach ( you have mentionned it several times, I killed it because they moved from the kitchen to the bedroom and one of them crawled on Naomi in the middle of the night, unacceptable. An example of him family duties, householder suties, can be obstacles on the path) what might "realizing the danger of akusala" involved? Thanks Nama! Metta Phil #117487 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2011 10:25 am Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna truth_aerator Hi RobertE, Pt, all, My opinion is to focus on dukkha and its cessation, not on abstract metaphysical things. Ultimately what matters is the result, rather than unprovable and highly abstract things. Whatever the arguments, the experience and result is the experiential arbitor, and ultimately pragmatic idea of truth is what actually matters. No matter what the arguments about non-existence of the trees and cars, one still behaves as if they are. I hope no one tries to drive non-existent cars, carrying no self, into a tree that isn't supposed to exist and neither does 100 mph speed. Some say that concepts have no characteristics, but at the same time we have to use fork for one thing and spoon for another, even though both of them are conceptual objects that aren't supposed to exist or be differentiated. The fact that Hindu Atman (which the Buddha refuted) doesn't mean that it doesn't matter whether you stick your finger into boiling water or reach Arhatship. Dukkha is still there, regardless of metaphysical abstractions that Buddhist philosophers have argued for thousands of years. Generally speaking, it is ok if people have their own opinions as long as those opinions don't translate into wrong actions or justifications for kilesas. With best wishes, Alex #117488 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2011 12:51 pm Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna ptaus1 Hi Alex, > A: My opinion is to focus on dukkha and its cessation, not on abstract metaphysical things. Ultimately what matters is the result, rather than unprovable and highly abstract things. ... > The fact that Hindu Atman (which the Buddha refuted) doesn't mean that it doesn't matter whether you stick your finger into boiling water or reach Arhatship. Dukkha is still there, regardless of metaphysical abstractions that Buddhist philosophers have argued for thousands of years. > > Generally speaking, it is ok if people have their own opinions as long as those opinions don't translate into wrong actions or justifications for kilesas. pt: imo, the majority of what is spoken of in abhidhamma pitaka and commentaries has to do with describing direct experiences, particularly those of insight, in a very peculiar terminology, which takes some time to learn to correlate to one's experiences. So, i don't think it's about metaphysical abstractions, etc, quite the contrary. But, for most people, most of the experiences described will not be personally encountered in this lifetime at least, so will probably seem like irrelevant abstractions. So, if the descriptions aren't relevant, then I agree, there's not much point bothering with them. But, I also don't see the point in dismissing these things and especially arguing against them. It's a little bit like when 4-nikayas-only adherents start to doubt and argue against all the suttas that speak about past lives, recollecting past lives, divine eye, etc. Just because only a very small number of people actually experience these things, it doesn't mean the descriptions are an invention or an abstraction. What's relevant to one's experiences will ring a bell, what's not will not, but I see no point in arguing against things one can't experience. Just move on to whatever rings a bell. I think one of the reasons that abhidhamma goes into so much detail when it comes to direct experiences of insight is so that the majority of the possible experiences would be covered in terms of anatta and conditionality - in that way, whatever experience one comes across in the millenia to come, it would still be clearly pointed out that it's all anatta and conditioned, thus helping to avoid subtle lobha, mana, etc, associated with meditative achievements. Best wishes pt #117489 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2011 12:56 pm Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna ptaus1 Hi RobE, > > pt: Looks like in my dealings with RobE I got his gargantuosis messagitis. > > RE: Hey, don't blame it on me, man. I think it's your own tendency towards over-intellectualization. :-))) pt: Yes, I think you're right :) Sorry, I'm still in the process of replying to your other two long posts, hope to finish some time next week at least one of them, sometimes i wish it took me more time to commute so i could write a bit more. Best wishes pt #117490 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2011 12:59 pm Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna epsteinrob Hi pt. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > > Hi RobE, > > > > pt: Looks like in my dealings with RobE I got his gargantuosis messagitis. > > > > RE: Hey, don't blame it on me, man. I think it's your own tendency towards over-intellectualization. :-))) > > pt: Yes, I think you're right :) > > Sorry, I'm still in the process of replying to your other two long posts, hope to finish some time next week at least one of them, sometimes i wish it took me more time to commute so i could write a bit more. Ha ha, well that's good when you are busy enough to wish the commute was *longer.* Most commuters wish they had that problem! That's why we who are busy intellectualizing about Buddhism are especially blessed! Seriously, though, no hurry - I'll look forward to your reply whenever you have the time. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = #117491 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2011 1:03 pm Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna epsteinrob Hi pt. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > I think one of the reasons that abhidhamma goes into so much detail when it comes to direct experiences of insight is so that the majority of the possible experiences would be covered in terms of anatta and conditionality - in that way, whatever experience one comes across in the millenia to come, it would still be clearly pointed out that it's all anatta and conditioned, thus helping to avoid subtle lobha, mana, etc, associated with meditative achievements. That seems a good way to look at - very experience-oriented, so that rather than study for its own sake, one is understanding the principle of anatta, plus one is able to "look up" whatever they experience or occurs to them in concept, and check out the nature of what they think or experience. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #117492 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2011 1:25 pm Subject: Re: Notes on nimitta, part 3. epsteinrob Hi Phil. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > Thank you for this post, with helpful comments by Sarah. "Living in the world of nimittas" , as though it were a kind of dream world, that surprised me somewhat, nimittas are the reality, I thought, for all intents and purposes, so compared to the usual sea of concepts, any awareness of the close-to-reality world of nimitta seems pretty refined...but still a dream world. > > ... > > S: I went back to look at the quote of mine Nina gave (below, clearly written after a discussion with K.Sujin on the topic!). You raise a good point. I think that as insight develops, even the nimittas of dhammas appearing now seem like dreams. > > Ph: I think I heard: to understand conceptd we need to understand dhammas first, only then can we understand what concepts really are. > A.S talked about levels of nimitta, Nina found that hard to understand, wouldn't it be better to talk about levels of understanding? > This is an interesting, complex subject. I would think it would be both - levels of understanding/insight reveal a more subtle level of nimitta, as dhammas are more closely approached. An analogy: as you use a stronger microscope, you realize that the structures you saw with the less-strong microscope were only approximations. But at the time when you first saw the slightly more microscopic level, it seemed an amazing revelation of a deeper reality. So when the understanding becomes more refined, you will see nimittas that more closely approximate the reality of dhammas, and in retrospect you see that the old nimittas were fuzzy and approximate, shadowy by contrast. Buddha also says something analogous in the discussion of jhanas. When one goes beyond "pitti and sukkha" to the state of equanimity, one realizes that the pitti and sukkha which seemed like the happiest and most blissful states were rough and irritating compared to the peace of equanimity. And of course beyond that are even subtler states and then nibbana is the most subtle and still of course. So with nimittas they must become more refined as the mind becomes more refined to perceive them. > I think that's a good point, as understanding develops, the levels of dreaming are revealed. That's a very nice poetic statement of the way that works... I may make that my sig if you don't mind... ... > > So, more and more refined 'dream-worlds'? > > Ph: Yes, we're on the same page here. Yes, that is good. It really shows the inverse continuum between delusion and insight. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = #117493 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2011 1:57 pm Subject: Re: Reflection on disadvantages of akusala: when? Now! No, when??? epsteinrob Hi Phil, and Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > Hi Nina > > I almost wrote "Hi Nama" :) > > > > N: It all depends on the moment, nobody can tell ahead of time. No > > rule. One moment there will be realising the danger of akusala, one > > moment there may not be thinking at all, but for example metta may > > arise by conditions and you do not kill that cockroach. As to sati > > and pa~n~naa, it depends on the degree of development of that person. > > > When you say "realizing the danger of akusala" you mean thinking, right? > For example, with the cockroach ( you have mentionned it several times, I killed it because they moved from the kitchen to the bedroom and one of them crawled on Naomi in the middle of the night, unacceptable. I guess the question is whether it is akusala to dismiss your duties as householder in order to refrain from killing. I wonder what the official answer to this is? I remember having an argument with a an old friend, a devout Christian who said that if someone broke into his house and attacked and threatened his family, he still wouldn't kill that person, no matter what they did. I argued that your responsibility to your children is more important than your own spiritual philosophy, which is for your own benefit. He disagreed. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - > An example of how family duties, householder duties, can be obstacles on the path. What might "realizing the danger of akusala" involved? ======================= #117494 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2011 2:08 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: atta-nu-di.t.thi, was: samatha. epsteinrob Hi Han. Very sorry to hear about the difficult current medical conditions. That is a real test of strength and patience. It happens that my father, who is 91, has been treated for two of the conditions you have spoken of. I will make a couple of comments below. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: > > Dear Sarah, > > My eye conditions are related to ageing process. So there is nothing much I can do about it. I have Age-Related Macula Degeneration both eyes. There is no effective treatment. I have the beginning of cloudiness of the posterior wall of the lens capsule (which they call secondary cataract) both eyes, as a late complication of the cataract surgery that I had undergone some years ago. I will have to undergo laser surgery if it gets worse. I might be having glaucoma as well in both eyes, which I will have to check periodically. My father had cataracts that developed for some years. Everything was cloudy in his vision, and he is an artist. Eventually he had both of the lenses in his eyes replaced with plastic lenses, and it worked extremely well. He can see quite well now and it was an 'out-patient' procedure, as they have really refined the technique. ... > My wife, Tin Tin, is not well. She has heart problem and diabetes. She needs constant attention. Sudden atrial fibrillation or sudden hypoglycemic attacks can be very dangerous. My father also recently developed atrial fibrillations, and his cardiologist was very concerned. He put him on a new medication that is milder and less difficult to monitor than the most popular one, and it immediately controlled the fibrillations with no side-effects except some mild tiredness. But I understand it is only good for fibrillations that are not the result of a heart-valve problem. The drug is called Pradaxa. In my Dad's case, to make the treatment more mild, the doctor put him on half the normal dose, combined with his normal aspirin regimen. So it's a kind of half-and-half solution that he devised. With this drug, one must be careful that there is no bleeding as a result, as it can increase likelihood of bleeding. This cardiologist knows my Dad for many years, so he knew how to customize the treatment for his situation. In fact, the doctor just turned 80 and is finally retiring, so we have to find a new cardiologist! I hope that you and your wife see improvements in your health soon! Much metta, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #117495 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Sep 18, 2011 6:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Reflection on disadvantages of akusala: when? Now! No, when??? nilovg Dear Phil, Op 17-sep-2011, om 18:59 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > Which is fine. of course. I agree with what you write above, it > feels right. But it also feels different than what you usually > write, somehow. ------ N: ?? ---- Nina. #117496 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Sep 18, 2011 6:55 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Reflection on disadvantages of akusala: when? Now! No, when??? nilovg Dear Phil, Op 18-sep-2011, om 2:02 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > what might "realizing the danger of akusala" involved? ------ N: There are different levels: thinking and reflecting about it, the level of the development of samatha, when one sees the danger of sense objects and the defilements involved with them, and the level of insight when the danger is directly seen without thinking. ---- Nina. #117497 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Sep 18, 2011 7:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Reflection on disadvantages of akusala: when? Now! No, when??? nilovg Dear Rob E, Op 18-sep-2011, om 5:57 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > I guess the question is whether it is akusala to dismiss your > duties as householder in order to refrain from killing. I wonder > what the official answer to this is? ------ N: So long as one is not a sotaapanna there may still be the inclination to kill. The sotaapanna would never kill. And also for non-ariyans, it would be good to find other ways out to solve such problems. Nina. #117498 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Sep 18, 2011 10:01 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Notes on nimitta, part 3. upasaka_howard Hi, Robert (and Phil and Sarah) - In a message dated 9/17/2011 11:25:32 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, epsteinrob@... writes: Hi Phil. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > Thank you for this post, with helpful comments by Sarah. "Living in the world of nimittas" , as though it were a kind of dream world, that surprised me somewhat, nimittas are the reality, I thought, for all intents and purposes, so compared to the usual sea of concepts, any awareness of the close-to-reality world of nimitta seems pretty refined...but still a dream world. > > ... > > S: I went back to look at the quote of mine Nina gave (below, clearly written after a discussion with K.Sujin on the topic!). You raise a good point. I think that as insight develops, even the nimittas of dhammas appearing now seem like dreams. > > Ph: I think I heard: to understand conceptd we need to understand dhammas first, only then can we understand what concepts really are. > A.S talked about levels of nimitta, Nina found that hard to understand, wouldn't it be better to talk about levels of understanding? > This is an interesting, complex subject. I would think it would be both - levels of understanding/insight reveal a more subtle level of nimitta, as dhammas are more closely approached. An analogy: as you use a stronger microscope, you realize that the structures you saw with the less-strong microscope were only approximations. But at the time when you first saw the slightly more microscopic level, it seemed an amazing revelation of a deeper reality. So when the understanding becomes more refined, you will see nimittas that more closely approximate the reality of dhammas, and in retrospect you see that the old nimittas were fuzzy and approximate, shadowy by contrast. Buddha also says something analogous in the discussion of jhanas. When one goes beyond "pitti and sukkha" to the state of equanimity, one realizes that the pitti and sukkha which seemed like the happiest and most blissful states were rough and irritating compared to the peace of equanimity. And of course beyond that are even subtler states and then nibbana is the most subtle and still of course. So with nimittas they must become more refined as the mind becomes more refined to perceive them. > I think that's a good point, as understanding develops, the levels of dreaming are revealed. That's a very nice poetic statement of the way that works... I may make that my sig if you don't mind... ... > > So, more and more refined 'dream-worlds'? > > Ph: Yes, we're on the same page here. Yes, that is good. It really shows the inverse continuum between delusion and insight. Best, Rob E. ============================= A couple additional thoughts: 1) Nimittas are basically percepts, the simplest sort of concepts in that they are sankharic constructs (or, better, "constructings") that are rather like faithful photocopies of just-passed, unmediated experiential phenomena, and not the originals. 2) Nimittas are like elements of dreams in that they appear to be originals but are only constructed facsimiles. If one considers a dream (and, for that matter, waking life as well), the "story" is a composed fiction, and even the experiences of which the story is composed are mental "constructings" posing as originals. These facsimiles, whether dream elements or nimittas, though constructs that are misperceived as originals, are nonetheless actually experienced. When we "feel a bodily sensation" in a dream, in many cases there is no actual physical sensation at all serving as basis, but there is nonetheless an actual sensation - a constructed one, experienced via the mind door. With metta, Howard P. S. When I speak of an "actual physical sensation," I don't mean to imply an "external bodily rupa" but merely a type/category of (mentally-) unmediated sensation such as sensed warmth or felt roughness or an itch (as opposed to a mentally constructed facsimile of such or a memory of such or an imagining of such). Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #117499 From: "philip" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2011 10:21 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Reflection on disadvantages of akusala: when? Now! No, when??? philofillet Hi Nina > > Which is fine. of course. I agree with what you write above, it > > feels right. But it also feels different than what you usually > > write, somehow. > ------ > N: ?? Ph: Sorry for the confusion. What I meant that there is (not only in your books but in discussion here, and in the talks) usually an encouragement towards being aware of the characteristics of realities. Maybe I am wrong, but there is not often the kind of pointing-out of difficulty or subtlty, unless it is pointing out difficult or subtly in what meditators seek. I don't remember having heard or read that direct awareness of the characteristics of dosa directly as a dhamma is difficult. But I'm sure it is. Anyways, please never mind. There are so many topics at DSG that are just distractions from present realities, thinking about "different than what you usually write" is of course just a distraction. Metta, Phil #117500 From: "philip" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2011 10:33 pm Subject: Re: Reflection on disadvantages of akusala: when? Now! No, when??? philofillet Hi Rob E > I guess the question is whether it is akusala to dismiss your duties as householder in order to refrain from killing. I wonder what the official answer to this is? Ph: I probably don't understand it properly, but the mangala sutta occurs to me a lot. See verse 5. http://www.aimwell.org/Books/Pesala/Mangala/mangala.html There is a good chance I will be single soon, though my wife is my dearest friend. She broke up with her partner, but I think we'll still get amicably divorced. I think would rather be single with a dear friend within shouting distance. I like spending time by myself, it is natural for me, and I think there would be better conditions@for understanding to deepen, more solitude, more quieT. Anyone who insists that solitude and quiet don't provide good conditions for reflecting on Dhamma really is being hard-headed, I think. Of course understanding can and does arise anywhere. But come on!!!! And certainly there would be less killing of cockroaches or mosquitoes that I wouldn't kill if I were the only one they were harassing. I'd rather not discuss this, just letting you and others know the latest in my little soap opera. > I remember having an argument with a an old friend, a devout Christian who said that if someone broke into his house and attacked and threatened his family, he still wouldn't kill that person, no matter what they did. I argued that your responsibility to your children is more important than your own spiritual philosophy, which is for your own benefit. He disagreed. Ph: Well as Buddhists we know that there is no telling what would happen, the Christian who insists he wouldn't kill has little understanding of the way conditions can come together to cause people to kill no matter waht they vowed. Metta, Phil #117501 From: "philip" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2011 11:03 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma in practice: mindfulness of vipaka to prevent kamma philofillet Hi Howard > HCW: Practice begins when one is quite the amateur. Otherwise one will > never become more than an amateur. One begins by energetically exercising > intent. You might note the following teaching of the Buddha describing a > practice for monks, and not specifically ariyans, Phil, and please note in > particular, the first of the following four: > > > Right Effort > "And what, monks, is right effort? > [i] "There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, activates > persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the non-arising > of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen. Ph: Dhammas do it, the monk doesn't do it. I think we agree there. But when beginners are told that akusala states "can" arise if they don't practice diligently, it is sure to create unwise pressing and stressing and screwing up of the kusala states that *can* arise to do the work. I am not one who says meditation is wrong because it is