#119200 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:46 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: When Can A Monk Ask Me for Something? dhammasaro Good friend Connie, Fine... maipenrai... no problem... [verily beeg Texican smiles] It is also in the files section as "Bhikkhu Invitation." [http://f1.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/YI6kToe595J8oDDfBeDX53Ibd8CVyjicXoYEN0VEL21kQYwyy6\ MQ-_Igms-AiPPlIT816pjKzKbPhmoRx_CavMytCT5yA5zO/Members%27%20files/Bhikkhu%20-%20\ Invitation.pdf] It provides the correct procedure a layperson should offer an "Invitation" to a monk so the monk can ask for something from the layperson. Unfortunately, it is my experience the vast majority of westerns do not know the correct procedure. peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com From: nichicon@... <...> Glad you found the answer, Chuck. I hope it proves helpful to you. I'd also like to point out that this group does not receive attachments. connie <...> #119201 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:56 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny scottduncan2 Moriarty, R: "? Do you mean as in Sherlock Holmes ?" Scott: Very good, Rob. And we tend to scorn the american education system up here in Canada. Whom else would I have been referring to? R: "I'm saying that even though we may think we are doing things in conventional terms, those conventional activities break down or contain or are constituted by paramatha dhammas and those dhammas will be put into play even while we may be thinking of what we are doing in terms of concepts. They have no inherent anything of their own." Scott: So, I can imagine anything I want conventionally, construe anything I want conventionally, configure my conventional behaviour any way I want, and it will turn out correctly in the end. In other words, even if I'm wrong, that's just conventional wrongness, my paramattha dhammas will make it right. R: "...What I meant to say was that...right cetana can follow the Buddha's words to do activities [arising of right action] that represent and contain the conditions [mindful attention to arising namas/rupas, etc.] that will direct attention and develop mindfulness, and that while we may think at first that we are "following breath [concept] with awareness [concept,] even while doing so the activity [really namas and rupas] will develop the conditions for sati to arise and develop." Scott: What is 'right action?' The function of cetanaa is not to 'follow the Buddha's words,' it has another function. It takes other mental factors to accomplish the 'follow the Buddha's words' function. You are, in fact, actually suggesting that it doesn't matter what is done, right or wrong, akusala or kusala, it will work out in the end because we can will it to be so. Scott. #119202 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 1:55 pm Subject: Re: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 10/23/2011 7:36:19 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: Howard, You did not disappoint. Must be the accumulations that came over onto the new computer. H: "...part of our avijja is reifying these dhammas; that is, thinking of them not only as distinguishable variations of mental and physical quality and activity, but as isolated, atom-like, separate entities..." Scott: Last word to me, I guess. 'Part of our avijja' makes little sense, since don't you consider everything to be indistinguishable? -------------------------------------------------------------- HCW: No, I do not. Distinguishable and inseparable are not mutually exclusive. Analogy (given before): A whirlpool in a river is inseparable from its surroundings, not sharply delineated, and is water just as all the rest is, but distinguishing "whirlpool" is quite possible. BTW, Scott, I DID say that I would prefer not to further discuss this area of diametric opposition. So, indeed, I will not carry the discussion on this beyond this post. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Given that, how can you parse out avijja and then further parse avijja into parts? ----------------------------------------------------------------- HCW: What I had wanted to say was that reification is the central aspect of avijja, but I held back "as a peacemaker". In any case, I do not think that ignorance is monolithic. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Aren't you next suggesting a function of this part of avijja - that of 'reifying' and 'thinking?' ---------------------------------------------------------------- HCW: Ignorance pollutes/defiles thinking and all else, including all the factors listed in the chain of dependent origination. -------------------------------------------------------------- And then, to make matters even less clear, you suggest that avijja creates ideas about 'atom-like, separate entities.' ---------------------------------------------------------------- HCW: It doesn't make anything less clear at all. Avijja createss the false perception and false conceiving of them. This is my view on then matter. No doubt you see this differently. So be it. I'm responding to your remarks and questions here to be polite, but, Scott, I don't wish to continue this. -------------------------------------------------------------- So this goes around and around in a great circle, with an entity parsed out and creating other entities which, like itself, apparently don't exist. -------------------------------------------------------------- HCW: As far as I'm concerned, it has gone around more than I wish. ----------------------------------------------------------- Maybe the new computer is broken... ---------------------------------------------------------- HCW: No, it's actually working superbly, but I consider that it has done all it needs to do now for our discussions. I'm calling it quits, Scott. This is not because of thinking that you are acting rudely. You indeed have acted so, but you are certainlyNOT doing so at the moment. No, I'm calling it quits, because the discussion is and will be (I believe) fruitless, and so I'm an unenthusiastic participant, and I'm bowing out. ----------------------------------------------------------- Scott. =============================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #119203 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 2:44 pm Subject: Do you weld pewter onto khandas? scottduncan2 Howard, Scott: Okay. I thought you politely ended the discussion last time. Scott. #119204 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 4:46 pm Subject: [dsg] Training the mind ( was Re: Lost in the nimitta sarahprocter... Dear Nina & all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > >S: Usually in Bangkok, if people start to talk about their experiences > > (or are encouraged to do so), K.Sujin will just ask about now, what > > is real now. All those experiences have completely gone, no use > > dwelling on them at all - whether good or bad. I always find this > > so helpful as we cling so much already to our special experiences. > ------- > N: I remember. Whenever we speak to her about our problems, she will > point to this moment. Some people are disappointed that she does not > answer straight, but in the end some may come to the conclusion that > this is the most effective way. .... S: Actually, back to this moment and the dhamma now is the most straight too! ... > As to Abhidhamma study being theoretical, I think we told you in > India that we visited a Thai temple where two small boys started to > recite by heart the Dhammasagani. It was very sweet the way they did > this. When we asked them about the application in life the teacher > said: not yet, this is in a higher class. Also in Birma it is a > tradition to start theory for years and later on practice. It is good > to know that people have different backgrounds. .... S: Yes, I remember we visited a temple in Burma where the chief monk (and other monks, perhaps) could recite the entire Tipitaka in Pali. Some of the group were very impressed, but K. Sujin just asked what the use was if there was no understanding now. I was also thinking of Ajahn Naeb and others who had a lot of Abhidhamma book knowledge but just theory, not in accordance with daily life understanding of dhammas. As you mentioned to Rob E recently, "do not worry about names and terms. Abhidhamma is not in the book as Kh Sujin often says. It pertains to reality here and now. No need to think of classifications." I remember how shocked one of our friends was when we went to Cambodia. He had studied the Patthana in a lot of detail and had all sorts of tables showing the relationship between different conditions which he wished to explain about. Again, K.Sujin was unimpressed and brushed aside all the tables and details, just asking him about the present reality now. I sympathised with Lodewijk's visits to doctors. I'm glad you can make the most of the time for reading Sangiiti. I've been having to go to the Chinese doctor here several times for very painful massage and needles for my hip. On the first couple of visits I foud the pain unbearable in the massage, but now I take along my ipod with dhamma discussion and it becomes quite bearable with all the reminders about present dhammas. I even fell asleep under the needles this morning! Metta Sarah ===== #119205 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 4:54 pm Subject: Re: What is the method/technique of meditation for defecating? sarahprocter... Dear Alex, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > >S: "...This is also true of many so-called Abhidhamma experts, isn't >it? Even those who can recite the entire Abhidhamma Pitaka in Pali >and >who know all the precise technical descriptions of dhammas >usually >have lots of wrong ideas about people existing, a practice >which >should be undertaken and ideas about control. > >================================================================ > > So the Buddha was incompetent teacher who couldn't teach "don't practice or you'll develop Self views" and kept saying exactly opposite of what He was supposed to mean... > > Venerable Buddhaghosa was also wrong since he talked about practice... .... S: No, the Buddha was not "incompetent" and Buddhaghosa was not "wrong", but most of us completely misunderstand what was taught because of the strong desire to have a Self that ccan control. So in spite of all the Teachings about dhammas as anatta, we bend over backwards to look for dhammas that are atta. .... > Numerous other people from Buddha's time till 21st century couldn't figure it out. Even Abhidhamma experts such as Ven. Mahasi Sayadaw do talk about practice. He was a questioner and final editor at the Sixth Buddhist Council on May 17, 1954. > > Pa Auk Sayadaw is another Abhidhamma master who does teaches Anapanasati. http://www.paauk.org/files/sayadawbio.html > > So all of them are wrong about intentional practice, and you are right? .... S: The Buddha was and is right. The development of satipatthana will prove it. When teachers wish to introduce their methods and short-cuts and forget about dhammas as anatta now, beyond control, they miss the point of the Teachings. We need to be very careful in what we encourage others to follow. .... > If the suttas and/or commentaries such as VsM were clear on "live daily life, do not practice, do not strive just study" then I would have no problem. But when there are suttas after sutta talking about "strive!" etc, it is hard to twist them to mean the exact opposite of what they say. Please understand my concern. ... S: I understand your concern and I think it is very misplaced. Have you tried listening to the audio Scott and Phil recommended recently, such as the one with Erik? www.dhammastudygroup.org Why not listen to a part and then we can discuss it further. Metta Sarah ===== #119206 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 4:56 pm Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Moriarty, > > R: "? Do you mean as in Sherlock Holmes ?" > > Scott: Very good, Rob. And we tend to scorn the american education system up here in Canada. Whom else would I have been referring to? > > R: "I'm saying that even though we may think we are doing things in conventional terms, those conventional activities break down or contain or are constituted by paramatha dhammas and those dhammas will be put into play even while we may be thinking of what we are doing in terms of concepts. They have no inherent anything of their own." > > Scott: So, I can imagine anything I want conventionally, construe anything I want conventionally, configure my conventional behaviour any way I want, and it will turn out correctly in the end. In other words, even if I'm wrong, that's just conventional wrongness, my paramattha dhammas will make it right. > > R: "...What I meant to say was that...right cetana can follow the Buddha's words to do activities [arising of right action] that represent and contain the conditions [mindful attention to arising namas/rupas, etc.] that will direct attention and develop mindfulness, and that while we may think at first that we are "following breath [concept] with awareness [concept,] even while doing so the activity [really namas and rupas] will develop the conditions for sati to arise and develop." > > Scott: What is 'right action?' > > The function of cetanaa is not to 'follow the Buddha's words,' it has another function. It takes other mental factors to accomplish the 'follow the Buddha's words' function. You are, in fact, actually suggesting that it doesn't matter what is done, right or wrong, akusala or kusala, it will work out in the end because we can will it to be so. Actually you are seeing things in too gross terms, and think I am saying that, but I really am not. I'm just trying to "get in the door" with you in terms of establishing the possibility that an activity, done with some degree of right understanding, could set the conditions for kusala to develop. And that it is not an absolute. But I'm definitely not ruling out all the possibilities of how that could go rightly or wrongly, based on what is undertaken and how it is understood. I do however have some faith in certain activities, proposed by Buddha, for heading in generally the right direction, and the teachings having some capacity to correct wrong understanding. In other words, I do think there is a kusala process, and that it's not as absolute as I think you would see it. If we could establish -- almost impossible -- an understanding that the instructions for meditation and other practices and guidelines given by the Buddha are meant to guide beings into a generally right direction, and if followed, will help correct their course, then we could possibly look at all the ways in which it could go wrong, be corrected etc., and what the properties of that might be. I would hope that some of the more specific teachings on what is kusala and not, what are the factors of conditionality and how it works, etc., would help to guide one in that way. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #119207 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 5:05 pm Subject: Re: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny nilovg Dear Sarah, Op 23-okt-2011, om 13:03 heeft sarah het volgende geschreven: > I remember KS talking about how dosa is worse than lobha because of > the effect on others, if I recall. Perhaps Nina or others will > recall or remember any text on this. --------- N: I heard her on a Thai recording recently about lobha and dosa, where they are compared as to their disadvantages. Gradual S, I, 198: 'Lust is slightly to be blamed, but it is slow to change. Malice is much to be blamed, but it is quick to change." The co. explains more: it states two reasons for each of them. In the way the world looks at it, and as to vipaaka. When one has affection for dear ones, family etc. there is lobha, but one does not harm them. As to vipaaka, if one is happy about one's spouse this is not akusala kamma patha that causes rebirth in an unhappy plane. As to slow to change: Lobha is hard to eradicate. Only the arahat has eradicated it completely. Co as to dosa: much to be blamed in way the world looks at it, and quick to change. Dosa can motivate wrong conduct towards mother, father and others and this is blamed by the world. As to vipaaka; this can motivate deeds such as anantariya kamma (giving an immediate bad result) resulting in burning in hell for kappas. It can be quickly abandoned, when one asks forgiveness for one's deeds. ------ N: So good to apologize, this is done with humble mind, it is to be praised. I must praise Howard here, he is always so concerned about this. ----- Nina. #119208 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 5:58 pm Subject: Re: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny sarahprocter... Dear Nina, >N: I heard her on a Thai recording recently about lobha and dosa, >where they are compared as to their disadvantages. >Gradual S, I, 198: 'Lust is slightly to be blamed, but it is slow to >change. Malice is much to be blamed, but it is quick to change." >The co. explains more: it states two reasons for each of them. In the >way the world looks at it, and as to vipaaka. .... S: Thank you - exactly what I was thinking of. I appreciate the extra details too. In your other message with co from Sangiiti Sutta; dhammavinaya - Dhamma standing for sutta and abhidhamma, this is also stated in co the Mahaparinibbana Sutta and elsewhere. I'll look f/w to the details when you write. We hope all Lodewijk's tests went well and that he passed the test of patience! Patience with what is seen, heard and so on all day....tests for us all, tests at each moment. We're very fortunate to be able to have heard about the dhamma practice and test from moment to moment. Metta Sarah ===== #119209 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 6:06 pm Subject: Re: Vinnana vs vedana sarahprocter... Dear Alex, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > S: Citta or vinnana experiences every object, one at a time. The object may be a nama, a rupa or a concept. Vedana, feeling "tastes" the object in a pleasant, unpleasant or neutral way. When it arises it is either pleasant feeling, unpleasant feeling or neutral feeling. >A: But what is the difference between vinnana feeling something and vedana feeling something? .... S: Vinnana (i.e citta, consciousness) doesn't feel anything - it experiences the object exactly as it is. For example, seeing consciousness (vinnana), sees visible object in its 'entirety', just as it is. It doesn't feel anything. Vedana (feeling) arises with every citta at every moment. While citta 'leads' and experiences the object, the accompanying vedana 'tastes' that object in a pleasant, unpleasant or neutral way. Thus vedana is either pleasant, unpleasant or neutral. At the moment of seeing consciousness, the accompanying vedana also experiences the visible object with neutral feeling. When bodily consciousness experiences a tangible object, the accompanying vedana experiences the same object with pleasant or unpleasant feeling. When we prick our skin, there's unpleasant feeling. When we touch something soft, there's pleasant feeling. What about now? There is vedana arising. When there's attachment, there is often pleasant feeling arising. It has a characteristic which can be known. When there's aversion, there's always unpleasant feeling. This can be known too. No one likes unpleasant feeling, so usually there's more dosa, more unpleasant feeling about the unpleasant feeling! Again, ask anything further if there's more to clarify. Metta Sarah ===== #119210 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 6:15 pm Subject: Re: What is the method/technique of meditation ...? sarahprocter... Hi Phil & all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > p.s Clearly my accumulatiins of lobha including for Dhamma are so great that strong dosa about people who see things differently will always be with me. I don't regret that, it can be understood. .... S: I think we have to question our understanding of Dhamma when this is so. For example, when we appreciate that there are just dhammas arising and falling away, no people, then it's easier to appreciate the conditioning of different dhammas, different elements, different accumulations and this in itself will condition less idea of people who think and behave in particular ways. What is there to get mad about? Here's a great quote Scott gave before in #95579 from Vism IX: ">38. But if he is still unable to stop it this way, then he should try resolution into elements. How? 'Now you who have gone forth into homelessness, when you are angry with him, what is it you are angry with? Is it head hairs you are angry with? Or body hairs? Or nails? ... Or is it urine you are angry with? Or, alternatively, is it the earth element in the head hairs, etc. you are angry with? Or the water element? Or the fire element? Or is it the air element you are angry with? Or among the five aggregates or the twelve bases or the eighteen elements with respect to which this venerable one is called by such and such a name, which then, is it the materiality aggregate you are angry with? Or the feeling aggregate, the perception aggregate, the formations aggregate, the consciousness aggregate you are angry with? Or is it the eye base you are angry with? or the visible-object base you are angry with? ... Or the mind base you are angry with? Or the mental-object base you are angry with? Or is it the eye-element you are angry with? Or the visible-object element?? Or the eye-consciousness element? ... Or the mind element? Or the mental-object element? Or the mind-consciousness element you are angry with?' For when he tries the resolution into elements, his anger finds no foothold, like a mustard seed on the point of an awl or a painting on air." <...> >Evampi nibbaapetu.m asakkontena pana dhaatuvinibbhogo kaatabbo. Katha.m? 