all about self, etc. But I am one who says that being told to catch fleeting realities is not good, whether it is by a Mahashi teacher, or by A. Sujin, or by anyone. I'm sure there are meditators in the world who don't blindly follow techniques that weren't taught by the Buddha (e.g slow motion walking , "lifting", "placing", "lifting", "placing" etc and other rather silly practices) and sit patiently in line with a lifestyle that is harmonious with meditation, and watch mental states come and go without pressing, and there is bhavana. And I wouldn't be surprised if you were one of them! I think A.Sujin is wrong to assume that all meditators are misguided and follow techniques with wrong view. Meditation can happen in a kusala way. Metta, Phil > > > > [ii] "He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & > exerts his intent for the sake of the abandonment of evil, unskillful > qualities that have arisen. > [iii] "He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & > exerts his intent for the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have > not yet arisen. > [iv] "He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & > exerts his intent for the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, > development, & culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen: This, > monks, is called right effort." > � _SN 45.8_ > (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn45/sn45.008.than.html) > ================================== > With metta, > Howard > Seamless Interdependence > > /A change in anything is a change in everything/ > > (Anonymous) > > > > > > > > > #117502 From: "philip" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2011 11:18 pm Subject: Re: Abhidhamma in practice: mindfulness of vipaka to prevent kamma philofillet Hi Alex > Often we talk about all these complex things *as if* we have perceived and directly realized them. I think it is important to remember the difference between personal knowledge and the one that one has simply read in the books. Ph: I know what you mean. But it is fascinating to read about how deeply the mind was enlightened by the great ones. As long as one uses common sense in understanding which dhammas will only (in high probabality) be known in theory (e.g bhavangas) and which can be known here and know. (e.g most things related to the ayatanas, for example.) The other day I was reading about some cetasikas such as adhimokkha (determination) and I was going to ask Nina what is the difference between adhimokkha and virya, but of course that is an example of a question that doesn't need to be asked, trying too hard to sort things out isn't necessary. But the other day, for example, I asked about how ditthi could arise at the sense door. That is immediate, that can be experienced (apparently, mind door makes more sense to me) Anyways, great to read about how ariyans enlightened dhammas that don't present themselves here and now, and great to read about dhammas that are presenting themselves here and now, as long as we don't stay stuck in the book, no reason we should. And, again, these are not poisoned arrow issues, poisoned arrow issues are the things that you discuss so often, whether beings exist or not, the trees that cars crash into. The only reason those things get discussed here is because people (including me in the past and probably in the future, who knows) insist that beings and trees and speeding cars should be said to exist although it is irrelevant. Beings cannot be seen, or heard, or touched, nor can cars, or trees. They can only be thought about. Why spend so much time discussing them here? metta, Phil #117503 From: "philip" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2011 11:40 pm Subject: Re: Proximate cause of visible object philofillet Hi Ken > KH: Yes, visible objects Epleasant, unpleasant and middling Earise all the time, but there will be no visual consciousness of any particular one of them unless the appropriate kamma has been put in place. So seeing arises as a result of kamma (vipaka) but visual object and other rupa arises because of not only kamma but also temperature and other factors. And rupa must always have colour, odor, temperature and nutritive in addition to the primary rupa with every kalapa, if I recall correctly. So to summarize, the angry bellowing butterfly that is charging towards us, that rupa arose for reasons other than kamma. It is the seeing that is the result of our kamma, and kamma might condition seeing the pretty little buffalo that is fluttering above the charging butterfly instead? Metta, Phil #117504 From: "philip" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2011 11:43 pm Subject: Re: Correct? philofillet HI Sarah > > "At a moment of seeing there is contact between visible object and the consciousness that sees." > > > > Is the above correct? Isn't it more accurate to say there is contact between eye sense and object and seeing consciousness arises as a result? > .... > S: The Teachings refer here to the coming together or the inner and outer ayatanas. So there has to be the coming together of eye-sense (inner ayatana), visible object (outer ayatana), seeing consciousness (inner ayatana) and mental factors, such as contact (outer ayatana), at an instant, in order for there to be the "miraculous" seeing of visible object. Ph: Why is the cetasika contact outer ayatana? How can a cetasika be external? > The visible object has already arisen when (conditioned by kamma), seeing consciousness, accompanied by contact and so on (as Dieter mentioned/quoted) experiences it with eye-sense as the base and door at that moment. Ph; Fascinating, isn't it? Metta, Phil #117505 From: "philip" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2011 11:44 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate cause of visible object philofillet Hi Nina > > The proximate cause of visible object is the 4 primary rupa. (Vism > > XIV 14.54) > > I thought it was kamma. Only vipaka citta is caused by kamma, the > > rupa of visible object arises independant of kamma? > ------- > N: Ruupas of the body can be originated by kamma, citta, temperature > or nutrition. > Visible object always has to arise with the four great elements, > these are its foundation or proximate cause. > Ph: Thank you for the explanation. Metta, Phil #117506 From: "philip" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2011 11:55 pm Subject: Re: Can actions rooted in lobha condition kusala? philofillet Hi Rob E Running out of posting time, so I am cutting and slashing at posts kind of franticaly. Thank you for paring down your usual epics, and sorry for my having to hack away at it to reduce it quickly to the following core. Sorry!!! I know I asked too many questions and then asked you to keep it short, that was dumb of me. > > 3) If I recall correctly Alex's post said that good actions accumulate and develop more good actions. Again, if we agree that there is lobha galore, can an action rooted in lobha condition more truly kusala actions? > > That's a really good question. I say optimistically "Yes," especially if you are being mindful of what is accompanying your actions. I feel [perhaps wrongly] that the intention to do kusala actions is "there" somewhere, even if there is also lobha, moha and dosa swirling all around it. Still you managed to do the kusala action and I don't think actions really get accomplished without some intention to do them. Ph: Somewhere in the Useful Posts I came across a post by Nina that included something very intriguing, never have seen it before or since, something about the power of conventional intentions to plant a seed of making it happen, or something like that. A Pali term, a technical teaching that sounded very different from the usual warnings against believing in conventional intentions having any power. That will sound fishy to everyone, but there is something like that there, I will have to go through the U.Ps I have bookmarked, but in the meantime if anyone knows what I am referring to...I think it is in the "accumulations" section. It might have something to do with the "intention to do kusala actions being there somewhere,even if there is also lobha, moha, dosa swirling all around it." Of course moments of kusala chanda can arise at any moment from a sea of lobha, it is possible. But you'd have to assume the sea of lobha would be a drag on the arising of kusala chanda. On the other hand, the kind of akusala I was thinking of when I asked the above questions is certainly not the powerful kind. OH, I don't know Rob. SOmetimes by the time I get to these posts I find I am no longer keen on the topic I asked about the week before. Indeed it's almost always like that! Metta, Phil > In terms of the Buddha's official take on it, there are kusala actions on the mental, verbal AND physical levels, so the physical kusala counts too. {NOT a popular opinion around here.} #117507 From: "philip" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2011 11:57 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: atta-nu-di.t.thi, was: samatha. philofillet Dear Han Very happy to see you here, and sorry to hear about your and your wife's health problems. I know you are always with the Dhamma, and the Dhamma always with you, so that is reassuring. Metta, Phil #117508 From: "philip" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2011 12:13 am Subject: Re: To Phil. Happy in the morning philofillet Hi Lukas > I remember you mentioned that if a monk is contented in the morning the the whole day for him is happy. Ph: Not quite, I think it is that the monk who behaves well by body, speech and mind in the morning, will have a happy morning, and so for the afternoon, and the evening. But my experience and I'm sure the experience of most people is as you say a good morning tends to lead to a good day, starting the day off right is important. >I was wondering how you deal with that. and how you appreciate kusala in your life? Ph: I'm so sorry Lukas, but I can't really answer that now, it would take too long! But let's see. Everymorning I think about what a rare blessing it is to be born human with a sensitivity to the Buddha's teaching, and I hope that I will do good things in body, speech and mind to avoid harming others and myself. I think about how "the all" is burning with greed, hatred and delusion, I just think about that, reflect on it and naturally I think that conditions better behaviour during the day. Some mornings I don't think about it. Some mornings I think about baseball, or sex, or baseball and sex. That can't be helped, and I don't get stressed about it. But no doubt that the days there are conditions for quiet reflection and the yoga/meditation I told you about, those days will tend to be filled with more kusala moments, that is my experience, pretty consistent. > My problem is that when I wake you I drink 2 cups of strong coffe. I somoke 8 cigaretes and listen to the music. The my whole day is agitated and unhappy. How could I have more samatha in life. How could I change this bad pattern of my behaviour? > Ph: Yeah, the days that start with thinking about sex tend to be agitated days for me. And I drink too much coffee too. As for cigarettes, I don't think anyone here can help you with that. You need professional help, professional products to get off that powerful drug, nicotine. One thing to remember is that not only second hand smoke but the actual smell that comes off your body is toxic and harmful to other people. If you abstain from smoking cigarettes you will be offering protection to other people too. I told you my yoga/meditation is more pleasant now than alcohol, but not as pleasant as marijuana. I guess medititation can't beat nicotine yet, but keep experimenting with yoga, breathing, whatever, find those pleasant mental and body sensations and see if they can't beat nicotine someday. There is no need to feel that they will be harmful on the path. Sorry, LUkas, I gotta run!!! Metta, Phil #117509 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Sep 19, 2011 12:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma in practice: mindfulness of vipaka to prevent kamma upasaka_howard Hi, Phil - In a message dated 9/18/2011 9:03:47 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, philco777@... writes: Hi Howard > HCW: Practice begins when one is quite the amateur. Otherwise one will > never become more than an amateur. One begins by energetically exercising > intent. You might note the following teaching of the Buddha describing a > practice for monks, and not specifically ariyans, Phil, and please note in > particular, the first of the following four: > > > Right Effort > "And what, monks, is right effort? > [i] "There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, activates > persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the non-arising > of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen. Ph: Dhammas do it, the monk doesn't do it. I think we agree there. --------------------------------------------- HCW: Yes, we do agree. The "monk doing it" is just a manner of speaking. --------------------------------------------- But when beginners are told that akusala states "can" arise if they don't practice diligently, it is sure to create unwise pressing and stressing and screwing up of the kusala states that *can* arise to do the work. --------------------------------------------- HCW: No, I think, alternatively, that it can be an encouragement to practice diligently. -------------------------------------------- I am not one who says meditation is wrong because it is all about self, etc. But I am one who says that being told to catch fleeting realities is not good, whether it is by a Mahashi teacher, or by A. Sujin, or by anyone. ----------------------------------------------- HCW: We shouldn't try to catch anything but to simply pay attention. If we *should* detect an unwholesome thought or emotion or inclination or whatever about to arise, knowing the harm in it can cut off the arising. Likewise for the other 3 aspects of right effort. The main thing is to stay present, paying attention, and not lost in thought, in excitement, or in sloth & torpor. -------------------------------------------------- I'm sure there are meditators in the world who don't blindly follow techniques that weren't taught by the Buddha (e.g slow motion walking , "lifting", "placing", "lifting", "placing" etc and other rather silly practices) and sit patiently in line with a lifestyle that is harmonious with meditation, and watch mental states come and go without pressing, and there is bhavana. And I wouldn't be surprised if you were one of them! I think A.Sujin is wrong to assume that all meditators are misguided and follow techniques with wrong view. Meditation can happen in a kusala way. Metta, Phil ================================ With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #117510 From: "philip" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2011 12:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Reflection on disadvantages of akusala: when? Now! No, when??? philofillet Hi Nina > > what might "realizing the danger of akusala" involved? > ------ > N: There are different levels: thinking and reflecting about it, the > level of the development of samatha, when one sees the danger of > sense objects and the defilements involved with them, and the level > of insight when the danger is directly seen without thinking. Ph: Thank you. But I guess I don't understand what "danger is directly seen without thinking" means. Could I ask you to explain a little more, when you have time? I will be away for a few days, so pleast put it at the back of your "must post" llist. Metta, Phil #117511 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:24 am Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna truth_aerator Dear Pt, Scott, all, >pt: imo, the majority of what is spoken of in abhidhamma pitaka and >commentaries has to do with describing direct experiences, >particularly those of insight, in a very peculiar terminology, which >takes some time to learn to correlate to one's experiences. So, i >don't think it's about metaphysical abstractions, etc, quite the >contrary. >==================================================== I agree with those parts. Unfortunately some classifications do seem to go against the suttas, ex: sati being only positive factor. In the suttas there is term called micchasati (AN 10.103). Sati can be right or wrong depending whether it is samma or miccha. I don't want to focus too much time on this, this is just an example of little things. Also in the suttas there are teaching that a person can be on the way to stream for the duration of one's life and experience phala at the time of death (SN 25). There are also various suttas about giving to alms to those on the path or those who have realized fruition. Considering how magga/phala is supposed to be momentary makes it very hard to reconcile these things. If one gives alms one trillionth of a second later, one missed the opportunity to give to someone on the path or fruition... While this explanation can be stretched, the the suttas in Okkanta-samyutta are clear. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an10/an10.103.than.html >pt: But, for most people, most of the experiences described will not >be personally encountered in this lifetime at least, so will >probably seem like irrelevant abstractions. So, if the descriptions >aren't relevant, then I agree, there's not much point bothering with >them. >========================================================== And I wonder if it will ever be possible to see trillionth of cittas arising and ceasing per second. Furthermore the qualities of Dhamma is that it is seen here and now. The Buddha talked about this life, and progress in this life. In 17 suttas Ven. Sariputta keep telling us: questioner: " if a bhikkhu is practising in accordance with the Dhamma, would it takehim long to become an arahant?" Sariputta: "Not long, friend." - SN 38.16, SN 39.1-16 And some of the qualities of Dhamma are sanditthiko and akaliko. So I find it sad when I read how the path is really long and we should not hope for anything anytime soon. It directly contradicts many suttas. Some add qualifiers such as "but only if you have all the causes, and know the most advanced doctrines such as [commentarial Theravadin Abhidhamma, Mahayana suttas, Vajrayana's teaching, Dzogchen, Mahamudra, this tantra that tantra, etc]. >Pt: But, I also don't see the point in dismissing these things and >especially arguing against them. >=================================================== I believe in a careful selective approach. Those things which do not contradict the main body of suttas, is correct. There are plenty of good things in Abh Pitaka and VsM. It is just that some of their additions have to be scrutinized. With best wishes, Alex #117512 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2011 4:29 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Reflection on disadvantages of akusala: when? Now! No, when??? epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob E, > Op 18-sep-2011, om 5:57 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > > > I guess the question is whether it is akusala to dismiss your > > duties as householder in order to refrain from killing. I wonder > > what the official answer to this is? > ------ > N: So long as one is not a sotaapanna there may still be the > inclination to kill. The sotaapanna would never kill. And also for > non-ariyans, it would be good to find other ways out to solve such > problems. > Nina. Thanks, Nina. My first inclination if attacked is to try to stop the attck without violence. I have had a number incidents growing up in the New York inner city where I was either slightly beaten up, threatened, threatened with a knife or gun [from the time I was 11,] or saw other people harming someone else. My reaction when not being directly harmed was always to relax and try to let the event take its course without violence. That is not to say I don't have a bad temper, but it always seemed like a bad idea to get mad when the other person was the one with the knife! All these situations worked out very well. In one case I even asked the mugger's "assistant" [only in New York] to please ask his "boss" to give me back my wallet and papers, but keep the money. He looked at me and said "I'll see what I can do" like I was in a department store, and went off. He came back in five minutes with my wallet, my credit cards and a check for several thousand dollars - I was going to make a bank transfer with the check. I got into that situation by trying to stop someone else from getting mugged, so the mugger got "2 for the price of 1" that day, but couldn't get any use out of my cards or check. In one case a crazy friend of mine in High school was on drugs and was going to attack a young woman who had said something mean to him. This guy used to come over to my house and show me his knife collection - big hunting knives and military knives. I literally chased after him and tackled him to the ground before he could hurt her. He smiled and thanked me. He was about two feet taller than me, so I'm glad he smiled. In several cases I saw parents hitting their children in an abusive way. One woman slapped her young son in the face so hard - on line at the bank! - I thought his head would come off, and she was going to do it again. I went over and told her if she tried to hit him again I would physically stop her. I won't allow children to be beaten in front of me. She was unhappy with me, but stopped. In all cases I didn't have to hurt anyone, or get hurt myself, so I guess I was lucky. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #117513 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2011 4:39 am Subject: Re: Notes on nimitta, part 3. epsteinrob Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > 1) Nimittas are basically percepts, the simplest sort of concepts in > that they are sankharic constructs (or, better, "constructings") that are > rather like faithful photocopies of just-passed, unmediated experiential > phenomena, and not the originals. Perhaps you could liken the more refined nimittas to "better resolution" photos that begin to approximate the dhamma more closely, until one is finally able to see them directly. > 2) Nimittas are like elements of dreams in that they appear to be > originals but are only constructed facsimiles. ... These facsimiles, whether dream elements or > nimittas, though constructs that are misperceived as originals, are > nonetheless actually experienced. Yes, and the nimittas in daily life are equivalent to a dream too, so I think it's more than an analogy, but a real experiential analog. I guess in the Buddhist world we could say "Life is but a nimitta" from now on. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = #117514 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2011 4:55 am Subject: Re: Can actions rooted in lobha condition kusala? epsteinrob Hi Phil. No problem with cutting up the post! Glad you're posing the questions. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > 3) If I recall correctly Alex's post said that good actions accumulate and develop more good actions. Again, if we agree that there is lobha galore, can an action rooted in lobha condition more truly kusala actions? > > > > That's a really good question. I say optimistically "Yes," especially if you are being mindful of what is accompanying your actions. I feel [perhaps wrongly] that the intention to do kusala actions is "there" somewhere, even if there is also lobha, moha and dosa swirling all around it. Still you managed to do the kusala action and I don't think actions really get accomplished without some intention to do them. > > Ph: Somewhere in the Useful Posts I came across a post by Nina that included something very intriguing, never have seen it before or since, something about the power of conventional intentions to plant a seed of making it happen, or something like that. I like that! > A Pali term, a technical teaching that sounded very different from the usual warnings against believing in conventional intentions having any power. That will sound fishy to everyone, but there is something like that there, I will have to go through the U.Ps I have bookmarked, but in the meantime if anyone knows what I am referring to...I think it is in the "accumulations" section. Sounds good! > It might have something to do with the "intention to do kusala actions being there somewhere,even if there is also lobha, moha, dosa swirling all around it." Of course moments of kusala chanda can arise at any moment from a sea of lobha, it is possible. But you'd have to assume the sea of lobha would be a drag on the arising of kusala chanda. I think those kusala moments, however, stand on their own, and do plant seeds for future kusala. I would think conventional intentions might be like when metta arises, if it is a real moment of metta, even though it has a conventional object it produces a kusala accumulation. So maybe genuine intentions to "do good" have some kind of real dhamma to them at that moment, even if the object is a concept... > On the other hand, the kind of akusala I was thinking of when I asked the above questions is certainly not the powerful kind. > > Oh, I don't know Rob. Sometimes by the time I get to these posts I find I am no longer keen on the topic I asked about the week before. Indeed it's almost always like that! Well, perhaps it is in the writing of it that you are working out some of your understanding... I used to take notes that way, just to process the information I was getting, even though I would never read them again... Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = #117515 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2011 5:46 am Subject: Why does "desire" for awakening is unwholesome? It is compassion! truth_aerator Hello Phil, All, >P:3) If I recall correctly Alex's post said that good actions >accumulate and develop more good actions. Again, if we agree that >there is lobha galore, can an action rooted in lobha condition more >truly kusala actions? >============================================================ Lobha is totally removed at Arhatship. So lets not worry about that until we are at least on Anagami stage. Even Anagamis have certain form of it. This doesn't prevent reaching Anagami stage. Furthermore why does intention for Awakening has to be LOBHA? Why can't a person have compassion (karuna) toward oneself and others? Intention for awakening often occurs when one experiences dismay (samvega) at ordinary existence and it is what Gotama and many people who ordained have experienced. Lobha is for material qualities or ego achievements. Removing greed, anger and delusion is not greed. The path removes suffering for oneself and suffering that under their influences one could cause in others? Since when was compassion a negative quality? With best wishes, Alex #117516 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Sep 19, 2011 7:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Notes on nimitta, part 3. upasaka_howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 9/18/2011 2:39:24 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, epsteinrob@... writes: I guess in the Buddhist world we could say "Life is but a nimitta" from now on. --------------------------------------- :-) ============================ With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #117517 From: "philip" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2011 7:23 am Subject: Re: Why does "desire" for awakening is unwholesome? It is compassion! philofillet Hi Alex > Lobha is totally removed at Arhatship. So lets not worry about that until we are at least on Anagami stage. Even Anagamis have certain form of it. This doesn't prevent reaching Anagami stage. Ph: Not to woory about lobha, as you say it is almist inevitable, but if we mistake kusala chanda for akusala wanting fast results, the effirts will be in vain, just tie us more firmly to the wheel of samsara. I shouldn't assume tgere is nit kudala chanda for others, though. I tend to do that. But bhavana cannot be rooted in libha, plain and simple. > Furthermore why does intention for Awakening has to be LOBHA? Why can't a person have compassion (karuna) toward oneself and others? Ph: Right, fine. But karuna cannot be accompanied by unpleasant mental feeling, and karuna cannot be wanting with any attachment to self. Does such karuna feel familiar to you? If so, that is great. :) --liRegardless of the conditions into which humans are born, be they handicapped or favored in various ways, birth in the human plane is the result of kusala kamma. It is only in the human plane that one can make a start to end all suffering. The Buddha has told us that, having left this human existence, not many will return to it for a long, long time. Therefore, it is up to us to make the most of this opportunity we have as human beings. Ph: Very true! But we are householders luving busy lives. Pretending to be monks for will not help to fulfill our rare human births. I hope your health improves to the piint that you can stop spending so much time onthe internet and ordain instead. > Intention for awakening often occurs when one experiences dismay (samvega) at ordinary existence and it is what Gotama and many people who ordained have experienced. Ph: Samvega can arise for sure. But if we are householders will it motivate attainnents or will it motivate improved sila? > Lobha is for material qualities or ego achievements. Ph: No, lobha is much more prevalent than that. There are many degrees of lobha. Removing greed, anger and delusion is not greed. Ph: Believing householders can do do by imitating monks for an hour a day is greed and delusion. The path removes suffering for oneself and suffering that under their influences one could cause in others? Since when was compassion a negative quality? Ph: It's not, but see above! If it is familar to you, great! I say tgat sincerely. Metta Phil > > With best wishes, > > Alex > #117518 From: "Ken H" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2011 7:36 am Subject: Re: Proximate cause of visible object kenhowardau Hi Phil, ------ >> KH: Yes, visible objects pleasant, unpleasant and middling arise all the time, but there will be no visual consciousness of any particular one of them unless the appropriate kamma has been put in place. >> > Ph: So seeing arises as a result of kamma (vipaka) but visual object and other rupa arises because of not only kamma but also temperature and other factors. ----- KH: Basically, yes, although I'm not sure you have the details right. Are you saying kamma can be one of the conditions for visible rupa? I think it's just temperature isn't it? Kamma conditions the arising of sense-base rupas, but not (I would have thought) of sense-object rupas.(?) I dunno, it must have been explained at DSG a hundred times and I still get it wrong! ------------------------------ > Ph: And rupa must always have colour, odor, temperature and nutritive in addition to the primary rupa with every kalapa, if I recall correctly. So to summarize, the angry bellowing butterfly that is charging towards us, that rupa arose for reasons other than kamma. It is the seeing that is the result of our kamma, and kamma might condition seeing the pretty little buffalo that is fluttering above the charging butterfly instead? ---------------------------- KH: For what it's worth that seems right to me. Apart from a minor mix-up with biology :-) Ken H #117519 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2011 7:47 am Subject: Re: Why does "desire" for awakening is unwholesome? It is compassion! truth_aerator Hi Phil, all, >Ph: Not to woory about lobha, as you say it is almist inevitable, >but if we mistake kusala chanda for akusala wanting fast results, >the effirts will be in vain, just tie us more firmly to the wheel of >samsara. I shouldn't assume tgere is nit kudala chanda for others, >though. I tend to do that. But bhavana cannot be rooted in libha, >plain and simple. >============================================================ Well, Nina says (#117466) that lobha and such are present even at sotapatti magga moment. So what you say may apply only when it comes to bhavana for Arahata-magga. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/117466 Also as Ananda has said to Bhikkhuni, craving can be properly used. Sister, a monk hears it said: `They say that a monk of such and such a name, by the destruction of the taints, in this very life enters and dwells in the taintless liberation of mind and liberation by wisdom'. Then he thinks: `Oh, when shall I too realize the taintless liberation of mind and liberation by wisdom?' Then, some time later, based on that craving, he abandons craving. It is on account of this that it was said: `This body has come into being through craving; yet based on craving, craving can be abandoned" - A. II. 145-6. P. A. Payutto Trans. IMHO the reason why people don't become Arhats instantly, or within very short period of time is because they make some mistakes. If one would make no mistakes, one could become an Arahat. But even sotapanna makes some mistakes compared to Arhat. But lets focus on steps closer to where we are now. >P:I hope your health improves to the piint that you can stop >spending so much time onthe internet and >ordain instead. >================================================= Right. I hope my health improves, that I find the acceptable monastery, and ordain to fully live the holy life (and of course post much less). With best wishes, Alex #117520 From: "philip" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2011 11:08 am Subject: Re: Can actions rooted in lobha condition kusala? philofillet Hi Rob R > > Ph: Somewhere in the Useful Posts I came across a post by Nina that included something very intriguing, never have seen it before or since, something about the power of conventional intentions to plant a seed of making it happen, or something like that. > A Pali term, a technical teaching that sounded very different from Ph: I have no idea how to find it, something from a commentary I think thinking "I will do good" or something like that can actually contribute to doing good. If Nina or anyone knows what on earth I am talkung about, please post. I think it is amoungst my bookmarked useful posts. But even if we find it and it says what I wrote about it above, of course it will be moot if such an intention is rooted in akusala cittas, which is the topic at hand. So it won't be any kind of seachange pasage! Ok, I am officially DSG burned out,doesn't take much, see you again in a few days. metta, phil #117521 From: "Ken H" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2011 12:07 pm Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna kenhowardau Hi Pt, and Robert E, I wonder if Robert put his finger on it when he said over-intellectualisation was having a concept of a concept. Then we could say intellectualising (without the "over") was having a concept of a dhamma. And, of course, "wisely considering" was having right understanding of a concept of a dhamma. Whew! ------------- > Pt: The important question is - is there a gray area between pariyatti and over-intellectualsing? E.g. > 1. like when trying to intellectually make sense of what was heard - especially on difficult subjects like d.o, kamma, etc - intellectually considering these usually has nothing to do with the present moment, though it might at some point help condition pariyatti. 2. like when explaining our theoretical understanding of dhamma to others - again, nothing to do with understanding the present moment, but might encourage pariyatti at some point. 3. like when trying to consider what has just ocurred in dhamma terms - ala, oh, that was anger, and anger is unwholesome, it is not me, it is impermanent, etc - again, more thinking that has nothing to do with the present (anger is already gone), but it might help with pariyatti in the future. ------------ KH: According to my RobertE-inspired understanding, 1 and 2 are good examples of intellectualising Dhamma (a.k.a. Dhamma study). And maybe 3 is too, but I have my doubts. With regard to 3 I am again tending to side with Robert . He spoke recently about killing, and implied (shock horror) that he might be prepared to kill under some circumstances. Phil has said something similar with regard to his duties as a householder. All I can say is that people are concepts, and concepts don't have kamma. When we talk about people killing and protecting their families from axe-murderers (or from savage cockroaches) we are having concepts of concepts. And that, I think, is outside the realm of Dhamma study. ---------------------- > Pt: My theory is that all these would be cittas with concepts as objects, but without panna. Would anyoane agree? So, the question then becomes, can this sort of cittas actually be kusala in the first place, alike to cittas responsible for dana and sila that can arise without panna? I'm not sure, I'd like to think that they can. Like for example when we try to share our theoretical knowledge of dhamma here, I guess it would be a bit like dana. But i also think that 99% of this sort of cittas would in fact be akusala, and more have to do with the desire to know, or to know better than someone else, or to disagree, etc. -------------------- KH: I agree with both assertions: it can be dana, but in our case its mostly lobha. ------------------------------ > Pt: Anyway, for the sake of being thorough I think there are two more types of cittas that have concepts as objects and are kusala, though not that related to our topic: -dana, sila and metta without panna, with concepts as objects. -samatha bhavana where concept is the object of citta, when there's panna, but not of the pariyatti or patipatti sort. ----------------------------- KH: Yes, although "metta without panna" would have to be either dana or sila, and not metta in the strict sense of the word. Correct me if I am wrong but I think metta is, strictly speaking, a brahma vihara and arises with the panna of samatha. ----------------------------------------- > Pt: As for the issue of why the Buddha thought kindness towards beings, when in effect there are no beings, just dhammas - as I've said before, my preference is to avoid framing the issue in terms of exist/doesn't exist, because imo - one, the topic is irrelvant to the topic of insight - panna is concerned with a khanda at the moment of insight, not with the issue of whether beings (trees, cars, etc) exist or not. ------------------------- KH: I still prefer the exist/don't exist way. I think to know anatta is to know "there is no lasting thing here, no sentient being." ------------------------------------- > Pt: Two, when claimed that self, beings, etc, exist or not, it automatically tends to cause a.confrontational argument regarding what did the Buddha say in different suttas on the topic of non/existence and what did he mean, while to be honest, none of the arguments strike me as anything having to do with encouraging insight. ------------------------------------- KH: 99.999% of modern-day Buddhists have a half-baked interpretation of the Dhamma. Despite their protests to the contrary, they still believe in a permanent self. They need to be told. And those of us who have been told (who accept there are only dhammas) still need regular reminders. There is no self - no you, no me, no anyone - there are only dhammas! Tell someone who cares! :-) ------------------------------------------ > PT: E.g. the sort of arguments you and Alex have been having for many years now regarding the trees and cars, most of which I'd classify as over-intellectualising. ----------------------------------------- KH: I wouldn't! Over intellectualising is when you have a concept of a concept. Ask Robert if you don't believe me. ---------------------------------------------------- > Pt: Three - the cognition process incorporates both dhammas and concepts, so both parties have to be familiar with it and choose a common vantage point for discussion, otherwise it's like the 4 blind men arguing about the shape of fhe elephant. And four - it has to be agreed whether we're talking insight or post-facto. Etc. ---------------------------------------------------- KH: It's like horses for courses. Outside DSG we have to shape our Dhamma discussions to suit the circumstances, but inside DSG it's open season. Everything here is fair game. ------------------------- > Pt: Looks like in my dealings with RobE I got his gargantuosis messagitis ------------------------- KH: So what? If people don't like it they can scroll down to the next message. :-) Ken H #117522 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2011 8:17 am Subject: The Golden Middle Way! bhikkhu5 Friends: Avoiding Extremes by the Golden Middle Way! The Blessed Buddha once said: The homeless one should not follow after these Two Extremes: 1: Giving in to indulgence in easy sensual pleasure, which is banal, primitive, vulgar, not noble, & disadvantageous on a very long term! Neither should he 2: Practice martyr self-torture, which is painful, not noble, and disadvantageous. The Blessed One has avoided both these extremes, and found the Golden Middle Way, which gives one both vision and understanding, which leads to peace, to clear insight, to Enlightenment, to Nibbna... It is this very Noble 8-fold Way that leads to the final irreversible ceasing of absolutely all Suffering: Right View Right Motivation Right Speech Right Action Right Livelihood Right Effort Right Awareness Right Concentration These Eight Noble Links, Friends and Bhikkhus, are to be developed for the full comprehension & elimination of all greed, hate, confusion, anger, envy, stinginess, hypocrisy, shrewdness, disloyalty, conceit, stubbornness, irritation, haughty arrogance, and lethargic laziness! These Noble 8 Links will induce their complete annihilation, ceasing, overcoming, vanishing, abandoning, destruction, evaporation, and the ultimate detaching release from all these mental horrors! <...> http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/The_4th_Noble_Truth_on_The_Way_to_Cease _Suffering.htm Source (edited extracts): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikya SN: 56:11 Numerical Discourses of the Buddha. Anguttara Nikya AN 8:90 http://What-Buddha-Said.net/Canon/Sutta/AN/Index.Numerical.htm Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samhita _/\_ * <...> #117523 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Sep 19, 2011 3:54 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Proximate cause of visible object nilovg Dear Ken H and Phil, Op 18-sep-2011, om 23:36 heeft Ken H het volgende geschreven: > > Ph: So seeing arises as a result of kamma (vipaka) but visual > object and other rupa arises because of not only kamma but also > temperature and other factors. > ----- > > KH: Basically, yes, although I'm not sure you have the details > right. Are you saying kamma can be one of the conditions for > visible rupa? I think it's just temperature isn't it? Kamma > conditions the arising of sense-base rupas, but not (I would have > thought) of sense-object rupas.(?) ------- N: Kamma is one of the conditions for ruupas of the body. Is there no colour of the body? Ruupas outside are originated only by temperature. ------ Nina. #117524 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Sep 19, 2011 4:10 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma in practice: mindfulness of vipaka to prevent kamma nilovg Dear Philip, Op 18-sep-2011, om 15:18 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > The other day I was reading about some cetasikas such as adhimokkha > (determination) and I was going to ask Nina what is the difference > between adhimokkha and virya, but of course that is an example of a > question that doesn't need to be asked, trying too hard to sort > things out isn't necessary. ----- N: Useful to know the difference. Adhimokkha: to be sure, determined about the object that is experienced by citta and the other cetasikas. It arises with kusala citta, akusala citta, vipaakacitta and kiriyacitta. It is different according as it arises with different cittas, but it performs a function together with the other naama-dhammas that arise together. Viriya: also this cetasika arises with kusala citta, akusala citta, vipaakacitta and kiriyacitta, but not with every citta. It strengthens and supports the conascent dhammas. These are all definitions and we should not try to catch realities as you suggest. ------- > Ph: But the other day, for example, I asked about how ditthi could > arise at the sense door. That is immediate, that can be experienced > (apparently, mind door makes more sense to me) ------ N: Also in a sense-door process there are javanacittas that can be kusala or akusala. ----- > Ph: Beings cannot be seen, or heard, or touched, nor can cars, or > trees. They can only be thought about. Why spend so much time > discussing them here? ------ N: Well said, Nina. #117525 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Sep 19, 2011 4:16 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Correct? nilovg Dear Phil, Op 18-sep-2011, om 15:43 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > Ph: Why is the cetasika contact outer ayatana? How can a cetasika > be external? ----- N: I used to have he same question. Citta is never lacking, although each moment there is a different citta. It is an inner reality. As to cetasikas, this is different. There are seven universals accompanying each citta, but as to the other cetasikas, there is such a variety of them and they accompany citta as the case demands. We can see them as 'outsiders', not like citta that is always present. Lobha is not always present, dosa is not always present. They can be compared to unwanted visitors that visit from time to time. ------- Nina. #117526 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Sep 19, 2011 4:21 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Reflection on disadvantages of akusala: when? Now! No, when??? nilovg Dear Phil, Op 18-sep-2011, om 16:40 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > Thank you. But I guess I don't understand what "danger is directly > seen without thinking" means. Could I ask you to explain a little > more, when you have time? ------ N: Pa~n~naa and sati just know without thinking that this is kusala, that is akusala. No need to always think of names or stories. Nina. #117527 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Sep 19, 2011 4:27 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Reflection on disadvantages of akusala: when? Now! No, when??? nilovg Dear Rob E, Op 18-sep-2011, om 20:29 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > She was unhappy with me, but stopped. In all cases I didn't have > to hurt anyone, or get hurt myself, so I guess I was lucky. ------ N: Kusala kamma condiitoned this. Interesting examples. They amazed me. ----- Nina. #117528 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Sep 19, 2011 4:31 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Can actions rooted in lobha condition kusala? nilovg Dear Rob E and Phil, Sometimes I take one point out of a post, just to add something. Op 18-sep-2011, om 20:55 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > I would think conventional intentions might be like when metta > arises, if it is a real moment of metta, even though it has a > conventional object it produces a kusala accumulation. So maybe > genuine intentions to "do good" have some kind of real dhamma to > them at that moment, even if the object is a concept... ------ N: The metta citta is kusala citta and that is a reality. It is accumulated and it can grow. ------ Nina. #117529 From: "Ken H" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2011 5:43 pm Subject: Re: Proximate cause of visible object kenhowardau Hi Nina, ------- <. . .