'Ambho pabbajita, tva.m etassa kujjhamaano kassa kujjhasi? Ki.m kesaana.m kujjhasi, udaahu lomaana.m, nakhaana.m ... muttassa kujjhasi? Atha vaa pana kesaadiisu pathaviidhaatuyaa kujjhasi, aapodhaatuyaa, tejodhaatuyaa, vaayodhaatuyaa kujjhasi? Ye vaa pa~ncakkhandhe dvaadasaayatanaani a.t.thaarasa dhaatuyo upaadaaya ayamaayasmaa itthannaamoti vuccati, tesu ki.m ruupakkhandhassa kujjhasi, udaahu vedanaa sa~n~naa sa"nkhaaravi~n~naa.nakkhandhassa kujjhasi? Ki.m vaa cakkhaayatanassa kujjhasi, ki.m ruupaayatanassa kujjhasi ... ki.m manaayatanassa kujjhasi, ki.m dhammaayatanassa kujjhasi? Ki.m vaa cakkhudhaatuyaa kujjhasi, ki.m ruupadhaatuyaa, ki.m cakkhuvi~n~naa.nadhaatuyaa ... ki.m manodhaatuyaa, ki.m dhammadhaatuyaa, ki.m manovi~n~naa.nadhaatuyaa 'ti? Eva~nhi dhaatuvinibbhoga.m karoto aaragge saasapassa viya aakaase cittakammassa viya ca kodhassa pati.t.thaana.t.thaana.m na hoti.< .... Metta Sarah ===== #119211 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 6:27 pm Subject: Re: What is the method/technique of meditation for defecating? sarahprocter... Hi Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Do you mind if terms are used incorrectly? I don't know. ... S: Not really. It's bound to be like that. We all use terms incorrectly at times and we'd all like others to be patient with us in this regard. Not everyone has been as fortunate as we have in terms of the explanations given. Even so, our use of terms and understanding is so miniscule compared to those in the Buddha's times or shortly afterwards. ... >Do you work to correct misunderstandings on the list? Definitely. ... S: Yes, of course, if I can. ... So I think you do mind. ... S: No. Helping when there's an opportunity is one thing. Minding is quite another. ... >Do you expect the clarifications you make to have an effect on people? I don't know. Maybe? ... S: I don't think much about it. If someone like Alex (in my last post) asks a question or if I think someone would like my input or if there's an error I think I can correct, I'll make the clarification. I don't think about the effect on people afterwards, though. Once I've posted, I just let it go. For example, in the post I just wrote to Alex about vedana and vinnana, I have no idea whether he'll aggree of be affected in any way and it's completely out of my control, so no use worrying about it. .... > > I recall being told once, in a short and terse statement, that there was a difference between 'concept and reality.' Faster than thought it made total sense. A lot of hard work and book study and questioning later and here I am - the most annoying person on the list. Ha ha. .... S: ha, ha indeed!! I see Rob E has been telling you to strive harder nonetheless as obviously he thinks there's some competition for that title of King Annoying!! Thx for the excellent transcript of the Erik discussion with KS. I love how that recording starts too. His preamble was a lot, lot longer as I recall. He was very attentive and afterwards Jon and I met him two or three times down in Koh Samui and at our hotel in Bkk, but he wouldn't come back to the foundation! Still, we never know when what has been heard and any understanding accumulated will manifest. No use in having expectations - we just share when we can and leave the rest to conditions. Metta Sarah ===== #119212 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 6:32 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Perfections, was: Pt's Galaxy ... sarahprocter... Hi Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > "What conditions kusala?" A. Sujin was asked. "Wise attention" was the answer. Does that mean yoniso manasikara is particularly ourstanding when "patient" javanas arise in response to an obhect? After all, there is manasikara with every citta. ... S: Manasikara with every citta but yoniso manasikara refers to when there are the arising of kusala cittas. When AS answered above 'wise attention', she is particularly pointing to panna and wise considering, wise attending to present dhammas. The more that is understood about present dhammas including kusala and akusala now, the more conditions there will be for kusala to develop. The hiri and ottappa arise with the kusala dhammas seeing the shame in the akusala too. > > No need for a response, just thinking out loud... ... S: Likewise. Helpful for us all to reflect further on as well. metta Sarah ===== #119213 From: "philip" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 6:48 pm Subject: Apologies philofillet Hi all My apologies for harsh speech the other day. Metta, Phil #119214 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 6:48 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Training the mind ( was Re: Lost in the nimitta nilovg Dear Sarah, Op 24-okt-2011, om 7:46 heeft sarah het volgende geschreven: > I sympathised with Lodewijk's visits to doctors. I'm glad you can > make the most of the time for reading Sangiiti. I've been having to > go to the Chinese doctor here several times for very painful > massage and needles for my hip. On the first couple of visits I > foud the pain unbearable in the massage, but now I take along my > ipod with dhamma discussion and it becomes quite bearable with all > the reminders about present dhammas. I even fell asleep under the > needles this morning! -------- N: Thank you for your concern. The doctor even talked about a pacemaker, but after a cycle test she found that we can still delay this. Next week the outcome of several tests. I hope your hip will soon be better and as you say (I often think of this), Dhamma is the best medicine. Lodewijk asked how Jon 's health is, he was worried. You told me about the itches. Nina. #119215 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 6:53 pm Subject: Re: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny nilovg Dear Sarah, I passed this one on. He finds it difficult that all different ailments come at once and so rapidly. Ageing has to do with this. I am not always so patient. It is not difficult to be patient on the list, I appreciate everybody's interest, no matter what they ask and say. But in other things! Oh! Funny how we can be patient with certain things but not with other things. Nina. Op 24-okt-2011, om 8:58 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > We hope all Lodewijk's tests went well and that he passed the test > of patience! Patience with what is seen, heard and so on all > day....tests for us all, tests at each moment. > We're very fortunate to be able to have heard about the dhamma > practice and test from moment to moment. #119216 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 6:56 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Apologies nilovg Dear Phil, Phil, that is good of you, I appreciate it. I am thinking of the text and Co about dosa just quoted; dosa more quickly gone. Nina. Op 24-okt-2011, om 9:48 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > My apologies for harsh speech the other day. #119217 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 7:28 pm Subject: Re: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny sarahprocter... Dear Nina, ______________________________ >From: Nina van Gorkom , >I passed this one on. He finds it difficult that all different >ailments come at once and so rapidly. Ageing has to do with this. ..... S: The Buddha never said it was easy.....one moment at a time - patience, courage and good cheer! We know that all the tests can be very tiring. ... > I am not always so patient. It is not difficult to be patient on the >list, I appreciate everybody's interest, no matter what they ask and >say. But in other things! Oh! Funny how we can be patient with >certain things but not with other things. >Nina. .... S: Same, same.... !! Very impatient often in other things. Metta Sarah p.s Phil, anumodana. ======== #119218 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Mon Oct 24, 2011 10:44 pm Subject: Re: What is the method/technique of meditation for defecating? scottduncan2 Sarah, S: "Not really. It's bound to be like that. We all use terms incorrectly at times and we'd all like others to be patient with us in this regard. Not everyone has been as fortunate as we have in terms of the explanations given. Even so, our use of terms and understanding is so miniscule compared to those in the Buddha's times or shortly afterwards." Scott: Yeah, I'm not meaning 'mind' like it bugs you or causes impatience, I mean you do notice when someone goes wrong. I'm quite aware that I don't know much and certainly nothing compared to a Buddha (that's one of the reasons I don't 'practice' - that and I *do* know that one can't). S: "No. Helping when there's an opportunity is one thing. Minding is quite another." S: "I don't think much about it..." Scott: Exactly. I know what you mean. There is a sort of natural helping that occurs and if the idea that 'helping' might have an effect comes along, well, that possibility remains subject to a host of things one has no control over. Still, the possibility remains that such clarifying could be 'helpful' in a sense. Trying to teach in order to help would be like trying sit in order to make sati arise. S: "...If someone like Alex (in my last post) asks a question or if I think someone would like my input or if there's an error I think I can correct, I'll make the clarification. I don't think about the effect on people afterwards, though. Once I've posted, I just let it go. For example, in the post I just wrote to Alex about vedana and vinnana, I have no idea whether he'll aggree of be affected in any way and it's completely out of my control, so no use worrying about it." Scott: Exactly. S: "...Thx for the excellent transcript of the Erik discussion with KS. I love how that recording starts too. His preamble was a lot, lot longer as I recall. He was very attentive and afterwards Jon and I met him two or three times down in Koh Samui and at our hotel in Bkk, but he wouldn't come back to the foundation! Still, we never know when what has been heard and any understanding accumulated will manifest. No use in having expectations - we just share when we can and leave the rest to conditions." Scott: On this latter we agree - no use having expectations (even when we notice we have them). I can well imagine that a return to the foundation would have been, say, difficult for Erik. I'll likely never get to go, but I would love it. I imagine, and no one would believe this, that I'd have very little to say - you know, at least in the room. I can have my say when I'm here, if I went there, it would be to listen. I'd likely talk my head off in all the post-session 'sessions.' Scott. #119219 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 12:51 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...establishing the possibility that an activity, done with some degree of right understanding, could set the conditions for kusala to develop...I do however have some faith in certain activities...I do think there is a kusala process..." Scott: There is a serious problem in having a view that is 'activity-centred' because this relies on the underlying belief in an actor, no matter how much one expostulates to the contrary. Belief in the primacy of 'activities, and in 'processes', as I always say to you, is wrong. I realize that you want to use ideas about how the falling away of one dhamma conditions the arising of the next to justify your thesis. Without knowing that it is kusala at the start, for one thing, and being unable to 'wield control of khandas' for another, it is impossible to simply go ahead, based on a misguided 'faith' in your ideas of what constitutes 'activity,' and create conditions for more kusala. Scott. #119220 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 1:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Do you weld pewter onto khandas? upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 10/23/2011 11:44:48 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: Howard, Scott: Okay. I thought you politely ended the discussion last time. ---------------------------------------------- :-) Thank you! ------------------------------------------------ Scott. =========================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #119221 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 2:37 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny scottduncan2 Rob E., And furthermore... R: "...establishing the possibility that an activity, done with some degree of right understanding, could set the conditions for kusala to develop...I do however have some faith in certain activities...I do think there is a kusala process..." I'll remind you of a portion of the as yet undiscussed textual offering of last week, for your further consideration: "243. But it is owing to not keeping what in mind, owing to non-penetration of what and owing to concealment of what that these characteristics do not appear? Firstly the characteristic of impermanence does not appear owing to not keeping in mind, not penetrating rise and fall owing to its being concealed by continuity (santati)..." Scott: Consider 'continuity' when you think 'activity.' Scott. #119222 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 2:59 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "...establishing the possibility that an activity, done with some degree of right understanding, could set the conditions for kusala to develop...I do however have some faith in certain activities...I do think there is a kusala process..." > > Scott: There is a serious problem in having a view that is 'activity-centred' because this relies on the underlying belief in an actor, no matter how much one expostulates to the contrary. Well my goal is not to "expostulate" but you have never said anything of substance to the contrary, just asserted that "it is so" in your usual faith-based manner. Maybe we should debate this point in more detail, since it is the core of the argument regarding "formal practice." Have you got anything of substance to say to demonstrate why doing intentional activities must invoke "an actor" who is doing so? Buddha spoke of all normal activities while saying that none of the objects, activities or mental/emotional experiences that were had were "self-based." If all those experiences can arise and be experienced without "a self," why cannot normal activities be undertaken without "a self?" I have said a number of times that one does such activities as meditation, practicing awareness of everyday activities, etc., with no sense of controlling anything, and without thinking there is a self that can achieve a goal, but only that the process itself will create conditions over time for kusala to arise. Can you demonstrate why it is impossible, as you assert, to follow Buddha's instructions for practice without a self-concept that is in control of the process being involved? > Belief in the primacy of 'activities, and in 'processes', as I always say to you, is wrong. What do you mean by primacy? I think an activity or process can be undertaken. I don't think it's got "primacy." I think that conditionality and accumulations have "primacy." I just don't think that, given accumulations and conditions that exist at a given time, that it is impossible to undertake an activity. If one does undertake an activity that is prescribed by Buddha, that activity will take place within the current conditions and accumulations and will do whatever it does within that situation. I don't have any illusion that I can change those conditions or control that process. It's like saying that if I take a sailboat out on the water, that by doing so I am saying I can control the sea, or that I can control the direction of the wind, or that I can guarantee I'll come back in one piece. There is no such assurance of anything. But I do know that if I follow the instructions, whatever the conditions, there is a good chance that I can sail the boat and get to a particular destination if I aim for it. I will have to deal with the wind, see what the conditions are as I go along, and adapt, while maintaining the principles of "right sailing." It's not any different when meditating. It has skills and it has a destination, but one must deal with conditions and one's capabilities at every step of the way, and adapt. I don't see a problem there. > I realize that you want to use ideas about how the falling away of one dhamma conditions the arising of the next to justify your thesis. That is what I use to justify my understanding of accumulations, as well as kamma, to the extent I understand them, rather than seeing individual cittas as completely isolated and independent, but it's not a direct reason why I think that meditation is possible. I think meditation is possible because activities, though we experience them conceptually to some extent, break down into individual dhammas, and certain conditions are into play by meditation, and dhammas can be experienced as awareness grows. If you want to accuse me of a false justification, please pick the right one. > Without knowing that it is kusala at the start, for one thing, and being unable to 'wield control of khandas' for another, it is impossible to simply go ahead, based on a misguided 'faith' in your ideas of what constitutes 'activity,' and create conditions for more kusala. Well, we disagree. My sense of it is that Buddha gave certain activities that if done according to his principles, would yield an accumulation of kusala over time. It seems perfectly sensible to me, and has nothing to do with personal control or a self that is in charge of the process. If I stick my finger in a light socket and get electrocuted, there's no "self" involved in that happening, just a physical law. Likewise if I meditate correctly, as Buddha instructed, there is a law of Dhamma that is in play, and has nothing to do with a self controlling it or doing it. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = #119223 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 3:07 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > And furthermore... > > R: "...establishing the possibility that an activity, done with some degree of right understanding, could set the conditions for kusala to develop...I do however have some faith in certain activities...I do think there is a kusala process..." > > I'll remind you of a portion of the as yet undiscussed textual offering of last week, for your further consideration: > > "243. But it is owing to not keeping what in mind, owing to non-penetration of what and owing to concealment of what that these characteristics do not appear? Firstly the characteristic of impermanence does not appear owing to not keeping in mind, not penetrating rise and fall owing to its being concealed by > continuity (santati)..." > > Scott: Consider 'continuity' when you think 'activity.' Do the think the commentary is saying that there is no continuity, or that continuity, but being easier to attend to, conceals rise and fall, which is how I read the passage. Indeed there is rise and fall and it is difficult to see on the microscopic level of dhammas. But there is also continuity, owing to accumulations and conditionality. Both do exist in the rise and fall of citta. The fall represents the falling away, but the rise with accumulations of the next citta does represent continuity. If accumulations and latent tendencies do go forward from one citta to the next, is there any other way to see that aspect of the rise and fall of citta other than continuity? The continuity is not continuous according to dhamma theory, it "re-arises" with the next citta, but it still maintains and continues the accumulations and tendencies that have been handed down by each successive citta. Do you think this is incorrect? And is not the entire Dhamma, the entire path, dependent on tendencies and accumulations being passed on so that panna can develop, and so that other path factors can develop to the point where enlightenment is reached? Without such continuity, without such a process, there would be no path, no Dhamma and no enlightenment. And it is just that kind of continuity, exactly as it occurs from one citta to the next, that allows meditation to satisfy the role that Buddha has clearly assigned it, but taking advantage of the arising and accumulating of this process, to grow discernment of arising dhammas and to have that capacity develop over time. When making the point that there is anicca and that citta falls away, the commentary says not to let the rise and fall be obscured by continuity, but that is not to say there is no continuity or accumulatio from one citta to the next, since there is. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = #119224 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 2:41 am Subject: On Makin' ah Misstook... dhammasaro Good friends all, Parroting some thoughts... Enlightenment means there is no anger left in your heart. There are no personal desires or delusion left in your heart. In this life that we have; we often forget that it's no great thing to make a mistake. In Buddhism, it's all right to make a mistake. It is all right to be imperfect. Isn't that wonderful? This means that we have the freedom to be a human being, rather than thinking of ourselves as someone wonderful and great who never makes mistakes. It is horrible, isn't it, if we think we are not allowed to make mistakes, because we do make mistakes, then we have to hide and try to cover them up. So the home then is not a place of peace and quiet and comfort. Of course most people who are sceptical say: "Well if you allow people to make mistakes, how will they ever learn? They will just keep on making even more mistakes". But that is not the way it actually works. To illustrate this point, when I was a teenager my father said to me that he would never throw me out or bar the door of his house to me, no matter what I did; I would always be allowed in there, even if I had made the worst mistakes. When I heard that, I understood it as an expression of love, of acceptance. It inspired me and I respected him so much that I did not want to hurt him, I did not want to give him trouble, and so I tried even harder to be worthy of his house. Now if we could try that with the people we live with, we'd see that it gives them the freedom and the space to relax and be peaceful, and it takes away all the tension. In that ease, there comes respect and care for the other person. So I challenge you to try the experiment of allowing people to make mistakes - to say to your mate, your parents or your children: "The door of my house will always be open to you; the door of my heart will always be open to you no matter what you do." Say it to yourself too: "The door of my house is always open to me." Allow yourself to make mistakes too. Can you think of all the mistakes you have made in the last week? Can you let them be, can you still be a friend to yourself? It is only when we allow ourselves to make mistakes that we can finally be at ease. That is what we mean by compassion, by metta, by love. It has to be unconditional. If you only love someone because they do what you like, or because they always live up to your expectations, then of course that love is not worth very much. That's like a business deal love: "I will love you if you give me something back in return." When I first became a monk I thought monks had to be perfect. I thought they should never make mistakes; that when they sit in meditation they must always sit straight. But those of you who have been at the morning sit at 4:30 am, especially after working hard the day before, you will know that you can be quite tired; you can slump, you can even nod. But that is all right. It is all right to make mistakes. Can you feel how easy it feels, how all that tension and stress disappears when you allow yourself to make mistakes? peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck Source: Buddhist Society of Western Australia Selected Dhamma Essays: Index On Making a Mistake Ajahn Brahmavamso Ajahn Brahmavamso is the Abbot of Bodhinyana Monastery in Western Australia. These Dhamma reflections are extracted from a talk he gave at the Dhammaloka Centre in Perth in 1990. #119225 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 4:28 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Identity crisis: Are Buddhists atheists? dhammasaro Good friends all, There are a few Buddhist temples in Tennessee, USA. However, there may not be one of ones' Tradition/school/sect/new Buddhist religion. On a Yahoo search in Knoxville: http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=mcafee&p=buddhism+in+knoxville%2C+tennessee On a Google search in Knoxville: http://www.google.com/search?q=buddhism+in+knoxville%2C+tennessee&ie=utf-8&oe=ut\ f-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a Both searches reveal there are Buddhists in Knoxville, Tennessee USA. peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck <....> #119226 From: "glenjohnann" Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 6:19 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) glenjohnann Dear Sarah .... > > > > Sarah: "- I referred to comments she's made to some of us about trying to find out the detailed answers, the theory - thinking our way through. All conditioned by self, even if no wrong-view arising at the time. Attachment conditioned by wrong view tendency..." > > Hello after a very long time! All's well my end, hope it is on yours too. Above you say that the thinking our way through is all conditioned by self, even if no wrong-view arising at the time. Attachment conditioned by wrong view tendency. This rings a bell - the part about no wrong-view arising, but attachment conditioned by wrong view tendency. I can even see us sitting around the table at Khun Duengduan's home in Ayudyaya discussing this. However, I can't put my mind to it clearly - as in think my way through it (LOL). Is it the attachment that arises, without wrong view - conditioned by natural decisive support condition arising from the tendency for wrong-view? In other words, conditioned by the concept of self implicit in wrong view? Not a very articulate question - but perhaps you can say more about this. Ann #119227 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 6:28 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny scottduncan2 Rob E., Regarding: "243. But it is owing to not keeping what in mind, owing to non-penetration of what and owing to concealment of what that these characteristics do not appear? Firstly the characteristic of impermanence does not appear owing to not keeping in mind, not penetrating rise and fall owing to its being concealed by continuity (santati)..." R: "Do [you] think the commentary is saying that there is no continuity, or that continuity, but being easier to attend to, conceals rise and fall, which is how I read the passage. Scott: I think it is mistaking the apparent continuity that hides the fact that dhammas rise and fall. It is due to the non-attending to rise and fall, which may or may not equate to your sense of 'continuity' being 'easier to attend to.' Maybe you mean something like a 'default setting.' The PTS PED: "Santati (f.) [fr. sa.m+tan, lit. stretch] 1. continuity, dura- tion, subsistence...citta-santati continuity of consciousness... dhamma-santati continuity of states...sankhaara-santati causal connection of material things...2. lineage..." Pm. (Paramattama~juusaa, commentary to the Visuddhimagga, wherein the same statement appears as in Sammohavinodanii) says: "'When continuity is disrupted' means when continuity is exposed by observing the perpetual otherness of states as they go on occurring in succession. For it is not through the connectedness of states that the characteristic of impermanence becomes apparent to one who rightly observes rise and fall, but rather the characteristic becomes more thoroughly evident through their disconnectedness, as if they were iron darts." R: "Indeed there is rise and fall and it is difficult to see on the microscopic level of dhammas. But there is also continuity, owing to accumulations and conditionality...The continuity is not continuous according to dhamma theory, it 're-arises' with the next citta, but it still maintains and continues the accumulations and tendencies that have been handed down by each successive citta. Do you think this is incorrect?...When making the point that there is anicca and that citta falls away, the commentary says not to let the rise and fall be obscured by continuity, but that is not to say there is no continuity or accumulatio from one citta to the next, since there is." Scott: I don't think santati ('continuity') includes 'accumulations' or 'latent tendencies' as you suggest. If you look closely at the way in which continuity is described, you should be able to see that it does not refer accumulations. These considerations are outside of the bounds of the term. Accumulation would refer to mental factors - to intrinsic or 'internal' factors more related to characteristic and 'strength' - which, while certainly arising and falling away with citta, would also fall under the same aegis as citta in relation to santati, since they are linked to citta. No, 'continuity' refers to only to rise and fall, not to factors intrinsic to a given dhamma when it has arisen and before it falls away. And the point is, thoughts of 'practice' are thoughts of 'wholes' or 'groups.' Thoughts of 'activities' are thoughts of 'wholes' or 'groups.' Thoughts of 'postures' are thoughts of 'wholes' or 'groups.' These are all concepts. These obscure the reality of rise and fall, which is why there is no wielding of power and why no deliberate 'practice' - only bhaavanaa. Scott. #119228 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 7:36 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...Maybe we should debate this point in more detail, since it is the core of the argument regarding 'formal practice.' Have you got anything of substance to say to demonstrate why doing intentional activities must invoke 'an actor' who is doing so?..." Scott: I'm suggesting that the notion of 'formal practice' is wrong because it is based on the view that someone doing something is necessary. Consider the following, from the commentary to the Saama~n~naphala Sutta: "'Wrong mindfulness becomes established' (micchaasati santi.t.thati): wrong mindfulness is the craving associated with the theory, and it is this which becomes established. For through oral tradition one first apprehends the general meaning of the view 'by doing so there is no evil,' etc. One then ponders that meaning with various reasons until it appears as cogent to the mind as if it possessed concrete form. By becoming accustomed to such a view over a long period of time, one arrives at a reflective acquiescence in it, thinking 'It is true.' When, again and again, one habitually indulges in and cultivates the view that has been accepted as true through reflective acquiescence, wrong thought directs craving to that view, with wrong effort reinforcing this craving; thus one apprehends things as having a nature which they do not really have. Thence it is the craving associated with a theory that is called wrong mindfulness." Scott. #119229 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 7:47 am Subject: Arising & falling of citta. Same or different moment? truth_aerator Dear Nina, all, For a citta, is moment of arising different from moment of falling? With best wishes, Alex #119230 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 7:56 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny truth_aerator Hello Scott, all, >Scott: I'm suggesting that the notion of 'formal practice' is wrong >because it is based on the view that someone doing something is >necessary. >============================================== Was Buddha wrong to prescribe intentional practices in Satipatthana sutta? >S:"'Wrong mindfulness becomes established' (micchaasati >================================= So sati can be wrong. So it isn't only wholesome cetasika. >S: For through oral tradition one first apprehends the general >meaning of the view 'by doing so there is no evil,' etc. >========================================================== Please note what wrong mindfulness contains. It does NOT refer to intentional practice. It refers to wrong view: "'There is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed. There is no fruit or result of good or bad actions. There is no this world, no next world, no mother, no father, no spontaneously reborn beings; no priests or contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is wrong view." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.117.than.html Note how wrong view denies the existence of this world... With best wishes, Alex #119231 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 8:19 am Subject: Do you winch poodles over khandas? scottduncan2 Alex, A: "Was Buddha wrong to prescribe intentional practices in Satipatthana sutta?" Scott: No, you are wrong to ascribe the prescription of 'intentional practices' to the Buddha. A: "So sati can be wrong. So it isn't only wholesome cetasika." A: "Please note what wrong mindfulness contains. It does NOT refer to intentional practice. It refers to wrong view..." Scott: Which are you arguing with, Alex - that there is no such thing as 'wrong sati' or that the commentary is wrong about what it says about 'wrong sati'? 'Wrong mindfulness' is defined in the text as being 'the craving associated with the theory.' So, this is not talking about sati, the wholesome mental factor, is it? It is referring to 'craving associated with theory.' Is lobha the same as sati? Do you suggest that the idea of wrong mindfulness only applies to the three examples of wrong view in that particular section of the sutta? I suggest that it is a template of the way wrong view of any kind becomes established. Just as a mental exercise, Alex, what wrong view would it be to say that 'a person must intend to practice and, to do so, must perform certain actions over and over again to get better at them?' Scott. #119232 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 9:17 am Subject: mindfulness of a sniper who is observing mindfully his target truth_aerator Scott, > Scott: Which are you arguing with, Alex - that there is no such thing >as 'wrong sati' or that the commentary is wrong about what it says >about 'wrong sati'? > > 'Wrong mindfulness' is defined in the text as being 'the craving >associated with the theory.' So, this is not talking about sati, >the >wholesome mental factor, is it? >======================================================= There is samma-sati and miccha-sati. So according to the Buddha, sati can be wrong. One can be mindful of namarupas or sniper can be mindful of the target he is about to shoot and kill. One can remember Dhamma or of doing some akusala action such as shooting of the enemy. With best wishes, Alex #119233 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 9:23 am Subject: Did Buddha mislead us with all His instructions to do? truth_aerator Scott, >A: "Was Buddha wrong to prescribe intentional practices in >Satipatthana sutta?" > >Scott: No, you are wrong to ascribe the prescription of 'intentional >practices' to the Buddha. >============================================= "Herein, monks, a monk, having gone to the forest, to the foot of a tree or to an empty place, sits down with his legs crossed, keeps his body erect and his mindfulness alert.[3] Ever mindful he breathes in, mindful he breathes out. Breathing in a long breath, he knows, "I am breathing in a long breath"; breathing out a long breath, he knows, "I am breathing out a long breath"; breathing in a short breath, he knows, "I am breathing in a short breath"; breathing out a short breath, he knows, "I am breathing out a short breath." "Experiencing the whole (breath-) body, I shall breathe in," thus he trains himself. "Experiencing the whole (breath-) body, I shall breathe out," thus he trains himself. "Calming the activity of the (breath-) body, I shall breathe in," thus he trains himself. "Calming the activity of the (breath-) body, I shall breathe out," thus he trains himself." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.010.nysa.html With best wishes, Alex #119234 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 5:28 am Subject: An Antagonist and This Ole Sentient Being dhammasaro Good friends all, When an antagonist becomes such, I try to remember it is just the ripening of my past kamma... it is a Buddhist teaching, yes? I should not become angry with the antagonist, no? My reasoning stems from what I read some years ago: If we understand that vipakacitta which arises is the result of kamma we performed ourselves, can we still be angry with other people or blame them for the vipaka we receive? In the Scriptures we read about events in the lives of people of old who received different vipakas. Also in the present time different events occur which clearly show that each person has to receive vipaka, the result of past kamma, but we cannot predict in which way it will appear. For example, a building may collapse and crush the owner so that [she/]he dies. A bomb is not the cause that the building collapses and crushes that [woman/]man. [Her/]His death is not caused by being shot or assaulted. Kamma performed in the past is the cause for receiving results through the eyes, the ears, the nose, the tongue or the body sense. Therefore, one should not be angry with someone else or blame [her/]him for the vipaka one receives. Sati can be aware of the characteristic of the dhamma that isvipakacitta, not a being, person or self. Thus one can corne to understand that the oment of vipaka is the result of past kamma, different from the moments of attachment, aversion and ignorance, or the moments of kusala dhammas. The kusala dhammas and akusala dhammas that arise are causes in the present that will condition the arising of results in the future. Source: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SariputtaDhamma/files/Vipakacitta%20From%20Past%20\ Kamma/ Discussion? peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #119235 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 5:44 am Subject: 31 Planes; was: Are Buddhists Atheists? dhammasaro Good friends all, Some of my teachers believe in the actual 31 Planes of Existence for rebirth while some other teachers believe the 31 Planes are simply where our heart/mind takes us sentient beings... it is all mental... See: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sagga/loka.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhist_cosmology Discussion? peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck <...> #119236 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 6:41 am Subject: RE: An Antagonist and This Ole Sentient Being dhammasaro Good friends all, For all - the teaching is from page 99 of A Survey of Paramattha Dhammas by Sujin Boriharnwanaket If we understand that vipakacitta which arises is the result of kamma we performed ourselves, can we still be angry with other people or blame them for the vipaka we receive? ... Kamma performed in the past is the cause for receiving results through the eyes, the ears, the nose, the tongue or the body sense. Therefore, one should not be angry with someone else or blame [her/]him for the vipaka one receives. How soon so many of us dhamma/Dhamma experts forget, heh? peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #119237 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 10:03 am Subject: Envy and Jealousy! bhikkhu5 Friends: Envy and Jealousy are a Mix of Greed & Hate! How to cure these agonizing mental states of Envy & Jealousy: 1: Review the Dangers in Envy and Jealousy like this: This Acid is eating up my mind from within! All joy & happiness is destroyed! 2: Know that Envy arises because one craves for something, that others have! The aversion towards these persons arises due to greed for a desired object. Wanting=greed is craving towards an object, while aversion=hate is craving away from an object. All forms of Craving cause Suffering! Know that Envy and Jealousy is the proximate cause of Discontent and Dissatisfaction! 3: Envy is cured by rejoicing in others' success = Mutual Joy! (Mudita ) like: How good that this being, having done good in the past, now earns the well deserved fruit!!! Thus one substitutes a disadvantageous mental state with an advantageous mental state. Know that this subtle Mutual Joy! (Mudita ) is the proximate cause of Contentment! Contentment is the highest Treasure... 4: Begin and Cultivate meditation on Infinite Mutual Joy: Sit down a silent & empty place with eyes closed and beam from the heart: May I be successful, rich, beautiful, famous, intelligent, popular & praised! May my friends be successful, rich, beautiful, famous, intelligent, & praised! May my enemies be successful, rich, beautiful, famous, intelligent, & praised! May all in this village be successful, beautiful, famous, intelligent, & praised! May all in this country be successful, rich, beautiful, intelligent, & praised! May all on this earth be successful, rich, beautiful, intelligent, and praised! May all in this galaxy be successful, rich, beautiful, intelligent, and praised! May all in the universe be successful, rich, beautiful, intelligent, and praised! Beam-out this tender sympathy from the heart first out in front, the right, left, back, above as below, thereby gradually expanding beyond the limitations of space and into the infinitude! When a cause is infinite, so will be the effect! 