> > N: Kamma is one of the conditions for ruupas of the body. Is there no colour of the body? > -------- KH: You have caught me out. Until now I would have confidently said no, there is no colour of the body. I had assumed the only rupas of the body were the sense-bases. And they could be experienced at the mind door, not at the sense doors. Ken H #117530 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2011 5:54 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: samatha. was: Khandhas and samsara sarahprocter... Hi Ken O, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Sarah > > your reference to the commnetary to MN 1 > > S: Again, Sub Cy "The purport is: all dhammas beginning with earth (pathavi) which function as the bases for conceiving (ma~n~nanaavatthu)." > In other words, there is only pathavii dhatu (earth element) experienced through the body-sense, only elements which are ever directly known through insight, but there is (wrong) conceiving about all kinds of earth and concept. Only the direct understanding of the realities lead to the ariyan knowledge." > > > KO: What you said had just confirm that misconceiving is the cause of our suffering and not because it is concept that cause the misconceiving. .... S: It is the misconceiving, the ignorance about the truth of realities that is the cause of the suffering. Pathavi dhatu is not understood as pathavi dhatu, it's taken to be some thing or some person. No one has ever suggested that it is the concept that is the "cause of misconceiving". It is the accumulated wrong view and ignorance. .... >The sub-commentary explains the reasons for cause of misconceivings. Direct understanding as in purification of view level, before that it is just conventional reality. It can be both concepts or nama and rupa, even satipatthana comprises of both. Saitpatthana is not solely nama and rupa. .... S: Even at the level of pariyatti (which is the 'fore-runner' of satipatthana), it is the right understanding of reality, even though at a conceptual level. Right understanding of realities has to begin like this by hearing and considering what is real now. Metta Sarah ======= #117531 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2011 6:05 pm Subject: Re: Who is better off? sarahprocter... Hi Phil, -- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > But I still cannot fully accept the notion that a person who does a lot of akusala but "has understanding" is better off than a person who does a lot of kusala without panna. In the first place, if a person has enough understanding that it is valuable to that degree, how could he continue to do "a lot of akusala?" If he *is* doing a lot of aksuala, it indicates that the "understanding" is not that valuable, I think. .... S: Good qus, but I think we have to remember the suttas which remind us not to measure or compare when similar examples were mentioned to the Buddha: For example, in the Migasala Sutta -AN, Bk of 6s,v.44 (PTS, Hare transl)we read: "And the measurers measure them, saying: `His stature (Dhammaa) is just this, the other's just that; in what way is one wanting, one exalted?' And that measuring, Ananda, is to the measurers' harm and hurt for many a day." Later the Buddha says further to Ananda: "....But who save the Tathagata can judge this difference? Wherefore, Ananda, be no measurer of persons; measure not the measure of persons. Verily, Ananda, he digs a pit for himself who measures the measure of persons. I alone, Ananda, can measure their measure - or one like me." S: More under "judging" in U.P., including the reminders quoted from the texts to reflect on the good qualities of others and not dwell on the bad qualities. Metta Sarah ====== #117532 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2011 6:21 pm Subject: Re: Notes on nimitta, part 3. sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > I would just reiterate that it would be good to understand whether developing the ability to see the stages of action in the rupas and namas that are attendant upon the apprehension of a dhamma is a matter of increased understanding and panna's ability to see and understand the actions taking place, or a kind of freedom of the citta as it becomes less encumbered by delusions and clingings and therefore more clear in its apprehension, and perhaps also "faster" in its ability to apprehend the momentary stages of arising, falling away and characteristics of dhammas, or of both. .... S: This was a summary of your questions about nimittas and insight at the end of a post. The developed insight grows through the deeper and more penetrative insight into the same namas and rupas. It's also true that as the cittas with panna develop, they are less and less "encumbered" by delusions in between and thus, the moments of insight and depth of insight becomes more the norm. With regard to the "luminous mind" you referred to, panna can begin to realise that it is the kilesas, the defilements, which arise in the javana processes that cause the harm. The vipaka cittas, such as moments of seeing, hearing and bodily experience are "luminous" in the sense that they are just 'results', they are pure of kilesa. Metta Sarah ======= #117533 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2011 7:12 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Implications of Foulness of the Body sarahprocter... Hi Antony, Another late reply... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "antony272b2" wrote: > > S: Isn't it more helpful to understand that the body we find so precious is just an illusion and in truth there are just the various rupas, the various elements arising and falling away? It is because these rupas arise and fall away all the time and are as such "oppressed" that they are truly foul oe impure (asubha), not beautiful or pure (subha) at all. The sotapanna has no more illusion or wrong view about the beauty of the body because there is no more illusion about a body as existing. It is clearly understood that there are only impermanent, unsatisfactory and foul namas and rupas arising and falling away. > > ... > Antony: So namas and rupas are foul? That is a new idea for me. I was under the impression that they were aesthetically neutral. .... S: Usually, we take the body or parts of the body for something beautiful or neutral, but actually, as we read in the suttas what is taken for the body is asubha (foul). Usually asubha-sa~n~naa refers to the contemplation of the 32 parts of the body, but I think it's true to say that what is impermanent, painful and without self is also impure. As you know, the vipallasas refer to the taking of: what is impermanent (anicca) as permanent; what is painful (dukkha) as pleasant (or happiness-yielding); what is without a self (anattaa) as a self; what is impure (foul: asubha) as pure or beautiful'' The one who has no more ditthi about these has turned away from the conditioned dhammas to the unconditioned dhamma. The anagami has eradicated all perversion of perception and consciousness (in addition to wrong view, of course) that the impure or foul is pure or beautiful. There is no more attachment to sensuous objects at all. Any further thoughts? Metta Sarah ====== #117534 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2011 7:22 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: samatha. was: Khandhas and samsara sarahprocter... Hi Ken O, You wrote to Nina, #117210 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > >N: True, but the stages of tender insight are insight, not thinking > >about the truth. > >The body parts, breath. etc. , well i understand what you mean. > >Howard had a similar question about mindfulness of breathing, and see > >my answer later on. > > > KO: I came from the dinosaur group so I know how you are going to answer. I > know what you going to answer and I could always answer the way, you, Ken H, > Sarah and Jon answers. Your pathway is the dry insightors like your teach AS, so > for people like you to understand the samatha bhavana is quite difficult. ..... S: With all respect, I think very few people today understand what samatha bhavana is. Just a comment to suggest that our "pathway is the dry insightors", indicates a mis-understanding of what insight is and what samatha is imo. Who can select what kind of citta arises now or at the next moment? Who knows whether there will be moments of samatha bhavana or moments of insight tomorrow? If one has a desire or makes a choice to develop A or B, to me it suggests that neither A or B is understood now. Is there any understanding of what metta is now, for example? Can metta be developed now? If so, is it by trying to develop metta or through understanding its characteristic and nature when it arises? Does one have to call oneself a samatha-bhavana attainer or anything else in order for metta to develop as we discuss the Dhamma now with the interest of our friends at heart? > > Buddha talk about satipathana as the only way, the only way covered two > important aspect, serenity and insight. This is written in the commentaries and > visud and dispeller of delusion .... S: Yes, there cannot be insight without serenity, calm. Even at a moment of understanding of reality now, there has to be serenity. Metta Sarah ======= #117535 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2011 7:37 pm Subject: Re: A reply to half a dozen multi-splendoured Rob E posts sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > >S: 3. "Do purposeful physical and mental activities have a positive effect on spiritual development?" you ask. Only right understanding and associated mental factors leads to "positive" "spiritual development" - samatha and vipassana bhavana. > >R: Yes, the question remains, does the "right form of concerted practice," the "right form of effort" associated with arising volitions, as embodied in statements of the Buddha such as "strive unceasingly..." etc., lead to the arising of such kusala understandings and mental factors. My view as you know is that Buddha not only said "yes" to such practice, but also directly admonished his followers to engage in such practice. Of course we disagree on this, as do all those who see meditation - formal meditation - as a most important part of the path, and not an impediment which leads to increased "self-view," & "wrong view" about the path. .... S: What we agree on is that any effort, right or wrong, any volition, right or wrong, any practice, right or wrong, are all anatta, beyone anyone's will or control. So now, if there are conditions for right effort to arise, it will arise. If there are conditions for wrong effort to arise, it will arise. Only right understanding will know what dhamma is what, leading to the development of the 'right' and leading away from the development of the 'wrong', no matter the circumstances. Metta Sarah ======= #117536 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Sep 19, 2011 9:54 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Proximate cause of visible object upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 9/19/2011 1:56:28 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Ruupas outside are originated only by temperature. =========================== What of the "rule" that multiple conditions are required for the arising of any phenomenon? With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #117537 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:07 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: samatha. was: Khandhas and samsara upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 9/19/2011 5:22:20 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Even at a moment of understanding of reality now, there has to be serenity. ================================== I think this can be understood if one takes note of the instantaneousness and rapid variation of experience: Someone might say that when being aware of their own terrible fear, there cannot be serenity, but that is not correct. There is terrible fear, and THEN there is the very quickly following (probably wordless) understanding "Fear," and at the instant of that understanding, fear is momentarily absent. With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #117538 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:57 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Proximate cause of visible object nilovg Hi Howard, Op 19-sep-2011, om 13:54 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Ruupas outside are originated only by temperature. > =========================== > What of the "rule" that multiple conditions are required for the > arising of any phenomenon? ------ N: This I said with regard to the four factors that originate ruupas. When looking at a particular ruupa, say, heat, this is conditioned by the other three conascent Great Elements of Earth, Water and Wind. ------ Nina. #117539 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Sep 19, 2011 11:16 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Proximate cause of visible object upasaka_howard Thanks, Nina. :-) With metta, Howard In a message dated 9/19/2011 8:57:29 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, Op 19-sep-2011, om 13:54 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Ruupas outside are originated only by temperature. > =========================== > What of the "rule" that multiple conditions are required for the > arising of any phenomenon? ------ N: This I said with regard to the four factors that originate ruupas. When looking at a particular ruupa, say, heat, this is conditioned by the other three conascent Great Elements of Earth, Water and Wind. ------ Nina. #117540 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 3:02 am Subject: Re: Not Who, but What? part 1 moellerdieter Dear Nina, you wrote: You touch on some basic points and therefore I had to take more time. I answer in 2 parts. D: good , I will answer likewise (Op 10-sep-2011, om 18:36 heeft Dieter Moeller het volgende geschreven: > N: The fourfold right effort is very important. In order to be a factor of the eightfold Path it has to accompany right understanding (sammaa di.t.thi) of the eightfold Path:Right effort (samm-vyma): the effort of avoiding or overcoming evil and > unwholesome dhammmas, and of developing and maintaining wholesome > dhammas. > D: I agree . But what now is the right understanding in detail?) ----- N: Direct understanding and awareness of whatever dhamma presents itself through one of the six doors. When there is less inclination to take visible object or sound for self and one understands them as only elements, sure, there will be less akusala. That harsh word spoken by Mr. X will disturb less. It is a conditioned dhamma, thus, a dhamma, why blame him? There are no persons, only dhammas. D: that is where we want to be . Lot of right effort still necessary from the point of intellectual understanding up to one's truely deep penetration (incl. mana ). Yes , we should take the harsh words of Mr. X with equanimity .But not because it is conditioned dhamma and there is no person X ( the chain of conditioned dhammas describe the delusioned Person , i.e. D.O.) , but as an effort to avoid ( aversion, anger) . Why blame him ? Well, the Buddha used sometimes straight language in his teachings. N:Everything that is real is dhamma. Here right effort arises already without having to think about it. It performs its function of abstaining from akusala in answering back in a disagreeable way. It is not 'my effort' but only a conditioned dhamma. D: see below ------ > > > D: "The monk rouses his will to avoid the arising of evil, > unwholesome things not yet arisen ... to overcome them ... to > develop wholesome things not yet arisen ... to maintain them, and > not to let them disappear, but to bring them to growth, to maturity > and to the full perfection of development. And he makes effort, > stirs up his energy, exerts his mind and strives" (A. IV, 13).> > (1) "What now, o monks, is the effort to avoid? Perceiving a form, > or a sound, or an odour, or a taste, or a bodily or mental > impression, the monk neither adheres to the whole nor to its parts. > And he strives to ward off that through which evil and unwholesome > things might arise, such as greed and sorrow, if he remained with > unguarded senses; and he watches over his senses, restrains his > senses. This is called the effort to avoid. > ----- N: This is all so true. Not clinging to a whole of a person. D: if so , then your comment above makes no sense to me D: N: Viriya is a cetasika and it performs its own function by > conditions.> > D: not clear what you mean by ' own functions' ? > As far as I understand , Viriya is the energy of sankhara khanda , > the potential vigour of the mental formation group (conditioned by > avijja -sankhara-vinnana ). > ------- N: Yes, this cetasika is one of those that are the khandha of formations (sa"nkhaarakkhandha). It can be kusala, akusala or neither, depending on the citta it accompanies. Its function is to consolidate conascent dhammas'. It fortifies and supports the citta and the other cetasikas it accompanies, so that they can carry out heir functions D: I think it must be noted that the original Law of Dependent Origination doesn't include the quality kusala, akusala or neither. It is -as far as I understand- an extension by Abhidhamma , wondering when this additional function was consolidated. . N:You write: We have to distinguish different meanings of sa"nkhaara in different contexts. In the D.O. sa"nkhaara is: kusala kamma, akusala kamma, and aruupajhaana. Sa"nkhaara stands here for abhisa"nkhaara, these kammas condition vi~n~naa.na, here vipaakacitta, in the form of rebirth- consciousness and vipaakacitta arising during life. D: why different context? In the 12 links D.O. we find Sankhara in the second and Sankhara Khanda in the 4th place (as part of nama) N: Sa"nkhaarakkhandha are all cetasikas except feeling and sa~n~naa which are a separate khandha each. Sa"nkhaara dhamma includes all conditioned dhammas. Sa"nkhaarakkhandha is included in sa"nkhaara dhamma, but sa"nkhaara dhamma is wider, it includes all conditioned dhammas. ------ D: not clear to me , in which way are you agreeing or disagreeing with my statement 'Viriya is the energy of sankhara khanda , the potential vigour of the mental formation group (conditioned by avijja -sankhara-vinnana )? with Metta Dieter #117541 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 3:36 am Subject: Re: A reply to half a dozen multi-splendoured Rob E posts truth_aerator Dear Sarah, all, >S: What we agree on is that any effort, right or wrong, any volition, >right or wrong, any practice, right or wrong, are all anatta, beyone >anyone's will or control. >========================================================== So just because things are "beyond anyone's will or control" it means that one shouldn't strive to do good, avoid evil and purify the mind? Does this means that intentional actions, being "beyond anyone's will or control" should not be done? In that case do not eat, do not drink water, do not move even a finger, do not breath, etc. These things do occur. Intentions do occur. Good intentions lead to good results, bad intentions lead to bad results. With best wishes, Alex #117542 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 4:06 am Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna epsteinrob Hi Ken H. Just a couple of quick notes for now, as I jump in and back out again. I like this discussion - maybe more later. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > All I can say is that people are concepts, and concepts don't have kamma. When we talk about people killing and protecting their families from axe-murderers (or from savage cockroaches) we are having concepts of concepts. And that, I think, is outside the realm of Dhamma study. Your view here *does* make sense to the Buddha's view on killing animals. He had no objection to the monks eating meat if it was given to them, as long as they didn't kill the animals themselves. That surprised me, but it supports your idea that the Buddha's teaching on ahimsa was directed towards avoiding the akusala kamma involved, rather than keeping other beings from being killed. In the Mahayana tradition, when Hui Neng went to live in the woods for 12 years with hunters, he would a/release the animals from their traps when the hunters weren't looking; and b/eat his own vegetables cooked up with the hunters' meat, but not the meat itself. I wonder if the hunters ever noticed the lower rate of capture during those 12 years. Just an interesting aside... ------------------------- > KH: Yes, although "metta without panna" would have to be either dana or sila, and not metta in the strict sense of the word. Correct me if I am wrong but I think metta is, strictly speaking, a brahma vihara and arises with the panna of samatha. I wonder what you think the purpose or intent of metta is when it arises *with* panna, that is to say, with dhamma as object rather than concept? It seems strange to have metta towards a momentary object rather than a being. Is there an explanation for how this makes sense? What is the object, in other words, of fully wise metta? > ------------------------- > > Pt: Looks like in my dealings with RobE I got his gargantuosis messagitis > ------------------------- > > KH: So what? If people don't like it they can scroll down to the next message. :-) You are too funny, Ken H. I like your style! Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = #117543 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 4:54 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Reflection on disadvantages of akusala: when? Now! No, when??? epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob E, > Op 18-sep-2011, om 20:29 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > > > She was unhappy with me, but stopped. In all cases I didn't have > > to hurt anyone, or get hurt myself, so I guess I was lucky. > ------ > N: Kusala kamma condiitoned this. Interesting examples. They amazed me. :-) Thanks. I was quite amazed myself when these things happened. When I look back...it seems very strange. Thanks for your comment on it being conditioned by kusala kamma - that is a good point, good to know... Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #117544 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 4:57 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Can actions rooted in lobha condition kusala? epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob E and Phil, > Sometimes I take one point out of a post, just to add something. > Op 18-sep-2011, om 20:55 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > > > I would think conventional intentions might be like when metta > > arises, if it is a real moment of metta, even though it has a > > conventional object it produces a kusala accumulation. So maybe > > genuine intentions to "do good" have some kind of real dhamma to > > them at that moment, even if the object is a concept... > ------ > N: The metta citta is kusala citta and that is a reality. It is > accumulated and it can grow. That is true even though the object is a concept? Can you explain a bit how that works? I'm sure you've talked about it before. And a second question: Can there be mindfulness at a moment when the object is a concept, for instance, a moment of metta with sati? And if so then does the sati take the metta as object and understand how it is directed towards a concept? Strange questions, but I am interested to see how this works. Thanks, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #117545 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 6:28 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Can actions rooted in lobha condition kusala? truth_aerator Dear RobertE, all, > And a second question: Can there be mindfulness at a moment when the >object is a concept, for instance, a moment of metta with sati? And >if so then does the sati take the metta as object and understand how >it is directed towards a concept? >===================== In the satipatthana suttas, 4 elements, 10 stages of corpse decomposition, 4 postures and minor movements, !mindfulnesss! of breathing (anapanaSATI) are all part of satipatthana as taught by the Buddha. With best wishes, Alex #117546 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 8:17 am Subject: Re: Notes on nimitta, part 3. epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > It's also true that as the cittas with panna develop, they are less and less "encumbered" by delusions in between and thus, the moments of insight and depth of insight becomes more the norm. That sounds nice. Right now most of my cittas seem encumbered by kilesas - you start to notice how painful all those subtle kilesas really are, and realize that even many or most of the "good" moments are underlined with various discomforts, fears, anxieties or resentments. Good to see I guess... And of the course the idea of "my" which seems associated with all of them! > With regard to the "luminous mind" you referred to, panna can begin to realise that it is the kilesas, the defilements, which arise in the javana processes that cause the harm. > Even now, it becomes more obvious with a small amount of awareness that develops... > The vipaka cittas, such as moments of seeing, hearing and bodily experience are "luminous" in the sense that they are just 'results', they are pure of kilesa. Hm...even the uncomfortable ones? That is interesting... Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #117547 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 8:18 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Can actions rooted in lobha condition kusala? epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Dear RobertE, all, > > > > And a second question: Can there be mindfulness at a moment when the >object is a concept, for instance, a moment of metta with sati? And >if so then does the sati take the metta as object and understand how >it is directed towards a concept? > >===================== > > > In the satipatthana suttas, 4 elements, 10 stages of corpse decomposition, 4 postures and minor movements, !mindfulnesss! of breathing (anapanaSATI) are all part of satipatthana as taught by the Buddha. Thanks, and I agree this is part of satipatthana practice. I am just wondering what the technical Abhidhamma sense of this is, but your point is well taken. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = #117548 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 9:24 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Can actions rooted in lobha condition kusala? truth_aerator Dear RobertE, all, >RE: Thanks, and I agree this is part of satipatthana practice. I am >just wondering what the technical Abhidhamma sense of this is, but >your point is well taken. >====================================================== I forgot few sutta additions: a) Base of infinite space/nothingness can lead to Nibbana. Both are conceptual from CMA point of view. b) Bahiya instruction contains: "In reference to the cognized, only the cognized. " So the fault is not in cognized itself, I believe fault is with avijja and tanha. So ultimately one needs to let go of clinging toward anything, conceptual or not. In CMA pg 315 It is said that concepts with mind & matter are object and decisive support condition for mind. In any case, concepts do have an affect on the mind. With metta, Alex #117549 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 9:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Notes on nimitta, part 3. upasaka_howard Hi, Robert (and Sarah) - My 2 cents flipped into the pile: In a message dated 9/19/2011 6:17:22 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, epsteinrob@... writes: Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > It's also true that as the cittas with panna develop, they are less and less "encumbered" by delusions in between and thus, the moments of insight and depth of insight becomes more the norm. That sounds nice. Right now most of my cittas seem encumbered by kilesas - you start to notice how painful all those subtle kilesas really are, and realize that even many or most of the "good" moments are underlined with various discomforts, fears, anxieties or resentments. Good to see I guess... And of the course the idea of "my" which seems associated with all of them! ----------------------------------------------- HCW: IMO, being aware of the frequent presence of defilements and their subtlety is already an important step forward. Consider how many people are almost entirely unaware of the unwholesome states interspersed among the wholesome. ---------------------------------------------- > With regard to the "luminous mind" you referred to, panna can begin to realise that it is the kilesas, the defilements, which arise in the javana processes that cause the harm. > Even now, it becomes more obvious with a small amount of awareness that develops... > The vipaka cittas, such as moments of seeing, hearing and bodily experience are "luminous" in the sense that they are just 'results', they are pure of kilesa. Hm...even the uncomfortable ones? That is interesting... ---------------------------------------------- HCW: It seems to me that while the feeling of akusala vipaka may be unpleasant, the aversion follows afterwards in a kammic state, leaving the vipaka state emotionally undefiled, though maybe defiled by ignorance. I think it should be added, more strongly, that even an aversive, extremely and multiply defiled state of consciousness is nonetheless luminous in that the aversion cetasika and all other active defilements are adventitious and not inherent in the consciousness itself. Whether a defilement is actively present or not, as taught in the Pabhassara Sutta, the mind is luminous. ----------------------------------------------- Best, Robert E. ================================ With metta, Howard Luminous /Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming defilements. Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements./ (From the Pabhassara Sutta) #117550 From: "philip" Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 10:13 am Subject: Cetasika is external philofillet Hi Nina > > Ph: Why is the cetasika contact outer ayatana? How can a cetasika > > be external? > ----- > N: I used to have he same question. > Citta is never lacking, although each moment there is a different > citta. It is an inner reality. As to cetasikas, this is different. > There are seven universals accompanying each citta, but as to the > other cetasikas, there is such a variety of them and they accompany > citta as the case demands. We can see them as 'outsiders', not like > citta that is always present. Lobha is not always present, dosa is > not always present. They can be compared to unwanted visitors that > visit from time to time. > Ph: I see. This ties in with what I was reading in PSD today, the citta as leader, and as home to the other conascent dhammas. Citta is always present. And amoung the always present cittas, only bhavanga citta is "luminous", free from outside visitors, which can be understood to include cetasikas. That makes sense. Defilements such as lobha and dosa are cetasikas, and the defilements are the visitors in that famous luminous mind sutta passage. But what about hetu. Bhavanga cittas have roots, they are not always ahetuka, right? What is the difference between hetu and cetasikas? Metta, Phil #117551 From: "philip" Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 11:01 am Subject: Citta knows the object. But what about sanna? philofillet Hi again Nina I read this in SPD, p.68: "All kinds of realities can appear when citta arises and clearly knows the object that presents itself. The citta that smells through the nose can arise and clearly know the different odours that appear. It can clearly know the smell of different kinds of animals, plants or flowers, the smell of food, of curry and of sweets. Even if we only smell without seeing anything, we can know what kind of smell it is." I guess this is similar to my (and other people's) confusion over the moneychanger simile that is used in Vism, where it says that citta knows what kind of money it is (or something like that, the colour?) when most people assume it is sanna. Isn't it sanna that knows "what kind of smell it is?" Aren't I right in thinking that citta has the power to cognize, differentiate, somehow grasp the nature of different sounds, but it is only sanna that puts it together to remember what they are, based on past marking? Metta, Phil #117552 From: "philip" Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 11:08 am Subject: Re: Cetasika is external philofillet Hi again Nina (and Sarah) > > There are seven universals accompanying each citta, but as to the > > other cetasikas, there is such a variety of them and they accompany > > citta as the case demands. We can see them as 'outsiders', not like > > citta that is always present. I missed this the first time. So the seven universals are not considered external. Perhaps Sarah was mistaken in denoting phassa as external? Metta, Phil #117553 From: "philip" Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 11:23 am Subject: Re: Who is better off? philofillet Hi Sarah > -- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > > But I still cannot fully accept the notion that a person who does a lot of akusala but "has understanding" is better off than a person who does a lot of kusala without panna. In the first place, if a person has enough understanding that it is valuable to that degree, how could he continue to do "a lot of akusala?" If he *is* doing a lot of aksuala, it indicates that the "understanding" is not that valuable, I think. > .... > S: Good qus, but I think we have to remember the suttas which remind us not to measure or compare when similar examples were mentioned to the Buddha: Ph: Thanks for the references. But please note that I am only asking because Acharn Sujin answered the question, saying that the one doing akusala with understanding is better off than the one doing kusala without understanding. It was not a clearly stated answer, she just asked which leads to the end of the path, stressing understanding. She was not encouraging akusala, of course, she was encouraging understanding. Understanding moots all debates. And I think my point above is good. If there is valuable understanding, why would akusala continue to be done? I don't think it would. The image I create of a student of Acharn Sujin who continues to do bad deeds based on a belief that understanding the akusala involved is the most important thing, that's a fictional creation. Though I must say that since starting to listen to Acharn Sujin a lot again, I seem to have become a little more relaxed about akusala kamma patha that has been performed or is contemplated, even as confidence about the importance of understanding the present dhamma inreases. Surely just a coincidence of conditoins, but have to keep an eye on that! Maybe that is why Nina made a point on several occasions of reminding me about the cockroach I killed, and was in the process of forgetting about. Now not so easy for me to forget about it. That is good function of a Dhamma friend, though we know of course a good Dhamma friend wouldn't encourage continued remorse. Nina was encouraging understanding, not remorse. Metta, Phil > #117554 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 11:43 am Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna kenhowardau Hi Alex, -------------------- <. . .> >> KH: And I think it's a big turn-off for other people when someone is rambling on and on trying to express a deep understanding that he doesn't really have. >> > A: If what you were saying with explicitly stated in the suttas, then I would have no problem. --------------------- KH: Alex, it's called anatta. You've seen anatta in the suttas. It means there are no people in the world - no trees, no cars - just momentary conditioned dhammas. ------------------------------ >> A: But when something is claimed to have been said by the Buddha, and no canonical reference given then I have to wonder. It is fine for a person to have his metaphysical views, just don't put your views in Buddha's mouth. ----------------------------- KH: That is an unfair accusation. At DSG the proponents of the 'no-control' interpretation give canonical references for everything they say. It is you who questions the worth of those Canonical references, saying that the ancient commentaries were unauthorised and incorrect. Or you insist suttas references must be given simple, ordinary meanings instead of deep, profound meanings. So please don't accuse people of not giving references. ------------------------------------- > A: I do find it a bit too much when people (me included) talk about things that are way way of what is need for Arhatship. Some discussions often seem to be of the "how many angels can fit on the tip of the needle" sort of use. Sometimes, me included, talk about some abstract concepts (read about in smart books) around as if we truly understand what they mean. -------------------------------------- KH: I find meditators to be the worst offenders in that regard. They love to relate their personal experiences and theories. And all of them are contrary to the Dhamma: being about self instead of no-self. But I have to admit it is not just the meditators. When I don't know the answer to a question I tend to theorise on the basis of what I do know. And that can be tedious for other people. Ken H #117555 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:14 pm Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna truth_aerator Dear KenH, All, >KH: Alex, it's called anatta. You've seen anatta in the suttas. It >means there are no people in the world - no trees, no cars - just >momentary conditioned dhammas. >================================================ The most typical way that Buddha talked about anatta was to cross question: "What do you think, Rahula - is the eye constant or inconstant?" "Inconstant, lord." "And is that which is inconstant easeful or stressful?" "Stressful, lord." "And is it fitting to regard what is inconstant, stressful, subject to change as: 'This is mine. This is my self. This is what I am'?" "No, lord." [Alex: same repeated for 18 elements, and in other suttas 5 aggregates are also used] - MN147 Please note, the Buddha refutes the existence of Atta that is nicca and sukkha. This seems like refutation of Advaita like unchanging Atman that is nicca and sukkha. Furthermore the Buddha says "is it fitting to regard what is inconstant, stressful, subject to change as: 'This is mine. This is my self. This is what I am'". Again, anatta is meant to be a strategy to let go of all craving. Why cling if there isn't any nicca & sukha atta to cling? Why cling if there isn't anything nicca and sukha to cling? http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.147.than.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.002.bpit.html In other cases He has refuted idea that the World and Self are one. Again, it doesn't refute the empiric individuality such as Ken, Alex, Sariputta, Buddha, etc. In MN#2 it is called wrong attention to think about "Do I not exist? I have no self'" instead it is more appropriate to think in terms of 4NT (stress, its origin, its cessation and yes, the path leading to its cessation that includes effort and jhanas). So all the talk about non-existence of I and "I have no self'" is actually improper attention. Wrongly grasp idea of Anatta can be a fuel for the defilements... If no one suffers then why follow the path? Why avoid driving into trees and pedestrians as there is nobody to get hurt! If there is no one, then there is no control, so let's indulge in this uncontrollable urge [whatever it is].... >KH: That is an unfair accusation. At DSG the proponents of the >'no-control' interpretation give canonical references for everything >they say. >============================================= Show them please. >================================================ the brahman spoke to the Blessed One thus: "Venerable Gotama, I am one of such a doctrine, of such a view: `There is no self-doer, there is no other-doer.'"[1] "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 [2] - 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?"[3] "Just so, Venerable Sir." "When there is an element of initiating, are initiating beings [4] clearly discerned?" "Just so, Venerable Sir." "So, brahmin, when there is the element of initiating, initiating beings are clearly discerned; of such beings, this is the self-doer, this, the other-doer. [5] "What do you think, brahmin, is there an element of exertion [6] ... is there an element of effort [7] ... is there an element of steadfastness [8] ... is there an element of persistence [9] ... is there an element of endeavoring?" [10] "Just so, Venerable Sir." "When there is an element of endeavoring, are endeavoring beings clearly discerned?" "Just so, Venerable Sir." "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 160. One truly is the protector of oneself; who else could the protector be? With oneself fully controlled, one gains a mastery that is hard to gain. 161. The evil a witless man does by himself, born of himself and produced by himself, grinds him as a diamond grinds a hard gem. 165. By oneself is evil done; by oneself is one defiled. By oneself is evil left undone; by oneself is one made pure. Purity and impurity depended on oneself; no one can purify another. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.12.budd.html So much for there being no "i" in empirical and conditioned sense. With best wishes, Alex #117556 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 1:58 pm Subject: Re: Notes on nimitta, part 3. epsteinrob Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote:> > ...Right now most of my cittas seem encumbered by kilesas > - you start to notice how painful all those subtle kilesas really are, and > realize that even many or most of the "good" moments are underlined with > various discomforts, fears, anxieties or resentments. Good to see I guess... > And of the course the idea of "my" which seems associated with all of > them! > ----------------------------------------------- > HCW: > IMO, being aware of the frequent presence of defilements and their > subtlety is already an important step forward. Consider how many people are > almost entirely unaware of the unwholesome states interspersed among the > wholesome. Thanks for the encouragement. I do also think it's fascinating when you start to see how "off" everything really is. In a way it's a relief, as though you knew something was wrong but couldn't put your finger on it, and now it starts to make a lot of sense. > ---------------------------------------------- ... > ---------------------------------------------- > HCW: > It seems to me that while the feeling of akusala vipaka may be > unpleasant, the aversion follows afterwards in a kammic state, leaving the vipaka > state emotionally undefiled, though maybe defiled by ignorance. Yes, I think makes sense in terms of the reaction of the present moment when the vipaka arises; though vipaka as the result of past kamma carries some influence or character from that kamma, does it not? > I think it should be added, more strongly, that even an aversive, > extremely and multiply defiled state of consciousness is nonetheless luminous > in that the aversion cetasika and all other active defilements are > adventitious and not inherent in the consciousness itself. Whether a defilement is > actively present or not, as taught in the Pabhassara Sutta, the mind is > luminous. I agree that the basic quality of a citta, being "aware of" whatever arises, is inherently a pure function, however defiled the object of its attention may be, and however murky the view. Still, when things get that difficult to see, it's time to wash the windows! :-) --------------------------------- > /Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming defilements. > Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements./ > (From the Pabhassara Sutta) Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = #117557 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 2:07 pm Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > -------------------- > <. . .> > >> KH: And I think it's a big turn-off for > other people when someone is rambling on and on trying to express a deep > understanding that he doesn't really have. > >> > > > A: If what you were saying with explicitly stated in the suttas, then I would have > no problem. > --------------------- > > KH: Alex, it's called anatta. You've seen anatta in the suttas. It means there are no people in the world - no trees, no cars - just momentary conditioned dhammas. Anatta does mean that there are no entities within the human organism, within the kandhas - those are all experiential, and the point is that there's no being, just processes. But anatta has nothing to do with trees and cars - those are not "beings," but objects. Anatta does not say that objects don't exist; only that people as entities don't exist. Sunya comes closer to saying that objects have a core of insubstantiality or emptiness, but it still does not say that trees and cars do not exist. As far as I can see, the idea that objects as well as people are merely conceptual constructions is a contribution of the Abhidhamma commentaries and sub-commentaries. > -------------------------------------- > > KH: I find meditators to be the worst offenders in that regard. They love to relate their personal experiences and theories. And all of them are contrary to the Dhamma: being about self instead of no-self. Got an example? Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = #117558 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 3:10 pm Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna kenhowardau Hi Alex, ----- > A: The most typical way that Buddha talked about anatta was to cross question: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.147.than.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.002.bpit.html In other cases He has refuted idea that the World and Self are one. Again, it doesn't refute the empiric individuality such as Ken, Alex, Sariputta, Buddha, etc. ----- KH: Quoting Thanissaro to me is like waving a red rag to a bull. Here we have a man who has taken the Buddha's teaching, twisted it, distorted it, and turned it into his own eternalist religion. What could be be more appalling than that? ------------------ > A: In MN#2 it is called wrong attention to think about "Do I not exist? I have no self'" instead it is more appropriate to think in terms of 4NT (stress, its origin, its cessation and yes, the path leading to its cessation that includes effort and jhanas). So all the talk about non-existence of I and "I have no self'" is actually improper attention. ------------------ KH You are not fooling anyone Alex. You have seen the real interpretation of that sutta many times, and now you are pretending never to have seen it. ----------------------------- > A: Wrongly grasp idea of Anatta can be a fuel for the defilements... If no one suffers then why follow the path? Why avoid driving into trees and pedestrians as there is nobody to get hurt! If there is no one, then there is no control, so let's indulge in this uncontrollable urge [whatever it is].... ----------------------------- KH: Eternalist religious-fundamentalists hate the Dhamma. Most of all they hate anatta. Thanissaro assures his minions anatta does not mean no self. He says it is just a meditation technique. ------------------------------------ >> KH: That is an unfair accusation. At DSG the proponents of the 'no-control' interpretation give canonical references for everything they say. >> > A: Show them please. ------------------- KH: Your ingratitude knows no bounds. When I think of all the patient help you have received over so many years at DSG, with meticulous referencing from the Canon, your denial of any such help is astounding. ---------- > A: the brahman spoke to the Blessed One thus: "Venerable Gotama, I am one of such a doctrine, of such a view: `There is no self-doer, there is no other-doer.'"[1] "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 [2] - 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?"[3] "Just so, Venerable Sir." "When there is an element of initiating, are initiating beings [4] clearly discerned?" "Just so, Venerable Sir." "So, brahmin, when there is the element of initiating, initiating beings are clearly discerned; of such beings, this is the self-doer, this, the other-doer. [5] "What do you think, brahmin, is there an element of exertion [6] ... is there an element of effort [7] ... is there an element of steadfastness [8] ... is there an element of persistence [9] ... is there an element of endeavoring?" [10] "Just so, Venerable Sir." "When there is an element of endeavoring, are endeavoring beings clearly discerned?" "Just so, Venerable Sir." "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 160. One truly is the protector of oneself; who else could the protector be? With oneself fully controlled, one gains a mastery that is hard to gain. 161. The evil a witless man does by himself, born of himself and produced by himself, grinds him as a diamond grinds a hard gem. 165. By oneself is evil done; by oneself is one defiled. By oneself is evil left undone; by oneself is one made pure. Purity and impurity depended on oneself; no one can purify another. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.12.budd.html > So much for there being no "i" in empirical and conditioned sense. ---------- KH: There is no denying the Dhamma can be misquoted. Before you, a man named Victor was sent undercover to DSG to spread the Thanissaro hererodoxy. He gave a similar litany of quotes, all "proving" the Buddha believed in an eternal soul. I doubt Victor converted any DSG members. There are Tipitaka experts here who can give a correct interpretation for every misquoted text. Elsewhere, however, there is less access to good friends, and Thanissaro's profanity goes unchallenged. I am not blaming you Alex, I am not even blaming Thanissaro. Ultimately there are only conditioned dhammas, no self and no control. Ken H #117559 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 2:58 pm Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna scottduncan2 Ken H. and Rob E., Regarding: KH: "And I think it's a big turn-off for other people when someone is rambling on and on trying to express a deep understanding that he doesn't really have...I find meditators to be the worst offenders in that regard. They love to relate their personal experiences and theories. And all of them are contrary to the Dhamma: being about self instead of no-self." Scott: I totally agree with Ken H. here. R: "Got an example?" Scott: Rob, were you to describe your last 'meditation session,' imagining that you were talking to some of your fellow 'meditators,' I'm sure we'd all see a very excellent example. Would you like to prove the point? Please tell us about your own meditation experience. Please give every detail, every flutter, every flashing light, every wobble, and every brilliant insight. I've read other descriptions, as has Ken H., and they are nothing but descriptions of mind-games people play with themselves. Show us we are wrong. What happened the last time you were on the cushion? Sincerely, Scott. #117560 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 9:14 am Subject: Compassionate Pity! bhikkhu5 Friends: Compassionate Pity cures all bitter Cruelty: How does a Bhikkhu dwell pervading one direction with his mind endued with compassion? Just as he would feel compassion on seeing an unlucky, unfortunate person, so he pervades all beings with boundless compassion! Therefore first of all, on eyeing a wretched man, deplorable, unfortunate, in every way a fit object for compassion, horrid, reduced to utter misery, with hands and feet cut off, sitting in the shelter for the weak & helpless with an empty dirty pot placed before him, with maggots in all his wounds, moaning, compassionate pity should be felt for him in this way: This being has been reduced to misery: If only he could be freed from this suffering! Similarly too should a Bhikkhu whose meditation subject is compassion also arouse compassion for an evil-wrong-doing person, even if he is happy now: Though this poor wretch is now happy, cheerful, & enjoying his wealth, but still, since he has neglected to do even one single good deed, he can come to experience untold suffering anytime after a downfall to the states of loss! Such infinitely compassionate pity he feels towards all beings and especially both towards himself, the dear friend, the neutral one, & the hostile person, thereby breaking down the wrong attitude barrier separating these objects. Vbh 273, Vism I 315 Compassionate Pity (Karun), which cures all cruelty, is a divine state! Karuna_is_Pity , Endless Pity , Space_Compassion , What_is_Wrong Safe_Medicine , Great_Compassion Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samhita _/\_ * http://What-Buddha-Said.net Compassionate Pity! #117561 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 11:00 am Subject: Meat eating Monks, was: Just checking re concepts and panna dhammasaro Good friends all, If I may... On monks eating meat from Chapter 8.4 of the Monastic Code in the Vinaya-pitaka: 4) Fish: the flesh of any animal living in the water.5) Meat: the flesh of any animal living on land, except for that which is unallowable. Because the Commentary, in discussing unallowable meat, uses the word meat to cover all parts of an animal's body, the same convention would apply to allowable meat (and to fish) as well. Thus it covers the liver, kidneys, eggs, etc., of any animal whose flesh is allowable. The following types of meat are unallowable: that of human beings, elephants, horses, dogs, snakes, lions, tigers, leopards, bears, and hyenas. Human beings, horses, and elephants were regarded as too noble to be used as food. The other types of meat were forbidden either on grounds that they were repulsive ("People criticized and complained and spread it about, 'How can these Sakyan-son monks eat dog meat? Dogs are loathsome, disgusting'") or dangerous (bhikkhus, smelling of lion's flesh, went into the jungle; the lions there, instead of criticizing or complaining, attacked them). The Commentary adds three comments here: These prohibitions cover not only the meat of these animals but also their blood, bones, skin, and hide (the layer of tissue just under the skin - see AN IV.113). The prohibition against dog flesh does not include wild dogs, such as wolves and foxes, (but many teachers - including the Thai translator of the Commentary - question this point). The flesh of a half-dog half-wolf mixture, however, would be forbidden. The prohibition against snake flesh covers the flesh of all long, footless beings. Thus eels would not be allowed. Fish or meat, even if of an allowable kind, is unallowable if raw. Thus bhikkhus may not eat steak tartare, sashimi, oysters on the half-shell, raw eggs, caviar, etc. (Raw flesh and blood are allowed at Mv.VI.10.2 only when one is possessed by non-human beings (!)) Furthermore, even cooked fish or meat of an allowable kind is unallowable if the bhikkhu sees, hears, or suspects that the animal was killed specifically for the purpose of feeding bhikkhus (Mv.VI.31.14) ............................................. Source: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/bmc1/bmc1.ch08-4.html peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com From: epsteinrob@... Hi Ken H. Just a couple of quick notes for now, as I jump in and back out again. I like this discussion - maybe more later. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > All I can say is that people are concepts, and concepts don't have kamma. When we talk about people killing and protecting their families from axe-murderers (or from savage cockroaches) we are having concepts of concepts. And that, I think, is outside the realm of Dhamma study. Your view here *does* make sense to the Buddha's view on killing animals. He had no objection to the monks eating meat if it was given to them, as long as they didn't kill the animals themselves. That surprised me, but it supports your idea that the Buddha's teaching on ahimsa was directed towards avoiding the akusala kamma involved, rather than keeping other beings from being killed. In the Mahayana tradition, when Hui Neng went to live in the woods for 12 years with hunters, he would a/release the animals from their traps when the hunters weren't looking; and b/eat his own vegetables cooked up with the hunters' meat, but not the meat itself. I wonder if the hunters ever noticed the lower rate of capture during those 12 years. Just an interesting aside... <...> #117562 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 4:55 pm Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna kenhowardau Hi Robert E, ------------ >> KH: It means there are no people in the world - no trees, no cars - just momentary conditioned dhammas. >> > RE: Anatta does mean that there are no entities within the human organism, within the kandhas - ------------ KH: You seem to be equating "the human organism" with "the khandhas." If they are one and the same, why would the Buddha have taught about the khandhas? Why wouldn't he have just taught about conventional organisms? ---------------------------- > RE: those are all experiential, and the point is that there's no being, just processes. ----------------------------- KH: What does experiential mean? According to the Encarta Dictionary it means "derived from or relating to experience as opposed to other methods of acquiring knowledge." How does that relate to "khandhas"? And what are processes in this context? Do the texts refer to processes? -------------------------------------- > RE: But anatta has nothing to do with trees and cars - those are not "beings," but objects. Anatta does not say that objects don't exist; only that people as entities don't exist. ------------------------------------- KH: Does that mean there are cars but no drivers? ------------------------------------------------ > RE: Sunya comes closer to saying that objects have a core of insubstantiality or emptiness, but it still does not say that trees and cars do not exist. As far as I can see, the idea that objects as well as people are merely conceptual constructions is a contribution of the Abhidhamma commentaries and sub-commentaries. ----------------------------------------------- KH: The Abhidhamma is the "higher" teaching. It comes first. The conventional-language teaching comes second and must be understood in strict accordance with the higher teaching. --------------------- <. . .> > KH: I find meditators to be the worst offenders in that regard. They love to relate their personal experiences and theories. And all of them are contrary to the Dhamma: being about self instead of no-self. >> > RE: Got an example? --------------------- KH: I was one of them for quite a long while. :-) Perhaps I shouldn't judge all meditators by my own example, but I have kept company with several of them both in real life and on the internet. In my experience they are all alike. They haven't been told that the Dhamma is about paramattha dhammas, not about permanent beings - namely themselves. Or, if they have been told, they haven't been listening. :-) Ken H #117563 From: "sarah" Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 5:32 pm Subject: Mike N's reminders: was- Just checking re concepts and panna sarahprocter... Dear Nina, (& Mike N) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Thanks for thinking of me. I have occasionally skimmed recent > > posts at DSG but haven't seen any discussions I felt I could > > contribute to in any useful way. > > > > Best wishes to you all just the same. ... S: Thx for sharing. I was thinking of Mike N the other day on 9/11. Everyone was talking on the radio and TV about where they were and what they were doing when they heard the news 10 yrs ago. I recalled how I was having a Dhamma exchange with Mike on the list here. Jon happened (most unusually for him) to be watching CNN when he saw the events all unfolding as they occurred. He called out to me to take a look, but I said I was too busy discussing Dhamma with Mike for quite a while. I remember Mike the next day, memorably talking about the different moments, the different cittas, when we view such news - even attachment to the blue sky in between the experiencing of sense objects and the dosa and compassion. Ah, here it is, sent to DSG #7986, sent on Sept 12th 2001: >M:Thanks (from 'an American') for the kind thoughts regarding yesterday's events. Gayan's building was evacuated in Boston (he's OK) and I had a very nice note from him, among other things wishing the victims and terrorists well--excellent, as usual. The really dimensional difference between the friendliness, compassion, gladness and equanimity taught by the Buddha and their corresponding 'worldly' cetasikas is that the former are non-exclusive--they are for absolutely everyone and everything, everywhere, without exception. >Confrontation with graphic depictions of death and destruction shocks people mostly, I think, because we're unaware of the absolutely constant nature of these things--everything is burning, burning, always. This reflection helps to inspire a sense of urgency to the pursuit of understanding, I think. >I noticed, while watching the images on TV and on my computer screen, that interspersed between the moments of dosa and patigha and moments of karunaa for those suffering pain and fear, were moments of lobha--for the beautiful photography of the blue sky and the billowing clouds of flame and smoke; for the awareness of my relative personal safety; for the unfolding of the story; and even moments of none-of-the-above when hearing a sound or touching something tangible was predominant for a moment--in those moments, no dosa or patigha or karunaa at all with regards to these events (or rather my concepts of them)--just liking or disliking or indifference to those sense-impingements. >Politics are so beside the point. What causes this kind of conduct, has always caused it? Just ignorance, aversion and desire--the very causes of politics themselves and of injustice. The only thing that even begins to address these root causes is, I think, The Buddhadhamma. >The Buddha's last exhortation was, "Vayadhamma sankhara appamadena sampadetha." "Subject to loss are conditioned things--try to achieve heedfulness." (my poor translation). Please excuse my rambling, mike ********** S: Excellent reminders. Mike, if you see this, perhaps it'll spur you on to add further useful contributions! Very best wishes in the meantime. Metta Sarah ====== _ #117564 From: "sarah" Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 5:35 pm Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna sarahprocter... Hi Scott!! Very glad to hear from you!! Hoping you've all had a good summer in Canada and look f/w to discussing some Dhamma in due course.... Metta Sarah --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Ken H. and Rob E., > > Regarding: > > KH: "And I think it's a big turn-off for other people when someone is rambling on and on trying to express a deep understanding that he doesn't really have...I find meditators to be the worst offenders in that regard. They love to relate their personal experiences and theories. And all of them are contrary to the Dhamma: being about self instead of no-self." > > Scott: I totally agree with Ken H. here. #117565 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 5:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Just checking re concepts and panna nilovg Dear Scott, wonderful to see you again. I often thought of you, really missed you. I hope you continue on. Nina. Op 20-sep-2011, om 6:58 heeft scottduncan2 het volgende geschreven: > Scott: Rob, were you to describe your last 'meditation session,' > imagining that you were talking to some of your fellow > 'meditators,' I'm sure we'd all see a very excellent example. #117566 From: "sarah" Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 6:05 pm Subject: Re: Samatha and Vipassanaa, was: Not Who, but What? sarahprocter... Hi Alex (Rob E & all), Great quotes on the Gradual Path in #117414, thx Alex Rob, see more under "Gradual" in U.P. Metta Sarah --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: <....> > Six animals are simile for craving toward 6 sense objects. > > > Their gradual weakening is metaphorically said as > "And when these six animals became internally exhausted, they would stand, sit, or lie down right there next to the post or stake. " > > First they pull, then become internally exhausted, then stand, then sit, then lie down - which shows them becoming more and more exhausted. #117567 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 6:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Just checking re concepts and panna nilovg Dear Ken H, Op 19-sep-2011, om 4:07 heeft Ken H het volgende geschreven: > KH: Yes, although "metta without panna" would have to be either > dana or sila, and not metta in the strict sense of the word. > Correct me if I am wrong but I think metta is, strictly speaking, a > brahma vihara and arises with the panna of samatha. ------ N: Metta is one of the perfections and as such it is to be developed along with satipa.t.thaana. This is very natural, occurring in daily life. While you are friendly to someone else there can be awareness and understanding of naama and ruupa. Whatever reality appears at the present moment can be object of awareness, including metta-citta or metta cetasika, which is adosa. In this way we learn that metta is a conditioned dhamma, not my metta. Quote from Kh Sujin's Perfections: < In the ultimate sense there are no beings or persons, there are only realities arising and falling away, each with their own characteristic. We think of different situations and people with kusala citta or with akusala citta. We should know the difference between kusala and akusala. If we live according to the Dhamma, we shall further develop pa and every kind of kusala. We shall know immediately at which moment we have no loving-kindness but akusala. Then we shall be able to have loving-kindness immediately, also for a person who behaves like an enemy.> ------- Nina. #117568 From: "philip" Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 6:14 pm Subject: Re: Cetasika is external philofillet Hi again Nina > But what about hetu. Bhavanga cittas have roots, they are not always ahetuka, right? Ph: Oops. Bhvanga cittas don't have roots, they are vipaka so it is the kamma that caused them that did or didn't have roots, so bhavangas are only accompanied by the universal seven... Metta, Phil p.s Hi Scott! #117569 From: "sarah" Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 6:28 pm Subject: Re: A reply to half a dozen multi-splendoured Rob E posts sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > >S: 6. Anicca, dukkha and anatta - these refer to the nature of dhammas, not to bodies and tables. As the Buddha said repeatedly in the suttas, seeing is impermanent, form (visible object) is impermanent, contact.....etc > > Not bodies and tables. See U.P. under "impermanence". > >R: That's a sticky point. So many times we really experience reactivity in response to the conventional objects which we cling to. I find it hard to see how looking at that is not useful, or that the awareness of that clinging, even though imprecise as to the arising dhamma, is not helpful. ..... S: The point is that the "reactivity in response to conventional objects which we cling to" is because of ignorance about realities. Of course it's helpful to be aware of the clinging or any other dhamma. Clinging is also a reality. Understanding dhammas as dhammas as distinct from concepts is the only way that ignorance and clinging will eventually be worn away and eradicated. Metta Sarah ====== #117570 From: "sarah" Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 6:42 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: atta-nu-di.t.thi, was: samatha. sarahprocter... Dear Han, Thank you so much for responding and letting me know about your conditions. I hadn't read your earlier message to Nina and others when I wrote, so I apologise for asking you to repeat yourself. Wishing you and your wife, Tin Tin courage, wisdom and the results of good kamma! We're hoping we may be able to visit Bangkok at the end of January over Chinese New Year (21st-26th Jan)*, so perhaps we'll speak by phone at least. Metta Sarah *p.s Ann, Phil, anyone else, pls keep these dates in mind as we're hoping to arrange something at this time. Will keep you posted off-list --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: > > Dear Sarah, > > My eye conditions are related to ageing process. So there is nothing much I can do about it. I have Age-Related Macula Degeneration both eyes. There is no effective treatment. I have the beginning of cloudiness of the posterior wall of the lens capsule (which they call secondary cataract) both eyes, as a late complication of the cataract surgery that I had undergone some years ago. I will have to undergo laser surgery if it gets worse. I might be having glaucoma as well in both eyes, which I will have to check periodically. All these decrease my visual acuity and I cannot work on my computer for long periods. > > My wife, Tin Tin, is not well. She has heart problem and diabetes. She needs constant attention. Sudden atrial fibrillation or sudden hypoglycemic attacks can be very dangerous. I have only one daughter with us. The other daughter has gone to America to live with her daughter. So I cannot leave my house. If you come to Bangkok these days, I will not be able to meet you. > > But I thank you very much for your kind concern. #117571 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 7:15 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Who is better off? sarahprocter... Hi Phil, --- On Tue, 20/9/11, philip wrote: >Ph: Thanks for the references. But please note that I am only asking because Acharn Sujin answered the question, saying that the one doing akusala with understanding is better off than the one doing kusala without understanding. It was not a clearly stated answer, she just asked which leads to the end of the path, stressing understanding. She was not encouraging akusala, of course, she was encouraging understanding. Understanding moots all debates. .... S: Yes, exactly. We don't know what akusala has been done or will be done, but it is only rt understanding which leads to the end of samsara. The quotes were just a reminder for us to understand the akusala and other dhammas now, rather than to speculate about others' tendencies with more akusala. .... >And I think my point above is good. If there is valuable understanding, why would akusala continue to be done? I don't think it would. .... S: Think of some of the Bodhisatta's lives - until one is a sotapanna, transgressions may occur. Valuable understanding, but not enough. ... >The image I create of a student of Acharn Sujin who continues to do