5: Keep on doing that 15-45 min every day. Note the difference in day joy! May all beings rejoice in Mutual Joy celebrating all beings success & progress! The Blessed Buddha said One should not despise any giving. One should not envy others. One who envies others cannot attain absorption and will never enter any concentrated trance. Dhammapada 365 Neither nice speech, nor serene behaviour Makes one accomplished, if one is still Possessed of envy, miserliness or deceit. Dhammapada 262 Absorbed in distractions, Not paying appropriate attention, Giving up the goal, following after the pleasant, One comes to envy those, who enjoy right effort! Dhammapada 209 How to cure envy and jealousy by substitution with the opposite see: Rejoicing Bliss = Mudita, Infinitely_Joyous_Consciousness , Mutual_Joy , What_is_Wrong , Safe_Medicine , Rejoicing_Joy , Mudita: Unselfish Joy Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samhita _/\_ * http://What-Buddha-Said.net Envy and Jealousy! #119238 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 12:53 pm Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > Scott: I think it is mistaking the apparent continuity that hides the fact that dhammas rise and fall. It is due to the non-attending to rise and fall, which may or may not equate to your sense of 'continuity' being 'easier to attend to.' Maybe you mean something like a 'default setting.' The PTS PED: > > "Santati (f.) [fr. sa.m+tan, lit. stretch] 1. continuity, dura- tion, subsistence...citta-santati continuity of consciousness... dhamma-santati continuity of states...sankhaara-santati causal connection of material things...2. lineage..." > > Pm. (Paramattama~juusaa, commentary to the Visuddhimagga, wherein the same statement appears as in Sammohavinodanii) says: > > "'When continuity is disrupted' means when continuity is exposed by > observing the perpetual otherness of states as they go on occurring in succession. For it is not through the connectedness of states that the characteristic of impermanence becomes apparent to one who rightly observes rise and fall, but rather the characteristic becomes more thoroughly evident through their disconnectedness, as if they were iron darts." Like I said, with regard to anicca, continuity obscures it. Here's the relevant portion of your quote: "For it is not through the connectedness of states that the characteristic of impermanence becomes apparent to one who rightly observes rise and fall..." This is with regard to the "characteristic of impermanence," and being able to discern it. That's fine, but it's not directly relevant to whether practice can affect arising conditions or not in order to develop kusala. When I am talking about "continuity that does exist" I'm not referring to a particular term. I'm just saying that there is *actual* continuity in the reoccurence and development of accumulated qualities such as panna. The fact that citta A can pass on accumulated panna to citta B and develop panna in this way by building it from one citta to the next shows that there is a kind of process or continuous accumulating and building of such qualities. It is the way in which the path develops, otherwise it wouldn't. No matter what you would prefer to call it, that is what takes place. So there is a gradual accumulation and development over time, and it doesn't take place within one single citta, it continues -- has continuity -- from one citta to the next. When panna has accumulated, there is more, higher-discerning panna in subsequent cittas. This is how development takes place, is it not? So what is relevant to the question of bhavana in meditation is this process, *not* the fact that "the idea of continuity obscures the reality of anicca." That is a separate point about something else. Within meditation, it is possible to observe anicca, first in a more gross sort of way, such as noticing that one mental object turns to another, or one observed physical quality switches to another, and eventually to individual dhammas at a higher point of development. The fact that one is doing meditation does not prevent panna from development or moments of discernment from arising. Why would it? The question remains whether the practice of attending what is arising in the moment and developing that capacity can develop actual discernment and understanding over time, and the passage in question doesn't deal with that at all. It's not what it's about. > R: "Indeed there is rise and fall and it is difficult to see on the microscopic level of dhammas. But there is also continuity, owing to accumulations and conditionality...The continuity is not continuous according to dhamma theory, it 're-arises' with the next citta, but it still maintains and continues the accumulations and tendencies that have been handed down by each successive citta. Do you think this is incorrect?...When making the point that there is anicca and that citta falls away, the commentary says not to let the rise and fall be obscured by continuity, but that is not to say there is no continuity or accumulatio from one citta to the next, since there is." > > Scott: I don't think santati ('continuity') includes 'accumulations' or 'latent tendencies' as you suggest. If you look closely at the way in which continuity is described, you should be able to see that it does not refer to accumulations. These considerations are outside of the bounds of the term. I'm not talking about the technical term, although it would be nice to know what it *does* refer to. What I am talking about is the reality of accumulation and development, whatever they are called. The reality is that it is developed through factors being carried on and developed from one citta to the next, despite the arise and fall of individual cittas, and that is a consistent process, no matter what you might like to call it. > Accumulation would refer to mental factors - to intrinsic or 'internal' factors more related to characteristic and 'strength' - which, while certainly arising and falling away with citta, would also fall under the same aegis as citta in relation to santati, since they are linked to citta. Well what are we talking about? We are talking about the accumulation and continuity of mental factors and the fact that they are developed over successive moments. That is the truth according to Abhidhamma, not my conventional view. > No, 'continuity' refers to only to rise and fall, not to factors intrinsic to a given dhamma when it has arisen and before it falls away. So you want to ignore the factors that actually are responsible for bhavana and make believe that "rise and fall" is the whole story. Bhavana does not come from anicca, from rise and fall, it comes from what is passed on despite the rise and fall of dhammas. So as long as you do this you will not deal with the question, "What is responsible for bhavana, how does it take place, and how does this apply to the meditation situation, where someone attempts to promote this process intentionally?" Don't settle for the easy answer that "this won't work because of self-view," and talk about the process itself. Let's talk about "how bhavana takes place" in Abhidhamma terms. Then we can apply it to this question. > And the point is, thoughts of 'practice' are thoughts of 'wholes' or 'groups.' What I would like to distinguish is that thoughts of practice are not the same thing as the "actuality of practice." When one is meditating, one is not sitting around "thinking about what meditation is." Dhammas are rising and falling and one is just paying attention to whatever arises in the mind and senses. > Thoughts of 'activities' are thoughts of 'wholes' or 'groups.' Thoughts of 'postures' are thoughts of 'wholes' or 'groups.' These are all concepts. You've got a weird "concept-based" concept about activities that they are somehow "thoughts of" this or that. Meditation is not a form of thinking. It's not an intellectual activity. I don't think you understand what an "activity" is. Meditation is more like bird watching than thinking. It's an observational experience-based activity. > These obscure the reality of rise and fall, which is why there is no wielding of power and why no deliberate 'practice' - only bhaavanaa. You know what Scott? You're not actually capable of investigating anything. You show up to a conversation like this armed with a preexisting set of beliefs and it's like "garbage in/garbage out" - you can only trot out the same old tired old ideas about meditation being this or that. You don't actually know what it is and you have no interest in finding out. I don't know what form of meditation you practiced for so many years, but apparently you sucked at it, [:-),] so maybe it's best that you went on to a different form of practice. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #119239 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 1:01 pm Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "...Maybe we should debate this point in more detail, since it is the core of the argument regarding 'formal practice.' Have you got anything of substance to say to demonstrate why doing intentional activities must invoke 'an actor' who is doing so?..." > > Scott: I'm suggesting that the notion of 'formal practice' is wrong because it is based on the view that someone doing something is necessary. I would not agree with this. I think the notion of 'formal practice' is based on the idea that certain practices can lead to certain types of results. If you doubt that this is the case, I would like to consider that in particular - whether or not any conventional activity can lead to a specific result over time, and whether it is possible to develop attributes of the path in this way through meditation. That, I think, should be the area of focus for this subject that we are discussing. The investigation into the nature of bhavana is another way of looking into the same question, and is equally important. > Consider the following, from the commentary to the Saama~n~naphala Sutta: > > "'Wrong mindfulness becomes established' (micchaasati santi.t.thati): wrong mindfulness is the craving associated with the theory, and it is this which becomes established. For through oral tradition one first apprehends the general meaning of the view 'by doing so there is no evil,' etc. One then ponders that meaning with various reasons until it appears as cogent to the mind as if it possessed concrete form. By becoming accustomed to such a view over a long period of time, one arrives at a reflective acquiescence in it, thinking 'It is true.' When, again and again, one habitually indulges in and cultivates the view that has been accepted as true through reflective acquiescence, wrong thought directs craving to that view, with wrong effort reinforcing this craving; thus one apprehends things as having a nature which they do not really have. Thence it is the craving associated with a theory that is called wrong mindfulness." That is a good quote regarding attributing and clinging to a wrong understanding of what something is. I don't know what the "theory" is here. Is the passage saying that "mindfulness" is the theory that is established and then craved? Or a "theory" in general in any area? The talk about the "meaning" and "reasons" is not quite clear to me either, since I don't know what those are meant to actually represent - they are general in the passage. It is not applied to activities or to some other structure in conventional thought or action, so I'm not sure what it is being applied to. However, it does show how wrong understanding is developed and how a wrong nature can then be attributed to something, but it doesn't particularly apply this to how a wrong view of the attributes of a particular activity is developed; ie, it doesn't say anything about "meditation" or any other particular activity being the result of such a wrong view. Is there a subcommentary explaining this passage further, or can you explain it further? Or is there a passage that applies this idea to the false understanding of conventional activities that are meant to effect a particular result? Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = #119240 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 1:22 pm Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny scottduncan2 Rob E., Pm. (Paramattama~juusaa, commentary to the Visuddhimagga, wherein the same statement appears as in Sammohavinodanii) says: "'When continuity is disrupted' means when continuity is exposed by observing the perpetual otherness of states as they go on occurring in succession. For it is not through the connectedness of states that the characteristic of impermanence becomes apparent to one who rightly observes rise and fall, but rather the characteristic becomes more thoroughly evident through their disconnectedness, as if they were iron darts." R: "Like I said, with regard to anicca, continuity obscures it... That's fine, but it's not directly relevant to whether practice can affect arising conditions or not in order to develop kusala." Scott: Practice, as you know, requires that one exercise control over dhammas. Since, due to the impermanence of each conditioned dhamma - which continuity hides - they are not subject to control. None are around long enough. Such a stark reality is totally relevant to 'practice' and it's claims of exercise of control. Scott. #119241 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 2:11 pm Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny scottduncan2 Rob E., Regarding: "'Wrong mindfulness becomes established' (micchaasati santi.t.thati): wrong mindfulness is the craving associated with the theory, and it is this which becomes established. For through oral tradition one first apprehends the general meaning of the view 'by doing so there is no evil,' etc. One then ponders that meaning with various reasons until it appears as cogent to the mind as if it possessed concrete form. By becoming accustomed to such a view over a long period of time, one arrives at a reflective acquiescence in it, thinking 'It is true.' When, again and again, one habitually indulges in and cultivates the view that has been accepted as true through reflective acquiescence, wrong thought directs craving to that view, with wrong effort reinforcing this craving; thus one apprehends things as having a nature which they do not really have. Thence it is the craving associated with a theory that is called wrong mindfulness." R: "...That is a good quote regarding attributing and clinging to a wrong understanding of what something is. I don't know what the 'theory' is here." Scott: A belief in formal meditation - wrong view. R: "...Is the passage saying that 'mindfulness' is the theory that is established and then craved? Or a 'theory' in general in any area? The talk about the 'meaning' and 'reasons' is not quite clear to me either, since I don't know what those are meant to actually represent - they are general in the passage..." Scott: Making stuff up and then thinking about it so much one believes it. R: "...It is not applied to activities or to some other structure in conventional thought or action, so I'm not sure what it is being applied to..." Scott: Wrong view. R: "...However, it does show how wrong understanding is developed and how a wrong nature can then be attributed to something, but it doesn't particularly apply this to how a wrong view of the attributes of a particular activity is developed; ie, it doesn't say anything about 'meditation' or any other particular activity being the result of such a wrong view." Scott: A belief in 'formal meditation' is wrong view. R: "Is there a subcommentary explaining this passage further, or can you explain it further? Or is there a passage that applies this idea to the false understanding of conventional activities that are meant to effect a particular result?" Scott: The theory of 'formal meditation' says that one can cause conditions to arise such that kusala increases. This theory becomes part of a modern oral tradition. It is pondered, worked over, enhanced until it seems to make sense to many. It makes sense to so many for so long that soon, it is 'true.' Wrong thought leads to wrong effort (known as 'practice') which is then said in many different ways to be something it is not. The history of wrong view. Scott. #119242 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 2:32 pm Subject: Re: mindfulness of a sniper who is observing mindfully his target scottduncan2 Alex, A: "There is samma-sati and miccha-sati. So according to the Buddha, sati can be wrong. One can be mindful of namarupas or sniper can be mindful of the target he is about to shoot and kill..." Scott: No. Sati arises with only kusala citta. Sati is not included in the list of immoral states found in Dhammasa"nga.ni. In a footnote to the PTS edition is stated: "...Moral intuition [pa~n~naa] was as incompatible with immoral thoughts to the Buddhist as it was to Socrates and Plato. Hence, also, 'insight' and 'mindfulness' are excluded, as well as 'faith.' The Cy. rules that the followers of heretical dogmas and mere opinion can have but a spurious faith in their teachers, can only be mindful of bad thoughts, and can only cultivate deceit and delusion. Nor can there possibly be that sixfold efficiency of sense and thought which is concomitant with good thoughts. Asl. 249." Scott. #119243 From: "sarah" Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 5:17 pm Subject: Re: under the gun sarahprocter... Hi Connie, (Rob & Scott!), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: > Somewhere back in the archives along comes this Scott guy and up jumps Connie: omg - I'm in love! Then, whaa, whaaa, whaaaaa! It's 'another good man done gone' after an onslaught of remarks along the lines you took when he finally-ever-after, hope against hope, did come back. I didn't / don't want him disappearing again & sure would be holding it against you now if he had! Wouldn't matter that I know better. I'd likely sink to friendly fire with nothing nice behind it. .... S: At least we all understand now and Scott knows he has one big fan at least! Let's all work to keep Scott happy, then Connie will be happy too! Of course, really down to the accumulations, of course.... ... > > A Breed Apart (a Wild Bill Hickok novel) p.39: < There's nothing as vicious on God's earth as a woman who is trying to protect what is hers ... or trying to take something that ain't. > .... S: :-) We all get sucked into our fantasy web.... ... > Ok, Sarah, I know Rob wasn't really out to break my heart... and that even if he had been, the Saw Simile holds true. .... S: yes, we all have our 'snapping point' - is that the one? ... >I'll try to "be nice" and impersonal after this... but can we relax that peevish so-and-so salutation required rule? I promise I’ll still delete most of what I write! .... S: How about "be nice" , a note to 'anyone who'll listen' at least and then no need to delete at all. We'd like to hear some of the "nice" full versions!! Many of us rely on the name, for quick searching, reference and so on..... so at least an 'all' or a 'heart-throb' if you don't mind and we'll know who you mean... Metta Sarah ===== #119244 From: "sarah" Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 5:25 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) sarahprocter... Dear Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > That being said, the post was a compromise expression - a compromise necessitated by the oscillation of dhammas arising while being driven crazy by Rob's ongoing inability to get it. That isn't about Rob, it's about me. .... S: Yes, never about 'the other', always about our own cittas.... ... > > I just want to point out that I don't particularly care for the implication that just because it looks witty and friendly that it actually is. It's just my thing - I can't fake it very well. I'd rather see the 'real' Rob as well, as opposed to some caricature of totally faked 'I'm-polite-so-I'm-buddhist' thing. > > I can stay this side of the line, but I don't like trying to pretend that I'm all kind and solicitous when I don't feel that way at all. I try to keep it civil (barely as you might say, sighing) but I'd rather appear in words closer to the reality of the moment, risking the chance that others might also realize that I experience akusala more often than kusala, than blatantly 'fake' an appearance or a persona that is not accurate. To me, some of that is what is simply appalling to me in the world of 'buddhism' and 'acting buddhist' and all that. > > End of rant. .... S: [Note: dhamma discussion only here and I'm very glad you're around to share it with!!!] Isn't it just about common courtesy and goodwill, rather than about 'faking' and so on? Like when we're feeling ill, but we do those around us a favour by smiling, taking interest and not showing we're sick? I call this courtesy rather than faking. Different moments, different cittas, of course, and always back to 'minding our own cittas now. Metta Sarah ===== #119245 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 7:18 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Arising & falling of citta. Same or different moment? nilovg Dear Alex, Op 24-okt-2011, om 22:47 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > For a citta, is moment of arising different from moment of falling? ------ N: Yes. Each time period of citta can be divided into three submoments: arising, persisting, falling away. These are extremely short. They are discrned in the course of the development of the stages of insight. For instance, at the moment of bhanga ~naa.na, the attention is mostly on the falling away of citta. ----- Nina. #119246 From: "philip" Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 8:10 pm Subject: Re: Can a Non-Buddhist Act as a Buddhist? was: Off Topic: An Unkownd Texas Ranger philofillet Hi Scott > D: "...for me it means : .. be islands unto yourselves, refuges unto yourselves, seeking no external refuge; with the Dhamma as your island, the Dhamma as your refuge, seeking no other refuge..." > > Scott: What does this come down to in actual behaviour? Does the above refer to a way of thinking? Does the above refer to dhammas? If the latter, which dhammas? And how are these dhammas 'cultivated?' Check note 53 on p.1055 of your SN anthology for a prime example of how sutta browsers get an example of free interpretation right from +the+ top authority, giving the whole idea of self-reliance a stamp of approval! I remember you once commmented on Bhikkhu Bodhi's neo-commentaries. Now that he is a social activist, we can expect even more freestyling in the upcoming AN anthology, I bet. Get ready for it, eat lots of Wheaties, you'll have your work cut out for you. http://records.photodharma.net/appeals/bhikkhu-bodhi-introduces-buddhist-global-\ relief metta, phil #119247 From: "philip" Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 9:16 pm Subject: Re: Sabhava or 'essence'- Ven. Dhammapiyo philofillet Hi Nina ( and all, please enjoy the great post that follows, but the question is for Nina, thanks) Rob K mentions calm when seeing the rotting cow and reflecting I will die like that too, soon enough. I think I would too. But why? I read that there is a stage of Vipassana nana that is a kind of terror. Is that terror related to conventional mortality, or real insight into dhammas and anattaness? Must be the latter. Sometimes I feel our clinging to Dhamma is covering up something, why don't we feel fear about anatta, with so much clinging to self, why not moee fear about giving up self...because panna is not at that stage yet? Thank you for your thoughts when you have time, Nina. Metta, Phil P.S Great post follows below! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > > Dear Venerable Dhammapiyo, > Thank you for your kind and encouraging words. > I find it not easy to talk about the practice as if it were > something we should do, different from what we are doing right > now. It seems so much just part of life, the study, the > considering, the moments when there is direct awareness; It all > goes together, and each assists the development of the others. > Writing on the internet there are many reminders of the nature > of realities, or reading the newspaper, the death and sorrow we > read about remind me of the paticcasamupada (dependent > origination) and how actually death is happening right now : the > momentary death of a moment of seeing which falls away to be > replaced by some other conditioned dhamma. > > Yesterday I went for a long walk in the New Zealand wilderness > where I am now holidaying. In one part there was a foul smell > and I soon saw the rotting carcase of a large cow in the swamp. > How does this relate to the practice and Abhidhamma? There was > smelling (a type of citta)and smell (a rupa). then so quickly > some slight degree of dosa (aversion)- a cetasika that arose > because of several conditions. Then there was very quickly the > thought that "soon I will die and be like this" and that > thinking was underlaid by detachment and calm so is a level of > samatha. And then there was some understanding of the difference > between the understanding that was at the level of samatha and > that that was of satipatthana. > There was not understanding of the degree of vipassana. Nor was > there samatha at the level of upacara (access concentration). > And yet confidence (saddha) (another cetasika - not self)was > strong. > We read in the suttas about a monk seeing a corpse, or some > other object, and how he immediately became enlightened. > Learning about these different moments in our own life one knows > how it must have been for those monks. One sees the way that > understanding develops and is confident, to whatever degree is > suitable, of what the path is. No one can say when enough > understanding will be developed so that such moments could > condition magga citta (path moment). It might be next week or it > might be a thousand lifetimes later- or much more. It doesn't > matter; what is most important is learning what the buddha > really taught and seeing it over and over. > > I believe it is not so much a matter of doing and trying but of > learning to see. The dhammas in the Abhidhamma are here and now. > We don't have to go anywhere or do anything; but there does have > to be sufficient conditions. There should be awe and respect for > the Dhamma so that one studies not with the aim of getting > something, but rather of genuinely testing out what is heard > against this moment. The more we listen and consider and > investigate directly, then for sure there are more conditions > been built up for insight. > In the very beginning there are only conditions for ignorance > and craving so almost everyone tries so hard to see. But the > sort of seeing that the Buddha meant is detached. Thus real > insight comes not from trying and wanting but through fulfilling > the correct conditions. Then there are moments, maybe a few more > every year, where awareness arises just because it must, and > this is deeper than when we try to make it come about. Then > awareness too is known as anatta, as not under control of > anyone. However, this doesn't mean 'well it's all conditioned, > I'll just let it happen'. So I am not saying 'don't try to be > aware", but by being awake to lobha(craving) we know it is > always trying to slip in. It can be extremely refined. > > Also I feel the moments when there is only heedlessness are very > natural , conditioned , not self: we don't need to be frightened > of unwholesome moments as they are only conditioned dhammas- so > insignificant and fleeting- we should see them as they are. Then > again it is not the middle way if we tolerate the kilesa either, > then we are not sincere... > Another point. I find different reminders and different ways of > considering very helpful. Otherwise there is a tendency, because > life has become easier (through more understanding, or samattha > or sila), to get comfortable and coast. Reading different suttas > reminds us of different realities and the complex ways they are > conditioned; it helps us see these dhammas as anatta when they > appear in daily life > These are just my reflections. I think there are not rules we > should follow because everyone's accumulations are vastly > different. I like what Dan wrote about this:"Instead of > prescribing a ritual to guarantee enlightenment, the Buddha > described the nature of reality and suggested that we carefully > consider his words, not just intellectually, but as they apply > to each > moment in the day." > Anumodana on your great interest for Dhamma as shown by your > life as a Bhikkhu in the sasana of the Buddha. > robert > > > Dear Robert K., > > I am deeply touched by the clear and concise explanation. It is > excellent! > > Sadhu! Sadhu! Sahdu! > > If you would be so kind, could you communicate some things about > actual > practice? > > It would be very helpful to many surely! > > Metta and Karuna > > Dhammapiyo Bhante > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Robert Epstein" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 10:47 PM > Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Sabhava or 'essence'- Rob E > > > > > > --- robertkirkpatrick@r... wrote: > > > --- : > > > > _______ > > > Dear Robert E., > > > Vipassana means special or profound seeing. That is, insight > into the > > > true nature of dhammas, realities. These dhammas are > analysed and > > > explained by the Sammasamabuddha in the most careful way in > the > > > Abhidhamma. They are also explained throughout the rest of > the > > > Tipitaka but in a less comprehensive way. > > > The Buddha's teaching are sometimes called DhammaVinaya (the > > > teachings and discipline). And these are recorded in the > Tipitaka > > > (the pali canon). Ti means three and so it is divided into > 1) Vinaya > > > (rules for monks and nuns). 2)Suttanta - individual > discourses to > > > various people on diverse topics and 3) Abhidhamma > > > People have different accumulations and hence there are > differences > > > as to which aspects of the DhammaVinaya are most appealing. > However, > > > even one who devotes most time to suttanta or vinaya will > have to > > > know much about the khandas, the ayatanas(sense fields), and > the > > > dhatus(elements) , the different conditions; as these are, > as the > > > visuddhimagga says "the soil in which understanding grows". > These are > > > all found in the suttanta and even a little in the vinaya . > But it is > > > only in the Abhidhamma where they are elucidated in full > detail. The > > > Abhidhamma details all that the realities that we experience > in daily > > > life as well as those that we aspire to. Understanding > Abhidhamma is > > > synonymous with with understanding life, with vipassana . > (By > > > understanding I mean not as an academic understands but as > direct and > > > deep understanding of whatever appears at the 6doors.) > > > here is an url: > http://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/tipintr4.htm > > > robert > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > Terrorist Attacks on U.S. - How can you help? > Donate cash, emergency relief information > http://dailynews.yahoo.com/fc/US/Emergency_Information/ > #119248 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 10:35 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) jonoabb Hi Rob E (118982) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > ... > > [J:] Consider the following analysis from Vism Ch. I, 10. Discussing the 3-fold division of that text (Sila, Samadhi, Panna), it says: > > > > **************************** > > "10. Here the training of higher virtue is shown by Virtue; the training of higher consciousness, by Concentration and the training of higher understanding, by Understanding. ... > > > > "- The necessary condition for the triple clear-vision is shown by Virtue. For with the support of perfected virtue one arrives at the three kinds of clear-vision, but nothing besides that. > > "- The necessary condition for the six kinds of direct-knowledge is shown by Concentration. For with the support of perfected concentration one arrives at the six kinds of direct-knowledge, but nothing besides that. > > [RE:] Well...of course Buddha defines Concentration as Jhana, so... > =============== J: Yes, the Buddha does define Right Concentration in terms of jhana, but that is in the context of the NEP. Here, Concentration (samatha bhavana, including mundane jhana) is being contrasted with Understanding (panna of satipatthana/insight). (And of course, in defining Right Concentration in terms of jhana, the Buddha was not saying that mundane jhana is Right concentration.) > =============== > > "- The necessary condition for the categories of discrimination is shown by Understanding. For with the support of perfected understanding one arrives at the four kinds of discrimination, but not for any other reason." > > > > [http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nanamoli/PathofPurification2011.pdf] > > **************************** > > > > [J:] Note in the case of Virtue and Concentration, the emphatic "but nothing besides that", while in the case of Understanding, the equally emphatic "but not for any other reason". > > [RE:] That seems to give concentration/jhana a pretty exclusive role in developing the six kinds of direct-knowledge. Even if you define concentration as jhana OR equivalent concentration gained through accumulations, it still makes jhana pretty darned important. > =============== J: The six kinds of direct-knowledge are mundane and are not a prerequisite to the development of the path. The point is that samatha (including mundane jhana) leads to one goal, while satipatthana/insight leads to another. > =============== > [RE:] In that case, jhana [for those who can manage it] would have a much more direct route to the concentration that gives higher knowledge. > =============== J: Yes, if one's aim is the six kinds of direct-knowledge (a mundane attainment), jhana is a prerequisite. > =============== > > J: As regards the depth of insight, this depends primarily on the extent to which panna of the insight kind has been accumulated. Absent well-developed panna of the insight kind, the suppression of the hindrances is a high level of samatha bhavana but nothing more, available to those outside the dispensation. > > [RE:] Doesn't a high level of samatha of the strength of jhana arise in the the higher vipassana-nanas? I don't know the specifics as well as you would - maybe you can say when jhana-strength concentration comes into play in the development of the higher insights leading to enlightenment. > =============== J: As far as I know, it is only at the actual stages of enlightenment (supramundane path moments) that the co-arising mental factor of concentration is regarded as being of the level of jhana for all who attain. > =============== [RE:] It seems that as a cetasika concentration does have an important role to play in conjunction with insight, does it not? > =============== J: In the case of each of the NEP mental factors (concentration, effort, etc.), it is those factors as occurring when insight is being developed that support the further development of insight and eventual enlightenment. Jon #119249 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 10:40 pm Subject: Re: Can a Non-Buddhist Act as a Buddhist? was: Off Topic: An Unkownd Texas Ranger scottduncan2 Phil, Ph:"...Now that he is a social activist, we can expect even more freestyling in the upcoming AN anthology, I bet. Get ready for it, eat lots of Wheaties, you'll have your work cut out for you." Scott: Yeah, I'm actually looking forward to the AN translation- the whole thing apparently! Coming to a bookstore near me (when I order it) in 2012! He already did the anthology. I've got the PTS volumes. I'll ignore the freestyling but will hope that we get at least some of the commentaries translated. Scott. #119250 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 11:19 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Sarah, S: "[Note: dhamma discussion only here and I'm very glad you're around to share it with!!!]" Scott: Thanks. S: "Isn't it just about common courtesy and goodwill, rather than about 'faking' and so on? Like when we're feeling ill, but we do those around us a favour by smiling, taking interest and not showing we're sick? I call this courtesy rather than faking." Scott: Well, yeah. But in 'minding my own cittas' there is a different set that come up than for you, of course. I'm not saying that 'you' are faking it, although you might be more capable of that in times of need than am I. As I said, not claiming correctness, I prefer to aim for 'basic' when awash with crabbiness and impatience - and barely manage to get even there. I have this thing about not wanting to 'fake' something and sometimes not even the so-called goal of 'common courtesy and goodwill' is enough to move me. I've never understood, for example, the metta thing where one 'has' (fakes?) metta so that others can think well of one. 'Real' metta, naturally expressed would have that effect on some, I guess. I'm not saying that I don't like it when someone thinks well of me, but do I act just for that end? I do not, Madam That seems fake to me. Like trying to be good so I get a better rebirth. It just doesn't make sense to me. Don't you just get what you get - that is, isn't it more complicated than that? It's like: 'Do I write Sarah or Dear Sarah? I mean she wrote Dear Scott but sometimes it's Hi Scott. If I write Dear when I'm crabby then I'm a fake. If I write nothing then Sarah thinks ill of me. If I want Dear then I'm insecure. If I think Hi is a downgraded Dear then I'm paranoid. So, whatever, I'll just write the name and be done with it all.' Hasn't it occurred to you yet that I'm (internet and otherwise) socially inept? That's just accumulations - he said utterly misusing and abusing the actual fundamental meaning of that popular term. Rant, rant, rant. Scott. #119251 From: "philip" Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 11:21 pm Subject: Re: Can a Non-Buddhist Act as a Buddhist? was: Off Topic: An Unkownd Texas Ranger philofillet Hi Scott > Scott: Yeah, I'm actually looking forward to the AN translation- the whole thing apparently! Coming to a bookstore near me (when I order it) in 2012! He already did the anthology. I've got the PTS volumes. I'll ignore the freestyling but will hope that we get at least some of the commentaries translated. Ph: True re the commentaries. I was proud of myself for detecting the freestyling, mana and the kilesa that is arrogance and lack-of gratitude, I forget if they are dhammas, or just aspects of mana or....? In any case I've got it coming out of my a...accumulations. Metta, Phil #119252 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 11:31 pm Subject: Re: Can a Non-Buddhist Act as a Buddhist? was: Off Topic: An Unkownd Texas Ranger scottduncan2 Phil, Ph: "...I was proud of myself for detecting the freestyling, mana and the kilesa that is arrogance and lack-of gratitude, I forget if they are dhammas, or just aspects of mana or....? In any case I've got it coming out of my a...accumulations." Scott: Hell, what's in a name? But yeah I detect these all day long. Am I proud of you? No. Just of me. And also, yeah, that 'accumulation' thing is taking on a life of it's own, and probably moving further and further away from it's basic meaning. You can see 'accumulations' being seconded into various arguments where it seems to be used as a synonym for self or personality (in the mere psychological as opposed to Dhamma sense) - 'self' in the sense of some quasi-permanent, ongoing but shifting cohesive set of tendencies (the definition of personality according to some super boring ego-psychology types, like Rappaport for example). This usage in contradistinction to the basic fact of impermanence - that being the paradox of the total falling away of citta before the next arising but without a gap. Scott. In the name of seeking the holy grail of a 'bridge' between conventional and ultimate descriptions of things, accumulations is the new metaphorical building material. #119253 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 11:31 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sabhava or 'essence'- Ven. Dhammapiyo upasaka_howard Hi, Phil (and Nina) - If I may butt in with what some may consider an irrelevancy: In a message dated 10/25/2011 6:17:11 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, philco777@... writes: Hi Nina ( and all, please enjoy the great post that follows, but the question is for Nina, thanks) Rob K mentions calm when seeing the rotting cow and reflecting I will die like that too, soon enough. I think I would too. But why? I read that there is a stage of Vipassana nana that is a kind of terror. Is that terror related to conventional mortality, or real insight into dhammas and anattaness? Must be the latter. Sometimes I feel our clinging to Dhamma is covering up something, why don't we feel fear about anatta, with so much clinging to self, why not moee fear about giving up self...because panna is not at that stage yet? ------------------------------------------------------- HCW: There was a time, years ago on a Goenka retreat, that for an hour or so (and, not while meditating) the sense of self/personal identity/knower was gone (at the conscious level). I was unfortunately emotionally unprepared for this - possibly due to ultra-minimal prior jhana experience, and the result, instead of great calm or joy, was tremendous fear and a desparate effort to "return to my prison cell." Unfortunately that effort succeeded, and I'm still "doing time"! LOL! -------------------------------------------------------- Thank you for your thoughts when you have time, Nina. Metta, Phil ================================= With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #119254 From: "philip" Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 11:36 pm Subject: Re: Can a Non-Buddhist Act as a Buddhist? was: Off Topic: An Unkownd Texas Ranger philofillet Hi again Scott An afterthought. > > I'll ignore the freestyling You won't have that option, not if you stay active discussing Dhamma on the internet, because it'll be transmitted fast, primed by Bh. Bodhi's authoritative status. His talks on MN really threw me off track for a few years... Metta, Phil #119255 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Oct 25, 2011 11:43 pm Subject: Re: Can a Ninja-Bodhi Act as a Buddhist? scottduncan2 Phil, Ph: "You won't have that option, not if you stay active discussing Dhamma on the internet, because it'll be transmitted fast, primed by Bh. Bodhi's authoritative status. His talks on MN really threw me off track for a few years..." Scott: It's cool. I'll still take the translation. But I can be catty too: It'll be better than that other guy of ati fame. Scott. #119256 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 12:39 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Sabhava or 'essence'- Ven. Dhammapiyo scottduncan2 Howard, H: "If I may butt in with what some may consider an irrelevancy..." Scott: An invitation if ever I saw a red flag. HCW: "...for an hour or so (and, not while meditating) the sense of self/personal identity/knower was gone (at the conscious level). I was unfortunately emotionally unprepared for this - possibly due to ultra-minimal prior jhana experience, and the result, instead of great calm or joy, was tremendous fear and a desparate effort to "return to my prison cell."..." Scott: Does that experience mean anything? When you demarcate this experience by saying 'not while meditating' how does this frame it? Jhaana experience - for the adept - is the source of many wrong views due to misconstruing things. Bhaavanaa ( which is definitely *not* 'meditating') can occur at any time. What is to be made of such an event from a Dhamma perspective? At the height of the 'encounter group' movement in the 70's it was not uncommon for the less stable to experience primitive emotional states after marathon sessions. Some experienced frank psychotic episodes fraught with extreme fragmentation anxiety. Was that supposed to mean something? Was you experience any different? I don't get how these things are anything but seeking after interesting experience. Scott. #119257 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 12:43 am Subject: kusala of four planes. nilovg Dear Alex, A correction to be made. I mentioned to you that jhaana was not mentioned among the ten protections (Sangiitisutta), but just now when going over the commentary I saw: Co: as to the kusala dhammas he establishes: these are of the four planes (N: of the sense sphere, ruupajhaana, aruupajhaana, lokuttara). He does not shake off the burden in order to attain these. ----- Nina. #119258 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 1:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Arising & falling of citta. Same or different moment? truth_aerator Dear Nina, >A: For a citta, is moment of arising different from moment of falling? > ------ >N: Yes. Each time period of citta can be divided into three >submoments: arising, persisting, falling away. These are extremely >short. >============================================================= Does each submoment has its own arising, persisting and falling away? Thank you for your answers, With best wishes, Alex #119259 From: "philip" Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 1:13 am Subject: Re: Can a Gandhi-Bodhi Act as a Buddhist? philofillet Hi Scott > Scott: It's cool. I'll still take the translation. But I can be catty too: It'll be better than that other guy of ati fame. Well, we'll see. I've only scratched the surface of SN and MN, I'll get Amazon to send the AN to me in the peta realm, where I'll be eating dirt and bitching at everybody about it. G'night. Metta, Phil #119260 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 1:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sabhava or 'essence'- Ven. Dhammapiyo nilovg Dear Phil, Op 25-okt-2011, om 12:16 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > I read that there is a stage of Vipassana nana that is a kind of > terror. Is that terror related to conventional mortality, or real > insight into dhammas and anattaness? Must be the latter. ------- N: Fear, terror, these are words we use in conventional language, and they are connected with aversion, dosa. In the context of the stages of insight, they are not connected with dosa at all. It is pa~n~naa that sees the danger and disadvantage of conditioned realities that are impermanent and thus dukkha. There is a turning away from them and inclining to nibbaana in the course of insight. The words bhanga and adinaava (danger) are used to denote this. But all this will come later on. Our task now? You know already! A very good post by Rob K you quoted. Have to cook now (thinking of Alex, in the kitchen). ------ Nina. #119261 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 2:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sabhava or 'essence'- Ven. Dhammapiyo upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 10/25/2011 9:39:30 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: Howard, H: "If I may butt in with what some may consider an irrelevancy..." Scott: An invitation if ever I saw a red flag. -------------------------------------------- HCW: A red flag, huh? Bull! ;-)) -------------------------------------------- HCW: "...for an hour or so (and, not while meditating) the sense of self/personal identity/knower was gone (at the conscious level). I was unfortunately emotionally unprepared for this - possibly due to ultra-minimal prior jhana experience, and the result, instead of great calm or joy, was tremendous fear and a desparate effort to "return to my prison cell."..." Scott: Does that experience mean anything? --------------------------------------------- HCW: It may not signify anything of any importance, or it might be an example of the "fear occurring as a stage." I certainly do not know, I brought it up because of the possibility of it being relevant to Phil's saying " I read that there is a stage of Vipassana nana that is a kind of terror." ----------------------------------------------------- When you demarcate this experience by saying 'not while meditating' how does this frame it? -------------------------------------------- HCW: It is simply a fact mentioned in my description of what happened. ------------------------------------------- Jhaana experience - for the adept - is the source of many wrong views due to misconstruing things. ------------------------------------------- HCW: I presume you mean "for the neophyte" rather than "for the adept"? And, yes, you are correct. There are all sorts of belief-based interpretations made. I brought up jhana inexperience only in relation to my not reacting with calm. -------------------------------------------- Bhaavanaa ( which is definitely *not* 'meditating') can occur at any time. What is to be made of such an event from a Dhamma perspective? ------------------------------------------- HCW: Yes, development and insight can occur at any time, often without obvious trigger. However, there would be preconditions, of course. Nothing comes from nothing. ------------------------------------------- At the height of the 'encounter group' movement in the 70's it was not uncommon for the less stable to experience primitive emotional states after marathon sessions. Some experienced frank psychotic episodes fraught with extreme fragmentation anxiety. Was that supposed to mean something? Was you experience any different? --------------------------------------------- HCW: I don't know. I don't dismiss the possibility of it being an unwholesome, even deranged, state. I just don't know. It seems to have had salubrious fallout, but ... I just don't know. ---------------------------------------------- I don't get how these things are anything but seeking after interesting experience. ---------------------------------------------- HCW: Okay. Whatever you get, you get; whatever you do not, you do not. ---------------------------------------------- Scott. ================================ With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #119262 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 4:29 am Subject: Re: Sabhava or 'essence' of experiences scottduncan2 Howard, HCW: "It may not signify anything of any importance, or it might be an example of the "fear occurring as a stage." I certainly do not know, I brought it up because of the possibility of it being relevant to Phil's saying 'I read that there is a stage of Vipassana nana that is a kind of terror.'" Scott: This is in reference to the fifth stage of insight , 'knowledge of terror,' or 'bhaya ~naa.na' I think. I really don't consider that this is referring to a mundance emotional state, nor need any mystical significance be applied to the word 'terror.' I think it just has to do with 'seeing' the disadvantages of the falling away of realities or something like that. HCW: "I presume you mean 'for the neophyte' rather than 'for the adept'?..." Scott: No I was referring to the wrong views of existence caused by the misconstruing of various jhaana experiences. So 'adept' is correct - one who was able to attain jhaana (for all the good it did him or her view-wise). And I was also pointing out the folly of thinking too much of the sort of thing you were describing I guess. H: "...I brought up jhana inexperience only in relation to my not reacting with calm." Calm, like as in samatha? Since jhaana suppresses hindrances, there would be no fear, right? No intrusion of worldly dhammas while jhaana citta is in ascendence, right? Samadhi and samatha mean more or less the same, I think - so more a function of concentration, I guess. But yeah, had you been in jhaana no such 'fear' would have arisen. Scott. #119263 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 4:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Arising & falling of citta. Same or different moment? scottduncan2 Alex, A: "Does each submoment has its own arising, persisting and falling away?..." Scott: And then, 'do each of these sub-moments have sub-sub-moments each with it's own arising, persisting and falling away?' And this will go on until the upcoming punchline which will be something about infinite regress or whatever and how silly all of this is. Scott. #119264 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 4:59 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > Pm. (Paramattama~juusaa, commentary to the Visuddhimagga, wherein the same statement appears as in Sammohavinodanii) says: > > "'When continuity is disrupted' means when continuity is exposed by > observing the perpetual otherness of states as they go on occurring in succession. For it is not through the connectedness of states that the characteristic of impermanence becomes apparent to one who rightly observes rise and fall, but rather the characteristic becomes more thoroughly evident through their disconnectedness, as if they were iron darts." > > R: "Like I said, with regard to anicca, continuity obscures it... That's fine, but it's not directly relevant to whether practice can affect arising conditions or not in order to develop kusala." > > Scott: Practice, as you know, requires that one exercise control over dhammas. You know I've consistently disagreed with this, and said over and over again that this is not how practice works. There's not control over dhammas, there's not even control in conventional terms since one cannot actually decide when to breathe, how much mindfulness to have, whether one gets tired or if attention gets distracted, or what dhamma may arise at any given moment, so there is no control. Just in case you can't hear me, which is likely, I'll say it again - there is no control over anything, no control, no control. I've used the analogy of sailing -- by the way, you might want to address something I say once in a while instead of just asserting your same old points. It's a "conversation" not dueling monologues. I always respond to what you say. Anyway, when you go sailing, you can't control the wind or the sea, can you? So how is it possible to sail? Well, strangely, you still can, without control. Because skillful action takes account of conditions as they arise and adapts in order to "get where one is going." So it's possible to aim for a destination, and with no control, excercise skillful action and get there. Again, if such were not the case, there'd be no path, however it takes place. > Since, due to the impermanence of each conditioned dhamma - which continuity hides - they are not subject to control. None are around long enough. Such a stark reality is totally relevant to 'practice' and it's claims of exercise of control. There is no claim of exercise of control, because the process is based on development, not on control. A baby learns to walk, though it has no control over the process. etc., etc. The process controls the baby, the baby doesn't control the process. In addition, cittas do act as carriers of qualities that accumulate, so panna only develops through passage and development from one citta to the next. So there is that process of learning, development, improvement, increase in skillfulness, etc., and it does take place, even in Abhidhamma terms. That process takes place without control, but certain situations have different conditions than others. So "hearing the Dhamma" is a condition for kusala to develop. "Wise consideration" creates conditions for kusala to develop. All I'm saying is that practicing meditation according to Buddha also creates conditions for kusala to develop. With no self, and no control, and individual cittas all in a row. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = #119265 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 5:08 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "You know I've consistently disagreed with this, and said over and over again that this is not how practice works. There's not control over dhammas, there's not even control in conventional terms since one cannot actually decide when to breathe, how much mindfulness to have, whether one gets tired or if attention gets distracted, or what dhamma may arise at any given moment, so there is no control..." Scott: That is all well and good. As far as I'm concerned, saying any of the above is negated by the ongoing belief in something called 'formal meditation.' The mere act of deliberately sitting in order to do something says it all to the contrary. R: "...In addition, cittas do act as carriers of qualities that accumulate, so panna only develops through passage and development from one citta to the next. So there is that process of learning, development, improvement, increase in skillfulness, etc., and it does take place, even in Abhidhamma terms. That process takes place without control, but certain situations have different conditions than others. So 'hearing the Dhamma' is a condition for kusala to develop. 'Wise consideration' creates conditions for kusala to develop..." Scott: Yes, and then - R: "All I'm saying is that practicing meditation according to Buddha also creates conditions for kusala to develop. With no self, and no control..." Scott: - it's all just words due to the persistence of this belief. No amount of purposeful sitting will 'create conditions.' There is talking the talk and this is negated by the desire and attempt to purposefully walk the walk. Scott. #119266 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 5:09 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > Regarding: > > "'Wrong mindfulness becomes established' (micchaasati santi.t.thati): wrong mindfulness is the craving associated with the theory, and it is this which becomes established. For through oral tradition one first apprehends the general meaning of the view 'by doing so there is no evil,' etc. One then ponders that meaning with various reasons until it appears as cogent to the mind as if it possessed concrete form. By becoming accustomed to such a view over a long period of time, one arrives at a reflective acquiescence in it, thinking 'It is true.' When, again and again, one habitually indulges in and cultivates the view that has been accepted as true through reflective acquiescence, wrong thought directs craving to that view, with wrong effort reinforcing this craving; thus one apprehends things as having a nature which they do not really have. Thence it is the craving associated with a theory that is called wrong mindfulness." > > R: "...That is a good quote regarding attributing and clinging to a wrong understanding of what something is. I don't know what the 'theory' is here." > > Scott: A belief in formal meditation - wrong view. Who says? Is that what the commentary is referring to, or is it a general thesis on wrong views? Where does it say that bhavana is mistaken for an activity [meditation,] and that this is a wrong view, and that is not what Buddha meant? Where? Please, tell me. And how is that demonstrated? > R: "...Is the passage saying that 'mindfulness' is the theory that is established and then craved? Or a 'theory' in general in any area? The talk about the 'meaning' and 'reasons' is not quite clear to me either, since I don't know what those are meant to actually represent - they are general in the passage..." > > Scott: Making stuff up and then thinking about it so much one believes it. Well you are applying that to meditation, there's no indication other than your own thoughts about this that it is the case with meditation. I think that meditation is not "stuff that is made up," it is all over the suttas, it is part of the Buddhist teaching; it is taught in detail in Visuddhimagga, it is mentioned in Patthana and other parts of the Abhidhamma, so how on earth is it "making up stuff," Scott, when it is part of the fabric of every part of the tipitaka??? Did it ever occur to you that *you* are "making stuff up" when you read about these practices everywhere in every branch and aspect of the Buddhist teachings from ancient times on up, and you "make up" that all of that is wrong and means something else, because you "made up" your own philosophy and call it Buddhism? How about that? > R: "...It is not applied to activities or to some other structure in conventional thought or action, so I'm not sure what it is being applied to..." > > Scott: Wrong view. What if the wrong view is yours, not mine? I can read you a law book about what constitutes a crime. That doesn't demonstrate, does it, that a crime has been committed? You have to show that a belief in the efficacy of meditation is a wrong view, not quote me random definitions of what wrong view is in general. What does that prove? Nothing. > R: "...However, it does show how wrong understanding is developed and how a wrong nature can then be attributed to something, but it doesn't particularly apply this to how a wrong view of the attributes of a particular activity is developed; ie, it doesn't say anything about 'meditation' or any other particular activity being the result of such a wrong view." > > Scott: A belief in 'formal meditation' is wrong view. Says you - so what? What am I supposed to do - take your word for it because you "say so?" And take it over the many teachings of the Buddha on this subject. Hm....let's see, teacher Scott or Buddha. Okay, I'll take Buddha. That was easy. Don't be insulting stupid Scott. Offer some evidence that "formal meditation is wrong view," or admit it's just your personal opinion and has no scriptural foundation. "Well I think it's wrong." I can find a three-year old to say that about anything they like. > R: "Is there a subcommentary explaining this passage further, or can you explain it further? Or is there a passage that applies this idea to the false understanding of conventional activities that are meant to effect a particular result?" > > Scott: The theory of 'formal meditation' says that one can cause conditions to arise such that kusala increases. This theory becomes part of a modern oral tradition. It is pondered, worked over, enhanced until it seems to make sense to many. It makes sense to so many for so long that soon, it is 'true.' Wrong thought leads to wrong effort (known as 'practice') which is then said in many different ways to be something it is not. > > The history of wrong view. That is your story of that history. You have nothing with scriptural authority that is applying that to the history of meditation. Show me something that verifies your opinion here, Scott, or you haven't got a leg to stand on. Unfortunately, your little opinion about meditation being wrong view, and your story about how it works, is not a part of Buddhist scripture. It is just your own false concept, made up by modern adherents to a particular view of dhammas, and adopted by you without any basis. It is wrong. You are the one with wrong view about meditation. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = #119267 From: "Christine" Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 6:42 am Subject: Re: Can a Non-Buddhist Act as a Buddhist? was: Off Topic: An Unkownd Texas Ranger christine_fo... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > > Hi again Scott > > An afterthought. > > > > I'll ignore the freestyling > > You won't have that option, not if you stay active discussing Dhamma on the internet, because it'll be transmitted fast, primed by Bh. Bodhi's authoritative status. His talks on MN really threw me off track for a few years... > > Metta, > Phil > Hello Phil, Could you explain a little of what you mean by this remark about Ven. Bodhi? with metta Chris #119268 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 7:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Arising & falling of citta. Same or different moment? truth_aerator Scott, >A: "Does each submoment has its own arising, persisting and falling >away?..." > >Scott: And then, 'do each of these sub-moments have sub-sub-moments >each with it's own arising, persisting and falling away?' And this >will go on until the upcoming punchline which will be something >about >infinite regress or whatever and how silly all of this is. >===================================================== What is the answer? Do sub-moments have arising or are they eternally existing or not-existing? If something eternally exists then it cannot ever arise & fall. If something doesn't ever exist, then it can never arise & persist since it doesn't exist. I've asked a fair question. Alex #119269 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:23 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Arising & falling of citta. Same or different moment? upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 10/25/2011 4:07:22 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Scott, >A: "Does each submoment has its own arising, persisting and falling >away?..." > >Scott: And then, 'do each of these sub-moments have sub-sub-moments >each with it's own arising, persisting and falling away?' And this >will go on until the upcoming punchline which will be something >about >infinite regress or whatever and how silly all of this is. >===================================================== What is the answer? Do sub-moments have arising or are they eternally existing or not-existing? If something eternally exists then it cannot ever arise & fall. If something doesn't ever exist, then it can never arise & persist since it doesn't exist. ----------------------------------------------------- HCW: The question you are asking exactly the same as Nagarjuna had asked. If one thinks of the stages of arising, changing while standing, and ceasing as things/entities, this becomes a genuine problem, but if these are not considered to be "things," then there is no problem at all. Arising, altering, and falling away are simply behavioral features of phenomena. Isn't it quite enough already to reify, say, "a warmth" without engaging in even further thing-making? At some point with regard to substantialism, enough is enough. ;-) --------------------------------------------------------- I've asked a fair question. ---------------------------------------------------------- HCW: It *is* in case substantialism is running rampant, Under such a perspective, the question is quite fair, but otherwise not. This reminds me of the story of a farmer telling a city guy that a sprout, when planted in rich soil and well watered, has the power to grow into an apple tree, and the city guy then asks the farmer to show him where that power is located in the sprout. The farmer, of course, stares at the urbanite as if he is a lunatic! ---------------------------------------------------------- Alex ============================== With metta, Howard Insubstantial and Lacking in Essence /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) #119270 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:35 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Rob E > > (118982) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon. > > ... > > > [J:] Consider the following analysis from Vism Ch. I, 10. Discussing the 3-fold division of that text (Sila, Samadhi, Panna), it says: > > > > > > **************************** > > > "10. Here the training of higher virtue is shown by Virtue; the training of higher consciousness, by Concentration and the training of higher understanding, by Understanding. ... > > > > > > "- The necessary condition for the triple clear-vision is shown by Virtue. For with the support of perfected virtue one arrives at the three kinds of clear-vision, but nothing besides that. > > > "- The necessary condition for the six kinds of direct-knowledge is shown by Concentration. For with the support of perfected concentration one arrives at the six kinds of direct-knowledge, but nothing besides that. > > > > [RE:] Well...of course Buddha defines Concentration as Jhana, so... > > =============== > > J: Yes, the Buddha does define Right Concentration in terms of jhana, but that is in the context of the NEP. Here, Concentration (samatha bhavana, including mundane jhana) is being contrasted with Understanding (panna of satipatthana/insight). > > (And of course, in defining Right Concentration in terms of jhana, the Buddha was not saying that mundane jhana is Right concentration.) Where does the Buddha make that distinction, between "mundane" jhana and the jhana of the NEP? Does he? If he does, I have another point to make on that point. :-))) If he doesn't, well... > > =============== > > > "- The necessary condition for the categories of discrimination is shown by Understanding. For with the support of perfected understanding one arrives at the four kinds of discrimination, but not for any other reason." > > > > > > [http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nanamoli/PathofPurification2011.pdf] > > > **************************** > > > > > > [J:] Note in the case of Virtue and Concentration, the emphatic "but nothing besides that", while in the case of Understanding, the equally emphatic "but not for any other reason". > > > > [RE:] That seems to give concentration/jhana a pretty exclusive role in developing the six kinds of direct-knowledge. Even if you define concentration as jhana OR equivalent concentration gained through accumulations, it still makes jhana pretty darned important. > > =============== > > J: The six kinds of direct-knowledge are mundane and are not a prerequisite to the development of the path. Is there somewhere definitive where that is explicated? What are the mundane factors for - why are they spoken of if they are not part of the development of the path? What's going on...? > The point is that samatha (including mundane jhana) leads to one goal, while satipatthana/insight leads to another. Please explain the diff. between the mundane path and NEP and whether the Buddha made this distinction, or if it is explicated elsewhere. It seems to dismiss a lot of what the Buddha describes. Am I wrong that this is the case? > > =============== > > [RE:] In that case, jhana [for those who can manage it] would have a much more direct route to the concentration that gives higher knowledge. > > =============== > > J: Yes, if one's aim is the six kinds of direct-knowledge (a mundane attainment), jhana is a prerequisite. And that does not relate to the path at all? What is direct-knowledge that is not the path, as opposed to direct knowledge that is the path? This distinction of the mundane path, and mundane direct-knowledge is a little confusing. Not sure what this includes and how it is different from path factors. > > =============== > > > J: As regards the depth of insight, this depends primarily on the extent to which panna of the insight kind has been accumulated. Absent well-developed panna of the insight kind, the suppression of the hindrances is a high level of samatha bhavana but nothing more, available to those outside the dispensation. > > > > [RE:] Doesn't a high level of samatha of the strength of jhana arise in the the higher vipassana-nanas? I don't know the specifics as well as you would - maybe you can say when jhana-strength concentration comes into play in the development of the higher insights leading to enlightenment. > > =============== > > J: As far as I know, it is only at the actual stages of enlightenment (supramundane path moments) that the co-arising mental factor of concentration is regarded as being of the level of jhana for all who attain. And how does that arise? Knowledge and development of jhana is not necessary? What is necessary to cause this factor to arise? Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - > > =============== > [RE:] It seems that as a cetasika concentration does have an important role to play in conjunction with insight, does it not? > > =============== > > J: In the case of each of the NEP mental factors (concentration, effort, etc.), it is those factors as occurring when insight is being developed that support the further development of insight and eventual enlightenment. ===================== #119271 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:38 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "You know I've consistently disagreed with this, and said over and over again that this is not how practice works. There's not control over dhammas, there's not even control in conventional terms since one cannot actually decide when to breathe, how much mindfulness to have, whether one gets tired or if attention gets distracted, or what dhamma may arise at any given moment, so there is no control..." > > Scott: That is all well and good. As far as I'm concerned, saying any of the above is negated by the ongoing belief in something called 'formal meditation.' The mere act of deliberately sitting in order to do something says it all to the contrary. Well you'll either have to explain how such a view is necessitated, and is correct, or else just be someone with an opinion based on personal belief. > R: "...In addition, cittas do act as carriers of qualities that accumulate, so panna only develops through passage and development from one citta to the next. So there is that process of learning, development, improvement, increase in skillfulness, etc., and it does take place, even in Abhidhamma terms. That process takes place without control, but certain situations have different conditions than others. So 'hearing the Dhamma' is a condition for kusala to develop. 'Wise consideration' creates conditions for kusala to develop..." > > Scott: Yes, and then - > > R: "All I'm saying is that practicing meditation according to Buddha also creates conditions for kusala to develop. With no self, and no control..." > > Scott: - it's all just words due to the persistence of this belief. No amount of purposeful sitting will 'create conditions.' There is talking the talk and this is negated by the desire and attempt to purposefully walk the walk. I just disagree with your view about this. Volitional action comes from volition. The volition that arises to develop the path factors can be kusala. Your prejudice against doing any kind of activity is just that. You understanding that no purposeful activity can develop particular factors is based on a mystical view that no action can cause anything to happen. This is not borne out in actual practice. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = #119272 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 11:03 am Subject: Same citta doesn't arise, persist & cease ? truth_aerator Dear Nina, all, 1) Every new moment is a different moment 2) Same citta does not persist for more than one moment 3) There is moment of arising (i), persisting (ii), and falling (iii) 4) What persists (ii) is not exactly arising (i), and what has fallen (iii) is not exactly that which is arising (i) or persisting (ii). How can the same citta that arises (i), cease (iii)? Point #1 means that citta which ceases is not citta that arises, and the citta which arises is not citta that ceases. With best wishes, Alex #119273 From: "connie" Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 11:13 am Subject: Re: Same citta doesn't arise, persist & cease ? nichiconn hi Alex, > > 1) Every new moment is a different moment every "moment" is said to have sub-moments or portions. > 2) Same citta does not persist for more than one moment right, one moment, said to have submoments or 'slices' if you like. > 3) There is moment of arising (i), persisting (ii), and falling (iii) right, that's what goes on during each 'portional' segment of that time-frame. > 4) What persists (ii) is not exactly arising (i), and what has fallen (iii) is not exactly that which is arising (i) or persisting (ii). > > How can the same citta that arises (i), cease (iii)? Point #1 means that citta which ceases is not citta that arises, and the citta which arises is not citta that ceases. > > same way we say we are the same person that was born some time ago. one life-span with different periods or chapters or ... see the 'moment of citta' as a window with three panes. don't sweat the small stuff. connie #119274 From: "philip" Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 11:25 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Sabhava or 'essence'- Ven. Dhammapiyo philofillet Hi Nina > N: Fear, terror, these are words we use in conventional language, and > they are connected with aversion, dosa. In the context of the stages > of insight, they are not connected with dosa at all. Ph: OK, thank you. I wonder why there is not more dosa about the idea of giving up self. Will there be (well before the stage of insight, of course) a time when understanding deepens and really shows me that self is to given up, and following that dosa? I don't know. But sometimes I wonder why there is not more dosa, more dread about that. I think it means my understanding of anatta is still very, very, very shallow. Calm and confidence and relief at dropping the burden of self? I sometimes think talk of that feels a little premature, at other times I appreciate it and I think share the feeling. That is because saddha, doubt, dosa and other realities are always arising in different ways. It is pa~n~naa > that sees the danger and disadvantage of conditioned realities that > are impermanent and thus dukkha. There is a turning away from them > and inclining to nibbaana in the course of insight. The words bhanga > and adinaava (danger) are used to denote this. > But all this will come later on. Our task now? You know already! Ph: Yes. Seeing and visible object, sound and hearing, that is our field of development, > A very good post by Rob K you quoted. Ph: Indeed. There are many posts by him in the UP, especially from the early years of DSG.that are breathtakingly good. It would be great if he still did that here, but I think I can better understand his reasons for not doing so now. > Have to cook now (thinking of Alex, in the kitchen). > Ph: Perhaps you will become sotapanna while reflecting on Alex wishing he could become sotapanna just by cooking! BTW, do you remember your story of the oven door smashing, and all the realities involved, especially the rupa, I think. Metta, Phil #119275 From: "philip" Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 11:30 am Subject: Re: Can a Non-Buddhist Act as a Buddhist? was: Off Topic: An Unkownd Texas Ranger philofillet Hi Christine > > You won't have that option, not if you stay active discussing Dhamma on the internet, because it'll be transmitted fast, primed by Bh. Bodhi's authoritative status. His talks on MN really threw me off track for a few years... > > l > > Could you explain a little of what you mean by this remark about Ven. Bodhi? > Ph: Bhikkhu Bodhi is such a wonderful person, and speaks in such a warm. modest way, and is in such an authoritative position as chief translator (safe to say) of the Pali canon that everything he says has a lot of weight. It's so easy to assume it is the word of the Buddha. I made that mistake. It's very easy to see where Thanissaro Bhikkhu is wrong, but with Bhikkhu Bodhi, not so easy, because so much of what he says is right. I remember hearing in a talk that you wrote to a highly renowned monk to ask him about meditation, and his answer to you was "meditate", and you found it difficult, because he was so famous. There followed a discussion about how we have to have a lot of confidence in order to keep listening to the true Dhamma and sometimes disregard even famous monks. I always assumed that the monk in your story was Bhikkhu Bodhi. Please don't ask me in what ways Bhikkhu Bodhi is wrong, it would be a major research project, that I don't have time for. His new global action plan is also of concern, we know what A.Sujin says about trying to be manager of the world. Thanks Chris. Sorry if I was offensive to you. Metta, Phil #119276 From: "philip" Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 11:50 am Subject: Re: Can a Non-Buddhist Act as a Buddhist? was: Off Topic: An Unkownd Texas Ranger philofillet Hi again Christine > Please don't ask me in what ways Bhikkhu Bodhi is wrong, it would be a major research project, that I don't have time for. His new global action plan is also of concern, we know what A.Sujin says about trying to be manager of the world. I'll just clarify by saying a main point is his willingness to disregard commentaries that don't make sense to him, reject them, and insert his own opinion, which is taken as authoritative commentary by people. As Rob K said of Ven Anaalayo, "what reality is it that makes him think he knows better than Buddhagosa?" or words to that effect. And now on the back of Ven Anaalayo's hugely popular book a blurb from someone saying "surely destined to become the classic commentary on the Satipatthana." Enough said. Metta, Phil #119277 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 11:00 am Subject: Pure is Peace... bhikkhu5 Friends: What are the qualities of Nibbâna? Nibbāna is: Total ease, complete calm, absolute freedom, perfect happiness & pure peace… Absence of any uncertainty, doubt, confusion, any delusion and all ignorance… Presence of confidence, certainty, understanding all, and direct experience… Absence of any greed, lust, desire, urge, attraction, hunger, and temptation… Presence of imperturbable and serene composure in an all stilled equanimity… Absence of all hate, anger, aversion, hostility, irritation, & stubborn rigidity… Presence of universal goodwill: An infinite & all-embracing friendly kindness… Nibbāna is not a place, not an idea, not a fantasy deception, not a conceit, not a conception, not a cause, not an effect, not finite, not definable, not formed, not begun, not ending, not changing, not temporal, but lasting… Nibbāna is unborn, unbecome, unmade, uncreated, uncaused, unconditioned, and unconstructed, yet ultimately real… Nibbāna is void of eye, visible objects & visual consciousness, void of ear, sounds & auditory consciousness, void of nose, smells & smell consciousness, void of tongue, tastes & gustatory consciousness, void of body, touch & tactile consciousness and void of mind, thoughts and mental consciousness… Pure Peace @ Rest … The Blessed Buddha once said: Hard it is to see the unconstructed, the undistorted! This independent state is not easily realized. Craving is all cut for the One, who knows, since he sees, that there is nothing to cling to ... !!! Udana – Inspiration: VIII - 2 In any dependence there is bound to be instability. In free independence there cannot be any instability. When there is no liable instability, no feeble wavering, there is a quiet calm, stillness, serenity and peace. When there is such solid tranquillity, then there is no tendency to drift, no attraction, neither any mental push, nor any pull, nor any strain of appeal or repulsion. When there is no attraction, no drift, no bending, then there is no movement, no development, and neither any coming, & much less any going. Neither any starting, nor any ending occurs... When there is neither any coming, nor any going, then there is neither any ceasing, nor any re-appearance... There being neither ceasing, nor reappearing, then there is neither any here, there, beyond, nor in between... This – just this – is the End of Suffering. Udana – Inspiration: VIII - 4 Having understood this unconstructed state, released in mind, with the chain to becoming eliminated, they attain to the sublime essence of all states. Delighting in the calmed end of craving, those steady Noble Ones have left all being & becoming behind. Itivuttaka: Thus spoken 38 Nibbana is The Highest Bliss! <....> Pure is Peace... Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samāhita _/\_ * <....> #119278 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 1:19 pm Subject: Re: Same citta doesn't arise, persist & cease ? truth_aerator Hi Connie, all, If every moment the citta is different, it means that different citta falls than the citta that arose. The Citta that arose cannot fall in a different moment because it is different citta that falls! If we say that three moments happen in one moment, then we have a contradiction. How can arising & falling which are mutually exclusive qualities occur in the same time, and citta? >A: 1) Every new moment is a different moment > >C: every "moment" is said to have sub-moments or portions. > > >A:2) Same citta does not persist for more than one moment > >C: right, one moment, said to have submoments or 'slices' if you like. > > >A: 3) There is moment of arising (i), persisting (ii), and falling >(iii) > >C: right, that's what goes on during each 'portional' segment of >that time-frame. > >A: 4) What persists (ii) is not exactly arising (i), and what has >fallen (iii) is not exactly that which is arising (i) or persisting >(ii). > > >How can the same citta that arises (i), cease (iii)? Point #1 >means that citta which ceases is not citta that arises, and the >citta which arises is not citta that ceases. > > > > > >C: same way we say we are the same person that was born some time >================================================= The person which dies is not exactly the same one as that which was born. Same with citta, the difference is just in the timescale. With best wishes, Alex #119279 From: "connie" Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 1:44 pm Subject: Re: Same citta doesn't arise, persist & cease ? nichiconn ok, Alex, > > The person which dies is not exactly the same one as that which was born. Same with citta, the difference is just in the timescale. > sure, there's a difference in the citta's strength at the different times. anything else? what's the significance? what are you getting at? thanks, connie #119280 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 2:47 pm Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...Volitional action comes from volition. The volition that arises to develop the path factors can be kusala..." Scott: 1.) Define 'volition' in your own words. 2.) Define 'volitional action' in your own words. (Fear not, Rob, for if you don't then I'll define it as I'm sure you do, although you might freak out.) 3.)Then, please explain how volition develops path factors because as far as I know 'volition' is not part of the noble eightfold path. Thanks. Scott. #119281 From: "Ken H" Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 3:13 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Arising & falling of citta. Same or different moment? kenhowardau Hi Howard and Alex, --------- <. . .> >> A: What is the answer? Do sub-moments have arising or are they eternally existing or not-existing? If something eternally exists then it cannot ever arise & fall. If something doesn't ever exist, then it can never arise & persist since it doesn't exist. >> > HCW: The question you are asking exactly the same as Nagarjuna had asked. --------- KH: Are you sure Nagarjuna asked a question about sub-moments? Alex seems to be confusing sub-moments with dhammas. He seems to think the dhamma that arises is not the dhamma that ceases. But surely it's the same dhamma, and its lifespan has been categorised into three phases. I doubt Nagarjuna would have wasted much time over that. -------------------------- > HCW: If one thinks of the stages of arising, changing while standing, and ceasing as things/entities, this becomes a genuine problem, -------------------------- KH: Yes, if there were three separate dhammas then each of them could be divided into three and, as Scott said, we would be looking at infinite regression. ---------------- > HCW: but if these are not considered to be "things," then there is no problem at all. ---------------- KH: Then there is a *huge* problem! What are these "things" that you and Nagarjuna consider not things? How can there be a thing that is not a thing? Please be specific in your answer; don't resort to smoke and mirrors. --------------------------- > HCW: Arising, altering, and falling away are simply behavioral features of phenomena. --------------------------- KH: That's right; every conditioned reality exists for three sub-moments during which it arises, persists and falls away. So where's the problem? -------------------- > HCW: Isn't it quite enough already to reify, say, "a warmth" -------------------- KH: What is this so-called "warmth" that you say is being reified? Please don't say it is "experiential content." That's what I would call a smoke-and-mirrors answer. --------------------------- > KH: without engaging in even further thing-making? At some point with regard to substantialism, enough is enough. ;-) --------------------------- KH: Yes, well, blame Alex. He's the one who was making three dhammas out of one. ----------------------------------- >> A: I've asked a fair question. >> > HCW: It *is* in case substantialism is running rampant, Under such a perspective, the question is quite fair, but otherwise not. ----------------------------------- KH: Here, we almost agree. But as I said, Alex is the only one making three dhammas out of one (and then nine out of three, and then twenty-seven . . .). And then he's using that argument to make the Abhidhamma look silly. It's seems a rather unfair tactic, wouldn't you say? ------------------ > HCW: This reminds me of the story of a farmer telling a city guy that a sprout, when planted in rich soil and well watered, has the power to grow into an apple tree, and the city guy then asks the farmer to show him where that power is located in the sprout. The farmer, of course, stares at the urbanite as if he is a lunatic! ------------------ KH: My guess is the power was in the cells of the sprout. --------------------------- > HCW: Insubstantial and Lacking in Essence > > /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./ ---------------------------- KH: What did the Buddha mean by "however you observe them"? To which "them" was he referring? To nothingness? Is there ultimately nothing that can be observed in this way? Surely he was referring to conditioned absolute realities. They can be observed as being anicca dukkha and anatta (unsatisfactory and devoid of eternal essence). Ken H #119282 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 5:42 pm Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny sarahprocter... Hi Rob E (& Scott), Good discussion you're having... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Scott: Consider the following, from the commentary to the Saama~n~naphala Sutta: > > > > "'Wrong mindfulness becomes established' (micchaasati santi.t.thati): wrong mindfulness is the craving associated with the theory, and it is this which becomes established. <...