bad deeds based on a belief that understanding the akusala involved is the most important thing, that's a fictional creation. Though I must say that since starting to listen to Acharn Sujin a lot again, I seem to have become a little more relaxed about akusala kamma patha that has been performed or is contemplated, even as confidence about the importance of understanding the present dhamma inreases. Surely just a coincidence of conditoins, but have to keep an eye on that! Maybe that is why Nina made a point on several occasions of reminding me about the cockroach I killed, and was in the process of forgetting about. Now not so easy for me to forget about it. That is good function of a Dhamma friend, though we know of course a good Dhamma friend wouldn't encourage continued remorse. Nina was encouraging understanding, not remorse. .... S: Yes, well said. Understanding, not remorse. "It's gone" doesn't mean not understanding the harm of akusala tendencies now. Easy to see with the cockroach example how it is rt understanding which realises the danger of the accumulated tendency to harm, for example. Good points raised! Metta Sarah ===== #117572 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 9:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Notes on nimitta, part 3. upasaka_howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 9/19/2011 11:58:08 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, epsteinrob@... writes: Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote:> > ...Right now most of my cittas seem encumbered by kilesas > - you start to notice how painful all those subtle kilesas really are, and > realize that even many or most of the "good" moments are underlined with > various discomforts, fears, anxieties or resentments. Good to see I guess... > And of the course the idea of "my" which seems associated with all of > them! > ----------------------------------------------- > HCW: > IMO, being aware of the frequent presence of defilements and their > subtlety is already an important step forward. Consider how many people are > almost entirely unaware of the unwholesome states interspersed among the > wholesome. Thanks for the encouragement. I do also think it's fascinating when you start to see how "off" everything really is. In a way it's a relief, as though you knew something was wrong but couldn't put your finger on it, and now it starts to make a lot of sense. > ---------------------------------------------- ... > ---------------------------------------------- > HCW: > It seems to me that while the feeling of akusala vipaka may be > unpleasant, the aversion follows afterwards in a kammic state, leaving the vipaka > state emotionally undefiled, though maybe defiled by ignorance. Yes, I think makes sense in terms of the reaction of the present moment when the vipaka arises; though vipaka as the result of past kamma carries some influence or character from that kamma, does it not? ----------------------------------------------------- HCW: Well, yes, certainly at least to the extent of its being pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral in "feel". Moreover, I would guess that other concomitant cetasikas of the vipaka state would be determined by the original kamma as well. It occurs to me that among the kammically resultant cetasikas of the vipaka state might be certain mental features and operations that serve to condition the nature of the subsequent mind-door state or states: That is, when, after the vipaka state passes by, and the "same" sense-door object is then known via the mind door, the perception of that object, i.e., the knowing of it by sa~n~na, and also the knowing of it in various ways by cetasikas other than sa~n~na in that successor mind-door state are conditioned directly by the cetasikas of the immediately preceding vipaka state, which in turn were conditioned by the original kamma. (I'm aware that this is hard to follow, but I can't seem to find a simpler way of expressing what I mean here.) ---------------------------------------------------- > I think it should be added, more strongly, that even an aversive, > extremely and multiply defiled state of consciousness is nonetheless luminous > in that the aversion cetasika and all other active defilements are > adventitious and not inherent in the consciousness itself. Whether a defilement is > actively present or not, as taught in the Pabhassara Sutta, the mind is > luminous. I agree that the basic quality of a citta, being "aware of" whatever arises, is inherently a pure function, however defiled the object of its attention may be, and however murky the view. Still, when things get that difficult to see, it's time to wash the windows! :-) ------------------------------------------------------- HCW: Indeed! ;-) The good thing, though, is that the murk isn't permanently embedded. ------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------- > /Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming defilements. > Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements./ > (From the Pabhassara Sutta) Best, Rob E. =============================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #117573 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 10:25 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Just checking re concepts and panna scottduncan2 Dear Nina, N: "wonderful to see you again. I often thought of you, really missed you. I hope you continue on." Scott: Thank you, Nina. I've been reading the list everyday. Sincerely, Scott. #117574 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 10:27 pm Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna scottduncan2 Dear Sarah, S: "Very glad to hear from you!! Hoping you've all had a good summer in Canada and look f/w to discussing some Dhamma in due course...." Scott: Yes, thanks. I've been following the concept/pa~n~na discussions with interest. Sincerely, Scott. #117575 From: "ptaus1" Date: Tue Sep 20, 2011 10:59 pm Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna ptaus1 Hi KenH, > KH: I wonder if Robert put his finger on it when he said over-intellectualisation was having a concept of a concept. pt: ok, but whatever the object of citta, what really makes the difference is if there's actually panna and/or sati or neither? > KH: Then we could say intellectualising (without the "over") was having a concept of a dhamma. And, of course, "wisely considering" was having right understanding of a concept of a dhamma. > > Whew! pt: hm, alright we can devise our own terminology, but let's relate it to abhidhamma for the sake of precision: - would "wisely considering" be esentially pariyatti, right? so, citta with panna and sati and concept of a dhamma as object? - would "intellectualising" be a citta with concept of a dhamma as object and ... hm, would it have panna? wouldn't that then make it the same as the above one? or it would have just sati, what would then make it like dana without panna? or maybe it has neither sati nor panna - and how is it kusala then? > > Pt: The important question is - is there a gray area between pariyatti and > over-intellectualsing? E.g. > > > 1. like when trying to intellectually make sense of what was heard - especially > on difficult subjects like d.o, kamma, etc - intellectually considering these > usually has nothing to do with the present moment, though it might at some point > help condition pariyatti. > > 2. like when explaining our theoretical understanding of dhamma to others - > again, nothing to do with understanding the present moment, but might encourage > pariyatti at some point. > > 3. like when trying to consider what has just ocurred in dhamma terms - ala, oh, > that was anger, and anger is unwholesome, it is not me, it is impermanent, etc - > again, more thinking that has nothing to do with the present (anger is already > gone), but it might help with pariyatti in the future. > ------------ > > KH: According to my RobertE-inspired understanding, 1 and 2 are good examples of intellectualising Dhamma (a.k.a. Dhamma study). And maybe 3 is too, but I have my doubts. pt: Ok, but as per my above questions, the issue is whether these three actually have panna accompanying a citta? If not, then is there only sati, which would still make it kusala? And lastly if it has neither sati, nor panna, how is it kusala at all then? And have in mind that the last question is very important - if it is not kusala, then the same argument applies to this sort of intellectualising that is put against meditation - if the citta is not kusala, then how can it be expected that it will ever condition kusala in the first place - i.e. it cannot actually lead to bhavana in the sense of developing wholesome tendencies, etc. > KH: All I can say is that people are concepts, and concepts don't have kamma. When we talk about people killing and protecting their families from axe-murderers (or from savage cockroaches) we are having concepts of concepts. And that, I think, is outside the realm of Dhamma study. pt: Sure, but the real issue is whether in the midst of considering the above there were any panna, or just sati, or neither? > KH: Yes, although "metta without panna" would have to be either dana or sila, and not metta in the strict sense of the word. Correct me if I am wrong but I think metta is, strictly speaking, a brahma vihara and arises with the panna of samatha. pt: i think metta is essentially another name for adosa cetasika which can arise at any time, only with sati (what would make it dana), or with both sati and panna what would make it bhavana. Maybe ask Sarah for clarification. > KH: I still prefer the exist/don't exist way. I think to know anatta is to know "there is no lasting thing here, no sentient being." pt: I think here we differ somewhat - anatta imo is something that is understood during moments of insight (dhamma as object), and what's cognised is that the dhamma is basically not self. That's about it. The whole exist/don't exist issue is completely irrelevant at those instances. Later on though, yes, one can intellectualise what happened in terms of exist/don't exist, but also runs the risk of running into over-intellectualising in the process. Without the instance of insight, it's just empty talk imo, and in fact potentially dangerous talk as we're all prone to falling into the two extremities of wrong view (so the arising of ditthi with the citta) that also run along the lines of exist/don't exist. > KH: 99.999% of modern-day Buddhists have a half-baked interpretation of the Dhamma. Despite their protests to the contrary, they still believe in a permanent self. They need to be told. And those of us who have been told (who accept there are only dhammas) still need regular reminders. pt: yes, because imo we too most of the time have the cittas with ditthi when we think in terms of exist/don't exist. > KH: There is no self - no you, no me, no anyone - there are only dhammas! Tell someone who cares! :-) pt: I think those who experienced true instances of insight have a clear understanding of what anatta means and will not need such descriptions at all. Those who haven't experienced insight will usually misconstrue what you are telling them with "no me, no you, etc", i.e. they'll have cittas with ditthi, rather than with panna. > > PT: E.g. the sort of arguments you and Alex have been > having for many years now regarding the trees and cars, most of which I'd > classify as over-intellectualising. > ----------------------------------------- > > KH: I wouldn't! Over intellectualising is when you have a concept of a concept. Ask Robert if you don't believe me. pt: hm, we still need to figure out is there any panna or even sati there or not in the definitions of intellectualising, etc. > KH: It's like horses for courses. Outside DSG we have to shape our Dhamma discussions to suit the circumstances, but inside DSG it's open season. Everything here is fair game. pt: yeah, very lenient moderators. Best wishes pt #117576 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Sep 21, 2011 12:19 am Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna truth_aerator Dear KenH, all, >KH: Hi Alex, > > ----- > > A: The most typical way that Buddha talked about anatta was to cross question: > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.147.than.html > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.002.bpit.html > > In other cases He has refuted idea that the World and Self are one. Again, it > doesn't refute the empiric individuality such as Ken, Alex, Sariputta, Buddha, > etc. > ----- > > KH: Quoting Thanissaro to me is like waving a red rag to a bull. >===================== So your argument is basically attack a person (TB), right? How about refuting those passages step-by-step? Furthermore, please not that MN#2 quote I used was from "Burma Piṭaka Association". I deliberately quoted from it regarding "Do I not exist? " and "'I have no self' " being wrong. As for MN147 and other suttas you can use translations of anyone else, Bhikkhu Bodhi, Ven.Nanamoli etc. (I didn't have good online MN147 translation, so I've used TB). The other translators say the same message. The Dhammapada verses were taken from Ven. Buddharakkhita not Thanissaro. The refutation of absence of attakaro and parakaro, I've used translation of K. Nizamis. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an06/an06.038.niza.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.12.budd.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.002.bpit.html If you have refutations to what the Buddha has said, please post them and refute these quotes point-by-point. With best wishes, Alex #117577 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Sep 21, 2011 4:29 am Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna epsteinrob Hi Scott and Ken H. Scott, lovely to see you here returning in full flower to your prejudicial posting! I'm glad to see that no spot of intelligence has entered your mind to defile the emptiness of your understanding! And a shout out to all those who are poisoned and prejudiced against all forms of meditation, particularly against anapanasati and the development of satipatthana through sitting meditation - the preferred enlightenment disciplines of the Buddha. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Ken H. and Rob E., > > Regarding: > > KH: "And I think it's a big turn-off for other people when someone is rambling on and on trying to express a deep understanding that he doesn't really have...I find meditators to be the worst offenders in that regard. They love to relate their personal experiences and theories. And all of them are contrary to the Dhamma: being about self instead of no-self." > > Scott: I totally agree with Ken H. here. It warms my heart to see that you and Ken H. are so close. > R: "Got an example?" > > Scott: Rob, were you to describe your last 'meditation session,' imagining that you were talking to some of your fellow 'meditators,' I'm sure we'd all see a very excellent example. Well, that shows that you have a predisposition to think certain things. Maybe you should examine that. > Would you like to prove the point? > > Please tell us about your own meditation experience. Please give every detail, every flutter, every flashing light, every wobble, and every brilliant insight. Yes, the flutters and flashing lights are the real highlights - you have put your finger on it. If it wasn't a sort of internal roller-coaster of special effects and brilliant internal realizations, I don't think any of us would bother. Your insight is amazing. You are a truly brilliant critic of these misguided disciplines. Thanks for setting me straight! > I've read other descriptions, as has Ken H., and they are nothing but descriptions of mind-games people play with themselves. Well do make sure in deciding what is skillful and what is not, what is part of the path and what is not, that you base your understanding solely on "other descriptions," a category which most definitely gives you the most objective understanding of exactly what is taking place when dedicated Buddhists engage in meditation. Personally, when I want to find out what people like you and Ken H. are like, I like to read the latest comic books and see the kinds of stereotypical characters who express their unfounded opinions with wide eyes and wide-open mouths and blurt things out without the slightest speck of actual information, in order to make sure that they don't know what they're talking about, and to happily express their unfounded prejudice against whatever they don't like. I can see you now, in my mind's eye, rattling on about other peoples' practice without the slightest bit of mindfulness or understanding, accumulating akusala like mad, and enjoying every moment of it. I truly hope that you are enjoying this process, and that you have a lovely time in your next life in a remote village somewhere trying vainly to feed yourself by ice fishing in a dry prairie. > Show us we are wrong. What happened the last time you were on the cushion? No thanks. Why don't you share what great insights dawned on you the last time you studied a subcommentary. I'm sure that kusala, samatha, sati, vipassana, panna, vipaka and vicara were all madly competing to create a nest of own-being within the comforting folds of your luminous cetasikas. I'm sure that you could illumine whole worlds with your brilliant explication of your naturally-arising dhammas. Please share! Oh, I wish I were as "naturally enlightened" as you and Ken H. You are so wise! With Sympathetic Joy for your *Great Accomplishments* in the Dhamma, [well...I may be able to think of one later...] I remain, Yours Truly, Rob E. "inveterate occasional meditator" = = = = = = = = = = = #117578 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Sep 21, 2011 4:50 am Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > > > Hi Robert E, > > ------------ > >> KH: It means there are no people in the world - no trees, no cars - just momentary conditioned dhammas. > >> > > > RE: Anatta does mean that there are no entities within the human organism, within the kandhas - > ------------ > > KH: You seem to be equating "the human organism" with "the khandhas." > > If they are one and the same, why would the Buddha have taught about the khandhas? Why wouldn't he have just taught about conventional organisms? If a molecular biologist were to explain to you that your arm is made up of cells, and that the cells were made up of membranes and fluids, and that the membranes and fluids were made up of molecules, and the molecules were made up of atoms, you would not ask "why is teaching you about both arms and molecules?" You would understand that there is a continuum of structure between them. I don't share your view that the "organism" or other conventional structures have no relation at all to the dhammas that are seen on a moment-to-moment basis. I think that like atoms, which bear no direct resemblance to "tables and chairs," that dhammas have a structural relation to what we experience as conventional beings and things. They are not the same, but the organism that we experience does represent the dhammas that we are not yet capable of perceiving. My sense of the Buddha's teaching on kandhas is that he was doing precisely that - saying that "these are the actual processes that the organism breaks down into," not that they were a totally separate replacement for what we experience as body and mind. And that is how Buddha talks about them, as the "actual processes" that are taking place. > ---------------------------- > > RE: those are all experiential, and the point is that there's no > being, just processes. > ----------------------------- > > KH: What does experiential mean? According to the Encarta Dictionary it means "derived from or relating to experience as opposed to other methods of acquiring knowledge." How does that relate to "khandhas"? Consciousness, perception, feeling, contact, etc. - these are the processes that form up our sensory and mental experience. What do you think the khandas are - chocolate pudding? > And what are processes in this context? Do the texts refer to processes? The khandas are processual in nature. When the eye makes contact with visual object and "seeing occurs," that is a process. When the "seeing" leads to the arising of vedana, that is a process. That is what takes place, it is an explanation of the occurrence of those things which we experience, which are called "dhammas," objects of experience. Citta only does one thing - experience dhammas. How the various conditions cause various cittas with cetasikas to arise and take this or that dhamma as its object of experience [whether perceptual or mental,] that is the process I speak of. > -------------------------------------- > > RE: But anatta has nothing to do with trees and cars - those > are not "beings," but objects. Anatta does not say that objects don't exist; only that people as entities don't exist. > ------------------------------------- > > KH: Does that mean there are cars but no drivers? There are bodies driving cars. There are visual and mental objects - rupas and namas - causing various actions to arise to allow that body to drive that car. That takes place on the conventional level, but there is no self involved, just a robot driving a car with various thoughts and reactions arising. The fact that there is "no self" is a separate issue from whether there is a "body" or a "car." We can take that up, but it's not the subject of anatta. Anatta simply means that no ones home and the attachments that "we" seem to have to various dhammas are falsely established, since these dhammas have nothing to do with a self, which doesn't exist, and are also impermanent and unsatisfying, and therefore not worthy of attachment. > ------------------------------------------------ > > RE: Sunya comes closer to saying that objects have a core of insubstantiality or > emptiness, but it still does not say that trees and cars do not exist. As far as > I can see, the idea that objects as well as people are merely conceptual > constructions is a contribution of the Abhidhamma commentaries and > sub-commentaries. > ----------------------------------------------- > > KH: The Abhidhamma is the "higher" teaching. It comes first. According to who? The Buddha never said that anywhere. So whose authority are you taking for that most important point? Buddha said to consult the suttas and vinaya as the main source of understanding the Dhamma and the path. He never said to take the "Abhidhamma first" so you must be following someone other than the Buddha. Who is it? I'd like to know who your guru is. > The conventional-language teaching comes second and must be understood in strict accordance with the higher teaching. Please, cite your authority, because the Buddha did not say that and in fact said the opposite. We follow Buddha first, do we not? Or is there someone else you are following who is a higher authority than the Buddha? Please explain. > --------------------- > <. . .> > > KH: I find meditators to be the worst offenders in that regard. They love to > relate their personal experiences and theories. And all of them are contrary > to the Dhamma: being about self instead of no-self. > >> > > > RE: Got an example? > --------------------- > > KH: I was one of them for quite a long while. :-) Maybe you were just bad at it. > Perhaps I shouldn't judge all meditators by my own example, but I have kept company with several of them both in real life and on the internet. In my experience they are all alike. They haven't been told that the Dhamma is about paramattha dhammas, not about permanent beings - namely themselves. Well, Buddha said a lot of things, but he did not say to focus on everything but oneself. He said that ultimately there is no self to attach to, not to refrain from developing personal understanding. > Or, if they have been told, they haven't been listening. :-) What I would like to know is who you have been listening to. I am pretty sure it was not the Buddha. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = #117579 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Sep 21, 2011 5:15 am Subject: Re: A reply to half a dozen multi-splendoured Rob E posts epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > > Hi Rob E, > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > >S: 6. Anicca, dukkha and anatta - these refer to the nature of dhammas, not to bodies and tables. As the Buddha said repeatedly in the suttas, seeing is impermanent, form (visible object) is impermanent, contact.....etc > > > Not bodies and tables. See U.P. under "impermanence". > > > >R: That's a sticky point. So many times we really experience reactivity in response to the conventional objects which we cling to. I find it hard to see how looking at that is not useful, or that the awareness of that clinging, even though imprecise as to the arising dhamma, is not helpful. > ..... > S: The point is that the "reactivity in response to conventional objects which we cling to" is because of ignorance about realities. Of course it's helpful to be aware of the clinging or any other dhamma. Clinging is also a reality. Understanding dhammas as dhammas as distinct from concepts is the only way that ignorance and clinging will eventually be worn away and eradicated. I appreciate your point, which does clarify it to a good extent, but the sequence of understanding here doesn't quite make sense to me. What is the order in which such clingings would be eradicated by insight? Let's say I see that I am anxious that my new rug will be destroyed and I have the insight to see that the moment of clinging to the rug is responsible for this. Let's say I then [by whatever means] reduce the clinging to the rug and I am less anxious. Are you saying that I cannot release the clinging to the rug until I see that I am not really clinging to the rug, but really clinging to dhammas, and that until I see the clinging to the dhammas I will not understand why my attachment remains? I know that the Abhidhamma teaches that we really only cling to dhammas, so what is the status of the clinging to conventional objects? It is still clinging and still causes suffering. When I am able to see that I am really clinging to dhammas the clinging to the dhammas can then be released through detachment, but what about the clinging to conventional objects? Does that get released beforehand, at the same time? How are they related? We go through our lives worrying about ourselves, our loved ones, what's going to happen to our job, our house, whether the car will crash - all sufferings caused by involvement with conventional objects, not directly experienced as attachments to dhammas. So how is that alleviated and how does that relate to attachment to dhammas and the realization thereof? I hope you see what I am driving at since it is somewhat confusing. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = #117580 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Sep 21, 2011 5:21 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Notes on nimitta, part 3. epsteinrob Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > It seems to me that while the feeling of akusala vipaka may be > > unpleasant, the aversion follows afterwards in a kammic state, leaving > the vipaka > > state emotionally undefiled, though maybe defiled by ignorance. > > Yes, I think makes sense in terms of the reaction of the present moment > when the vipaka arises; though vipaka as the result of past kamma carries > some influence or character from that kamma, does it not? > ----------------------------------------------------- > HCW: > Well, yes, certainly at least to the extent of its being pleasant, > unpleasant, or neutral in "feel". Moreover, I would guess that other > concomitant cetasikas of the vipaka state would be determined by the original kamma > as well. > It occurs to me that among the kammically resultant cetasikas of the > vipaka state might be certain mental features and operations that serve to > condition the nature of the subsequent mind-door state or states: That is, > when, after the vipaka state passes by, and the "same" sense-door object is > then known via the mind door, the perception of that object, i.e., the > knowing of it by sa~n~na, and also the knowing of it in various ways by > cetasikas other than sa~n~na in that successor mind-door state are conditioned > directly by the cetasikas of the immediately preceding vipaka state, which > in turn were conditioned by the original kamma. (I'm aware that this is hard > to follow, but I can't seem to find a simpler way of expressing what I > mean here.) > ---------------------------------------------------- I actually followed that - should I be frightened? ;-) I think that makes sense, and if that is the case, there's not a "clean break" from the original kamma through to the reaction that may come in response to the vipaka. There may be factors that are carried through from kamma to vipaka to the next series of responses that generate more kamma that create a causal chain. ------------------------------------------- Rob E.: > I agree that the basic quality of a citta, being "aware of" whatever > arises, is inherently a pure function, however defiled the object of its > attention may be, and however murky the view. > > Still, when things get that difficult to see, it's time to wash the > windows! :-) > ------------------------------------------------------- > HCW: > Indeed! ;-) The good thing, though, is that the murk isn't permanently > embedded. That is definitely a good thing! Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = #117581 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Sep 21, 2011 5:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Notes on nimitta, part 3. upasaka_howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 9/20/2011 3:21:42 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, epsteinrob@... writes: Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > It seems to me that while the feeling of akusala vipaka may be > > unpleasant, the aversion follows afterwards in a kammic state, leaving > the vipaka > > state emotionally undefiled, though maybe defiled by ignorance. > > Yes, I think makes sense in terms of the reaction of the present moment > when the vipaka arises; though vipaka as the result of past kamma carries > some influence or character from that kamma, does it not? > ----------------------------------------------------- > HCW: > Well, yes, certainly at least to the extent of its being pleasant, > unpleasant, or neutral in "feel". Moreover, I would guess that other > concomitant cetasikas of the vipaka state would be determined by the original kamma > as well. > It occurs to me that among the kammically resultant cetasikas of the > vipaka state might be certain mental features and operations that serve to > condition the nature of the subsequent mind-door state or states: That is, > when, after the vipaka state passes by, and the "same" sense-door object is > then known via the mind door, the perception of that object, i.e., the > knowing of it by sa~n~na, and also the knowing of it in various ways by > cetasikas other than sa~n~na in that successor mind-door state are conditioned > directly by the cetasikas of the immediately preceding vipaka state, which > in turn were conditioned by the original kamma. (I'm aware that this is hard > to follow, but I can't seem to find a simpler way of expressing what I > mean here.) > ---------------------------------------------------- I actually followed that - should I be frightened? ;-) -------------------------------------------------- HCW: LOLOL! Probably! ;-) ------------------------------------------------ I think that makes sense, and if that is the case, there's not a "clean break" from the original kamma through to the reaction that may come in response to the vipaka. There may be factors that are carried through from kamma to vipaka to the next series of responses that generate more kamma that create a causal chain. ------------------------------------------- Rob E.: > I agree that the basic quality of a citta, being "aware of" whatever > arises, is inherently a pure function, however defiled the object of its > attention may be, and however murky the view. > > Still, when things get that difficult to see, it's time to wash the > windows! :-) > ------------------------------------------------------- > HCW: > Indeed! ;-) The good thing, though, is that the murk isn't permanently > embedded. That is definitely a good thing! Best, Rob E. ============================= With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #117582 From: Lukas Date: Wed Sep 21, 2011 6:01 am Subject: Considering Dhamma more? szmicio Hi friends, I was wondering if this is good to reflect, read, listen consider Dhamma more? How to consider it more and more in daily life? Best wishes Lukas #117583 From: "ptaus1" Date: Wed Sep 21, 2011 8:30 am Subject: Re: A reply to half a dozen multi-splendoured Rob E posts ptaus1 Hi RobE, Just a quick note > RE: Are you saying that I cannot release the clinging to the rug until I see that I am not really clinging to the rug, but really clinging to dhammas, and that until I see the clinging to the dhammas I will not understand why my attachment remains? > > I know that the Abhidhamma teaches that we really only cling to dhammas, so what is the status of the clinging to conventional objects? It is still clinging and still causes suffering. When I am able to see that I am really clinging to dhammas the clinging to the dhammas can then be released through detachment, but what about the clinging to conventional objects? Does that get released beforehand, at the same time? How are they related? pt: I think a slightly different emphasis might help - in insight, I think it is clinging itself that is seen as being anatta/having anatta nature, e.g.very strong lobha for a pleasant feeling ( dhamma), or for a rug (concept), is seen as being anatta - so regardless of whether the object of clinging has just been a concept or a dhamma. So basically, understanding the anatta nature of clinging is what "releases" from clinging, regardless of what is the object of clinging citta. Best wishes pt #117584 From: "connie" Date: Wed Sep 21, 2011 8:52 am Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna nichiconn I do believe you're a liar, Rob! Too bad. connie --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Scott and Ken H. > Scott, lovely to see you #117585 From: "connie" Date: Wed Sep 21, 2011 9:34 am Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna nichiconn I'll retract that (but not my claws) & replace it with a quote: < Hateful consciousness, which always is accompanied by sadness, may be premeditated or not. - Nyanatiloka > connie --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: > > I do believe you're a liar, Rob! Too bad. > connie > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Scott and Ken H. > > Scott, lovely to see you > #117586 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Sep 21, 2011 9:39 am Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna truth_aerator Hello Scott, all, >Please tell us about your own meditation experience. Please give >every detail, every flutter, every flashing light, every wobble, and >every brilliant insight. >=============================================================== This is not how I understand meditation to be. True meditation causes fading and cooling of lobha, dosa and moha little by little. It does NOT have to have any flashy experiences and the process is typically long, boring and uneventful as the kilesas are gradually removed. The process is often boring because one, at least at first, doesn't have anything to brag about. One neither learns some abtruse theory to sound smart, write books, and win debates against lower schools, and neither does one develop x-ray vision or ability to manifest gold out of thin air. It is hard work at removing those sweet talking con artists, and not getting anything for "my Self". My understanding of nibbana is that it is final and remainderless extinguishment of all mental defilements. Nibbana is not somewhere on Pluto, and neither is it equal to getting PhD in Buddhology. Meditation is a long and gradual process that doesn't have sharp jumps, at least not in the beginning. VsM advises us to not cling to whatever flashy experiences that can be. With best wishes, Alex #117587 From: "philip" Date: Wed Sep 21, 2011 9:59 am Subject: Re: Considering Dhamma more? philofillet Hi Lukas Do you have Survey of Paramattha Dhamma? It is an amazing book. Yesterday I learned (or realized thanks to the book) that vipaka is really limited, jyst a brief vipaka citta that falls away and is gone, but the cittas that arise in response, so various, so wide ranging. There are not conditions yet for us to be aware of vipaka citta so that there is not all that new akusala kamma patha and accumulation of akusala that is not of that degree but by reflecting on Dhamma thanks to amazing books like SPD we come closer moment by moment. Remember, panna is a sankhara khanda, it is being conditioned and developed! Now! We are so lucky! No, no luck involved. Sensitivity to Dhamma has been accumulated by past reflection. Your interest in Dhamma is accumulating, just keep listening and reflecting, panna works its way. Metta, Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Lukas wrote: > > Hi friends, > I was wondering if this is good to reflect, read, listen consider Dhamma more? > How to consider it more and more in daily life? > Best wishes > Lukas > > > #117588 From: "philip" Date: Wed Sep 21, 2011 10:36 am Subject: Re: Considering Dhamma more? philofillet Hi again Lukas > We are so lucky! No, no luck involved. Sensitivity to Dhamma has been accumulated by past reflection. Your interest in Dhamma is accumulating, just keep listening and reflecting, panna works its way. Ph: I just found a great passage on p. 122 of SPD: "Though knowledge acquired. from reading and listening, defilements cannot be eradicated; they are still bound to be present in full force. When we consider dhammas and have right understanding of them, conditions are being accumulated for the arising of right awareness. Then sati can be directly aware and notice the characteristics of the dhammas of which we formerly had theoretical understanding acquired through listening. In this way panna can penetrate the characteristics of realities that appear and then fall away, and wrong view, by which one takes realities for a living being, a person or self, can be eliminated." Metta, Phil #117589 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Wed Sep 21, 2011 11:01 am Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna scottduncan2 Rob E., Regarding: R: "...the last time you studied a subcommentary..." Scott: Here is the gist of the problem that inheres in a belief in 'practice.' The assumption remains, despite many, many assertions to the contrary, that study is a 'practice.' There is no such thing. Reading Dhamma is just reading Dhamma. Those obsessed with practice will think others are also obsessed in their own way. If one is reading Dhamma to make something happen then one has totally missed the boat (and is floating in the pond with the rest of the hard-working, selfless meditators). Sincerely, Scott. #117590 From: "philip" Date: Wed Sep 21, 2011 11:13 am Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna philofillet Hi Scott --If one is reading Dhamma to make something happen then one has totally missed the boat... Hmm, good reminder in light of my post to Lukas. In my case I must admit reading Dhamma tends to happen rooted in desire for results, your post will help me be aware of that lobha :) Metta, Phil #117591 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Sep 21, 2011 11:22 am Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna truth_aerator Hi Scott, all, > Scott: Here is the gist of the problem that inheres in a belief in >'practice.' The assumption remains, despite many, many assertions >to the contrary, that study is a 'practice.' >======================================================== And in which sutta's or commentaries is that? ""And what, monks, is right effort? [i] "There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen. [ii] "He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the abandonment of evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen. [iii] "He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen. [iv] "He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen: This, monks, is called right effort." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sacca/sacca4/samma-vayamo/ "Just as when a person whose turban or head was on fire would put forth extra desire, effort, diligence, endeavor, undivided mindfulness, & alertness to put out the fire on his turban or head, in the same way the monk should put forth extra desire, effort, diligence, endeavor, undivided mindfulness, & alertness for the abandoning of those very same evil, unskillful qualities." - AN 6.20 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an06/an06.020.than.html "You, too, monks, should relentlessly exert yourselves, [thinking,] 'Gladly would we let the flesh & blood in our bodies dry up, leaving just the skin, tendons, & bones, but if we have not attained what can be reached through human firmness, human persistence, human striving, there will be no relaxing our persistence.' You, too, in no long time will reach & remain in the supreme goal of the holy life for which clansmen rightly go forth from home into homelessness, knowing & realizing it for yourselves in the here & now. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an02/an02.005.than.html With best wishes, Alex #117592 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:36 pm Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna scottduncan2 Phil, Regarding: P: "...In my case I must admit reading Dhamma tends to happen rooted in desire for results, your post will help me be aware of that lobha" Scott: How? Sincerely, Scott. #117593 From: "philip" Date: Wed Sep 21, 2011 2:20 pm Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna philofillet Hi Scott > > P: "...In my case I must admit reading Dhamma tends to happen rooted in desire for results, your post will help me be aware of that lobha" > > Scott: How? Decisive Scott Condition, natch. Since you have been away for awhile tgere is bound to be more attention paid to your words, for awhile... Seriously, things people say (or write) can be objects for useful reflection, can't they? If they weren't I wouldn't bother reading here. After posting this I'm going back to reading SPD. When we read, there is an increasingly natural emerging from the book to consider present realities. Will there be more awareness of lobha or more thinking about lobha, who can say? But there will at least be more awareness of the thinking about lobha, if that's all it is. Metta, Phil Metta, Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Phil, > > > > Scott. > #117594 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Sep 21, 2011 3:54 pm Subject: Re: Meat eating Monks, was: Just checking re concepts and panna epsteinrob Hi Chuck. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Maipenrai Dhammasaro wrote: > Fish or meat, even if of an allowable kind, is unallowable if raw. > > Thus bhikkhus may not eat steak tartare, sashimi, oysters on the > half-shell, raw eggs, caviar, etc. (Raw flesh and blood are allowed at > Mv.VI.10.2 only when one is possessed by non-human beings (!)) > > Furthermore, even cooked fish or meat of an allowable kind is > unallowable if the bhikkhu sees, hears, or suspects that the animal was > killed specifically for the purpose of feeding bhikkhus. Very interesting information, thanks for sharing this! Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - #117595 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Sep 21, 2011 4:14 pm Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna epsteinrob Hi Connie. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: > > I do believe you're a liar, Rob! Too bad. > connie > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Scott and Ken H. > > Scott, lovely to see you Well my entire post was obviously sarcastic, in response to the highly disparaging and insulting message from Scott addressed directly to me, and so obviously not "lying." Was there a good reason for Scott to speak that way, and is there a reason why you feel comfortable calling me a liar but have no problem with the nasty notes towards meditators from Ken H. and Scott's taunting note directly addressed to me, which started this negative exchange? I guess you are simply choosing sides, jumping in with strong language when you and I have never had such an exchange, and that you don't really care about the merits of who said what and why. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #117596 From: "Lukas" Date: Wed Sep 21, 2011 4:16 pm Subject: Re: Considering Dhamma more? szmicio Hi Phil, > Do you have Survey of Paramattha Dhamma? L: Well, I gave away all my paper books to friends. > We are so lucky! No, no luck involved. Sensitivity to Dhamma has been accumulated by past reflection. Your interest in Dhamma is accumulating, just keep listening and reflecting, panna works its way. L: I feel different, my interest in Dhamma is declining. Best wishes Lukas #117597 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Sep 21, 2011 4:17 pm Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna epsteinrob Hi Connie. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: > > > I'll retract that (but not my claws) & replace it with a quote: > < Hateful consciousness, which always is accompanied by sadness, may be premeditated or not. - Nyanatiloka > > connie That is fine - I just wonder why you have no criticism of any kind for Ken H.'s and Scott's hateful language. It shows that you are kindly disposed towards those you agree with, I suppose, no matter what they may do. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - #117598 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Sep 21, 2011 4:18 pm Subject: Re: A reply to half a dozen multi-splendoured Rob E posts epsteinrob Hi pt. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > pt: I think a slightly different emphasis might help - in insight, I think it is clinging itself that is seen as being anatta/having anatta nature, e.g.very strong lobha for a pleasant feeling ( dhamma), or for a rug (concept), is seen as being anatta - so regardless of whether the object of clinging has just been a concept or a dhamma. So basically, understanding the anatta nature of clinging is what "releases" from clinging, regardless of what is the object of clinging citta. Good thought, pt. That does make sense. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - #117599 From: "Lukas" Date: Wed Sep 21, 2011 4:19 pm Subject: Re: Considering Dhamma more? szmicio Hi Phil, > Ph: I just found a great passage on p. 122 of SPD: "Though knowledge acquired. from reading and listening, defilements cannot be eradicated; they are still bound to be present in full force. When we consider dhammas and have right understanding of them, conditions are being accumulated for the arising of right awareness. Then sati can be directly aware and notice the characteristics of the dhammas of which we formerly had theoretical understanding acquired through listening. In this way panna can penetrate the characteristics of realities that appear and then fall away, and wrong view, by which one takes realities for a living being, a person or self, can be eliminated." L: With wrong view, but what is wrong view? Is it still real? Best wishes Lukas