> > Is there a subcommentary explaining this passage further, or can you explain it further? Or is there a passage that applies this idea to the false understanding of conventional activities that are meant to effect a particular result? .... S: just a reminder: I think you may well find that the Sama~n~naphala sutta and commentaries is amongst the small translation booklets that Ken O kindly sent you, so you may like to take a look at your pile of books for it.... Metta Sarah ===== #119283 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 5:52 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) sarahprocter... Dear Ann (Scott, Sukin & all), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "glenjohnann" wrote: > Hello after a very long time! All's well my end, hope it is on yours too. ... S: good to hear from you. Hoping this means you've had a good recovery. ... > > Above you say that the thinking our way through is all conditioned by self, even if no wrong-view arising at the time. Attachment conditioned by wrong view tendency. .... S: I wouldn't go so far to say "all conditioned by self", but I think it's a lot more common than we have any idea about.... ... > > This rings a bell - the part about no wrong-view arising, but attachment conditioned by wrong view tendency. I can even see us sitting around the table at Khun Duengduan's home in Ayudyaya discussing this. However, I can't put my mind to it clearly - as in think my way through it (LOL). Is it the attachment that arises, without wrong view - conditioned by natural decisive support condition arising from the tendency for wrong-view? .... S: Yes. .... >In other words, conditioned by the concept of self implicit in wrong view? Not a very articulate question - but perhaps you can say more about this. ... S: The idea of self is so deeply rooted, so the latent tendency is there conditioning attachment even when there is no apparent view of self arising, such as when we try to work out the details, the meaning and so on - all for oneself, actually, rather than just understanding what appears now at this moment. We think the straining to work it out or the joy at getting the details straight is pariyatti, but often it's akusala - cheating dhammas disguised as kusala. So now, is it reading and study just for understanding at this moment or is it for scholarship, for working out the details? Only panna can tell. I tried to encourage Sukin to add more as well, but he told me off-list he'd forgotten it all! Metta Sarah ===== #119284 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 6:06 pm Subject: Re: 31 Planes; was: Are Buddhists Atheists? sarahprocter... Hi Chuck, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Maipenrai Dhammasaro wrote: > > Good friends all, > > Some of my teachers believe in the actual 31 Planes of Existence for rebirth while some other teachers believe the 31 Planes are simply where our heart/mind takes us sentient beings... it is all mental... > Discussion? ... S: What do you think? Can we talk about the human realm now as opposed to the animal realm, for example? Can we also experience a hell realm at moments of strong anger and the opposite when everything is going our way? Different mind states, different moments, different realms from moment to moment. Metta Sarah ===== #119285 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 6:11 pm Subject: Re: An Antagonist and This Ole Sentient Being sarahprocter... Hi Chuck, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Maipenrai Dhammasaro wrote: > For all - the teaching is from page 99 of A Survey of Paramattha Dhammas by Sujin Boriharnwanaket > > If we understand that vipakacitta which arises is the result of kamma we performed ourselves, can we still be angry with other people or blame them for the vipaka we receive? > ... > Kamma performed in the past is the cause for receiving results through the eyes, the ears, the nose, the tongue or the body sense. > > Therefore, one should not be angry with someone else or blame [her/]him for the vipaka one receives. .... S: Isn't it true? We think about people and "antagonists", but actually, there are just vipaka cittas of seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and touching followed by lots and lots of thinking about people and things. The experiencing of pleasant and unpleasant sense objects now is the result of kamma. ... > How soon so many of us dhamma/Dhamma experts forget, heh? .... S: Instead of thinking about "us dhamma/Dhamma experts", what about understanding the "beginner" citta now. Usually there's ignorance all day long. Metta Sarah ==== #119286 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 6:21 pm Subject: Re: view 'I have no self' is wrong view sarahprocter... Hi Dieter, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dieter Moeller" wrote: > > Hi Sarah , Alex , Howard and all, > > > you wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dieter Moeller" wrote: > > > " 2. Translated from the Visuddhi-Magga (chap. xviii) > > Just as the word "chariot" is but a mode of expression for axle, wheels, chariot-body, pole, <....> but when we come to examine the elements of being one by one, we discover that in the absolute sense there is no living entity there to form a basis for such figments as "I am," or "I"; in other words, that in the absolute sense there is only name and form. ...." > .... > S: "In the absolute sense there is only name and form" - this is the point of these similes - in the absolute sense, there are only namas and rupas. Anything else is a concept, an idea, a means of expression only. > > > D: I like to emphasize: in the absolute sense " when we come to examine the parts one by one" (as it is said above ) ... S: In other words, absolutely, in reality, there are only namas and rupas, only elements, no living being at all. ... > D: well, the point of clinging is the thirst and unfortunately it is very difficult to want what one will or not will > > Important point of the discussion was/is the issue of reality . I still like to claim that there are 2 realities , the everyday or common one and the abolute/ultimate one, > The choice of view is up to the unique experience of the individual , the conscient being .... S: And yet, as we agree, in the absolute sense, in absolute reality, there is no individual, no "conscient being", so there is no "choice of view up to the unique experience" of any being. Absolutely, there are just elements, just conditioned namas and rupas (apart from the one unconditioned element). When we or the texts refer to sammuti sacca or conventional truth, such as "house" or "chariot", it is just a usage of terms for convenience. Only in this sense is it called conventional reality. In truth, there is no house, no chariot at all. Now, if you don't think about house or chariot, where is it? They are just ideas in the mind, like when we dream. Thank you for your other comments and for sharing Jinavamsa's/Mitchell's. Metta Sarah ====== #119287 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 7:21 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Arising & falling of citta. Same or different moment? nilovg Dear Alex, Others (Ken H, Connie, Scott) gave the answer, and I hope this is clear now? Nina. Op 25-okt-2011, om 16:08 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > Does each submoment has its own arising, persisting and falling away? #119288 From: "connie" Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 7:45 pm Subject: Sangiitisutta, Tens, sutta 1. nichiconn Dear Friends, The Tens! Briefly: dasaka.m [CSCD 345-349] [Walshe 3.3, 3.3(1)-(6), 3.4] 345 = 1 intro, naathakara.naa dhammaa 346 = 2 kasi.nayatanaani 347 = 3-4 akusalakammapathaa, kusalakammapathaa 348 = 5-6 ariyavaasaa, asekkhaa dhammaa, conclusion. 349 = closing [3.4] In more detail: Olds There are, friends, ten-part Dhammas consummately taught by the Bhagava, that #1-Consummately-Awakened-One, an Arahant who knows and sees. In this situation, let us all gather together as one, undivided, so that this Best of Lives will stay on track and stand for a long time as a benefit to the many, as a pleasure for the many, out of compassion for the world, for the benefit and pleasure of gods and man. What are these tens? Walshe DN 33.3.3(1) 'Ten things that give protection (naatha-kara.na-dhammaa): *1124 Here a monk (a) is moral, he lives restrained according to the restraint of the discipline, persisting in right behaviour, seeing danger in the slightest fault, he keeps to the rules of training; [iii 267] (b) he has learnt much, and bears in mind and retains what he has learnt. In these teachings, beautiful in the beginning, the middle and the ending, which in spirit and in letter proclaim the absolutely perfected and purified holy life, he is deeply learned, he remembers them, recites them, reflects on them and penetrates them with vision; (c) he is a friend, associate and intimate of good people; (d) he is affable, endowed with gentleness and patience, quick to grasp instruction; (e) whatever various jobs there are to be done for his fellow-monks, he is skillful, not lax, using foresight in carrying them out, and is good at doing and planning; (f) he loves the Dhamma and delights in hearing it, he is especially fond of the advanced doctrine and discipline (abhidhamme abhivanaye); *1125 [iii 268] (g) he is content with any kind of requisites: robes, alms-food, lodging, medicines in case of illness; (h) he ever strives to arouse energy, to get rid of unwholesome states, to establish wholesome states, untiringly and energetically striving to keep such good states and never shaking off the burden; (i) he is mindful, with a great capacity for clearly recalling things done and said long ago; *1126 (j) he is wise, with wise perception of arising and passing away, that Ariyan perception that leads to the complete destruction of suffering. Olds [ 10.1 ] Ten things giving protection:[ 10.1 ] Here friends, a beggar has ethics, he lives self-controlled by the Paatimokkha-self-control, having arrived at conduct's pasture he sees the fearfulness in any measure of what should be shunned and stays on the seeker's course. It is, friends a beggar's ethics, his living self-controlled by the Paatimokkha-self-control, his having arrived at conduct's pasture seeing the fearfulness in any measure of what should be shunned that gives him protection. Again, additionally friends, a beggar has heard much, retains what he has heard, has got down what he has heard of that dhamma, so helpful in the beginning, helpful in the middle, helpful in conclusion, that points out the surpassingly pure Brahma-Life with it's goal and with it's terms in complete congruity. It is this matter of being learned in Dhamma, his having got a grasp of it, his ablity to speak about it, his detached understanding of it, and his throrough penetration of it in theory that gives him protection.[10.1.1] Again, additionally friends, a beggar is a helpful friend, a helpful companion, a helpful comrade. It is, friends, this beggar's being a helpful friend, a helpful companion, a helpful comrade that gives him protection.[10.1.2] Again, additionally friends, a beggar is well-spoken and is possessed of forbearance making for gentleness, he is right handy at supervising. It is, friends, this beggars well-spokenness and possession of forebearance making for gentleness, his competence at supervising, that gives him protection.[10.1.3] Again, additionally friends, a beggar, whatever needs to be done with his fellow Brahma-farers, whether lofty or menial, at that he is handy, not lax, he is skilled in recollecting what needs to be done, and in all such matters is competant, willing and able. It is, friends, that this beggar, whatever needs to be done with his fellow Brahma-farers, whether lofty or menial, is at that, handy, not lax, skilled in recollecting what needs to be done, and in all such matters is competant, willing and able, that gives him protection.[10.1.4] Again, additionally friends, a beggar takes pleasure in Dhamma, loves discussing, and derives great enjoyment from, higher dhamma, higher discipline. It is, friends, that this beggar takes pleasure in Dhamma, loves discussing, and derives great enjoyment from, higher dhamma, higher discipline that gives him protection.[10.1.5] Again, additionally friends, a beggar is content with having the requisites: any sort of robes, handouts, sitting and sleeping place, remedy for sickness that may arise. It is, friends, that this beggar is content with having the requisites: any sort of robes, handouts, sitting and sleeping place, remedy for sickness that may arise that gives him protection. Again, additionally friends, a beggar lives striving for the energy to let go of unskillful things, to acquire skillful things, steadfast, passionately holding on to, not throwing off the yoke to, skillful things. It is, friends, that that this beggar lives striving for the energy to let go of unskillful things, to acquire skillful things, steadfast, passionately holding on to, not throwing off the yoke to, skillful things, that gives him protection. Again, additionally friends, a beggar lives with a far-reaching, discriminating mind, possessed of mastery over the calling to mind and remembering of the long-ago said and done. It is, friends, that this beggar lives with a far-reaching, discriminating mind, possessed of mastery over the calling to mind and remembering of the long-ago said and done, that gives him protection. Again, additionally friends, a beggar is wise to what causes growth and termination, has possession of that Aristocratic wisdom that leads to the consummate ending of pain. It is, friends, that this beggar is wise to what causes growth and termination, has possession of that Aristocratic wisdom that leads to the consummate ending of pain, that gives him protection. RDs [ 10.1 ] Ten doctrines conferring protection.[10.1] (1) Herein friends, a brother is virtuous, lives self-controlled according to the self-control prescribed in the Vinaya, he has entered on a proper range of conduct, he sees danger in the least of the things he should avoid, he adopts and trains himself in the precepts.[ 267 ] (2) He learns much, and remembers and stores up what he has learnt. Those doctrines which, excellent at the start, in the middle, at the end, in the letter and in their contents, declare the absolutely perfect and pure religious life, these he learns to a great extent bears them in mind, treasures them by repetition, onders them in mind, penetrates them by intuition.[10.1.1] (3) He is a friend, an associate, an intimate of men of good character. (4) He is affable, endowed with gentleness and humility; he is patient and receives admonition with deference. (5) Where there are duties to be done for the seniors among his fellow-disciples, he therin is industrious, not slothful, and exercises forethought in methods for discharging them, is capable of accomplishing, capable of organizing. (6) And furthermore, friends, he loves the doctrine, the utterance of it is dear to him,[10.1.2] he finds exceeding joy in the advanced teaching of both Doctrine and Discipline.[10.1.3] (7)[ 268 ] Furthermore, friends, he is content with necessaries of any quality, whether it be raiment, alms, lodging, drugs and provision against sickness. (8) Furthermore, friends, he is continually stirring up effort to eliminate bad qualities, evoke good qualities, making dogged and vigorous progress in good things, never throwing off the burden. (9) Furthermore, friends, he is mindful, and possessed of supreme lucidity and perspicacity in following mentally and recollecting deeds and words long past. (10) Furthermore,friends, he is intelligent, endowed withinsight into the rise and passing away [of things], insight which is of that Ariyan penetration which leads to the complete destruction of pain. *walshe: 1124 Dhammaa here clearly means 'things, factors', not 'doctrines' (RD). 1125 DA is doubtful whether abhidhamma here means 'the seven Pakara.nas', i.e. the Abhidhamma Pi.taka as we know it, or not. The short answer is that if this text goes back to the Buddha's time (which is possible but far from certain), the word abhidhamma can only have the more general sense of 'higher teaching' or the like. Similar considerations apply to abhivinaya. 1126 Cf. n.1074. ***rd: [10.1] Lit. protector-making. For (1) cf. Dial.I, 317. 'Self-control prescribed,'etc., is paatimokkha-sa.mvara. [10.1.1] See Vin. Texts III, 50, on these qualifications for a bhikkhu juryman, and the footnote. [10.1.1] Piya-samudaahaaro, concerning which term Childers was doubtful, is thus expanded by B.: 'he listens intently (sakkacca.m) when another discourses and longs to teach others.' Cf. Mil. II, 237. [10.1.1] Abhidhamme Abhivinaye. B., by alternative exegeses, shows these terms are used vaguely. The former may mean the third Pi.take(?), or the doctrine of the Paths and Fruits. The latter may mean the Khandhaka-Parivaara, or the end of the vinaya--self-mastery. Cf. Sumagala Vilaasinii I, 18. ...to be continued, connie *Suttapi.taka: Diigha Nikaaya, Paatikavaggapaa.li, 10. Sa'ngiitisutta.m CSCD _http://tipitaka.org/romn/_ * The Long Discourses of the Buddha: #33, The Chanting Together - Walshe, WP 1995 * The Compilation - An Outline, taken from Digha Nikaya III.33: Sangiti Suttanta - Michael Olds * XXXIII: Sangiiti Suttanta - The Recital; T.W. and C.A.F. Rhys Davids both, http://halfsmile.org/buddhadust/www.buddhadust.org/dhammatalk/give_ear/dn33_sang\ iti.htm RDs, also available from http://wwwarchive.org/details/dialoguesofbuddh03davi [bookofdiscipline04hornuoft_bw.pdf] #119289 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 6:22 pm Subject: RE: An Antagonist and This Ole Sentient Being dhammasaro Good friend Sarah, you repied with "beginner citta." What is "beginner citta." This ole sentient being is unable to find the term in any document? [bummer] yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck From: dhammasaro@... To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com <...> #119290 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 6:50 pm Subject: RE: 31 Planes; was: Are Buddhists Atheists? dhammasaro Good friend Sarah, et al You wrote: S: What do you think? Can we talk about the human realm now as opposed to the animal realm, for example? Chuck: In conventional language anyone can speak of any realm. In Dhamma language; that is up to Sarah and others of the same kin. S: Can we also experience a hell realm at moments of strong anger and the opposite when everything is going our way? Different mind states, different moments, different realms from moment to moment. Chuck: In conventional language anyone can speak of any realm. In Dhamma language; that is up to Sarah and others of the same kin. This ole bag of bones simply related what he experienced: Different teachings on the 31 planes among his personal Theravada teachers... Hence, in conventional language, Buddhist being atheist depend on the agreed definition of "atheists" and the agreed concept of "31 Planes." peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck From: dhammasaro@... To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com <...> Some of my teachers believe in the actual 31 Planes of Existence for rebirth while some other teachers believe the 31 Planes are simply where our heart/mind takes us sentient beings... it is all mental... <....> #119291 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 7:24 pm Subject: Opinions are One Thing dhammasaro Good friends all, When it comes to the Dhamma, we have to understand that our opinions are one thing; the Dhamma is something else. Agreed? peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck <...> #119292 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:04 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Music and Abhidhamma nilovg Dear Vince, Op 22-okt-2011, om 8:12 heeft Vince het volgende geschreven: > > you wrote: > >> N: We like the melody, consisting of many sounds > > Why it's so?. What's the nature of beauty? -------- N: True there are agreeable sounds and disagreeable sounds, but since hearing, which is vipaakacitta is so short, it is hard to tell whether this citta is the result of kusala kamma or akusala kamma. When we 'hear' a melody we call music, this is thinking on account of what is heard. It depends on accumulations whether it is liked or disliked. Beauty is a conventional idea. When you heard a lot of Spanish Baroque you may have accumulated a liking for it. There is attachment to it. > > > V: From the Atthasalini, inside "Abhidhamma in daily life": > > "Through this artistic design there arise operations of the > mind.... For that reason the Blessed One has said, 'Monks, have you > seen a masterpiece of painting?' 'Yes, Lord.' 'Monks, that > masterpiece of art is designed by the mind. Indeed, monks, the mind > is even more artistic than that masterpiece.'" > > If beauty it's a characteristic of the mind free of ignorance, Why > the attachment > to the beauty is akusala?. Or it is the ignorance of impermanence > and -self what > qualify this like akusala? --------- N: The Buddha gave here an example of how citta operates. It is just an illustration. He used a conventional situation. Aren't we attached to what we find beautiful? We think whole stories of what we like and are quite absorbed in it. Attachment is always accompanied by ignorance. Ignorance of the true nature of a reality that appears. Attachment is conditioned and it is of no use to try not to be attached. It is best to develop more understanding of whatever appears. ------ I was at a concert lately and I kept thinking of your questions. A good reminder to consider more. Nina. #119293 From: "charlest" Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:05 pm Subject: Re: Arising & falling of citta. Same or different moment? dhammasaro Good friends all, Need your assistance... When Alex wrote about, "moment;" is it the moment called a "mind-moment" and "bhavanga-calana"? Sincere warm thanks... peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #119294 From: "connie" Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:22 pm Subject: Re: Arising & falling of citta. Same or different moment? nichiconn Hi Chuck, > > When Alex wrote about, "moment;" is it the moment called a > "mind-moment" and "bhavanga-calana"? > "mind-moment" or citta's 'lifespan'. Bhavanga-calana is a certain type/function of citta. connie #119295 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:25 pm Subject: [dsg] Sangiitisutta, Tens, sutta 1. and commentary. nilovg Dear friends, Sutta 1: (a)he is moral, he lives restrained ..(b) he has learnt much, and bears in mind and retains what he has learnt....(c) he is a friend, associate and intimate of good people; (d) he is affable, endowed with gentleness and patience, quick to grasp instruction; (e) whatever various jobs there are to be done for his fellow-monks,he is skillful..(f) he loves the Dhamma and delights in hearing it, he is especially fond of the advanced doctrine and discipline (abhidhamme abhivanaye); (g) he is content with any kind of requisites (h) he ever strives to arouse energy, to get rid of unwholesome states, to establish wholesome states,(i) he is mindful, with a great capacity for clearly recalling things done and said long ago; (j) he is wise, with wise perception of arising and passing away, that Ariyan perception that leads to the complete destruction of suffering. --------- N: The co. refers to A V, 23, for ten dhammas that give protection (naatha): Do you live protected, bhikkhus, not unprotected. These, bhikkhus, are ten dhammas that give protection. They are dhammas that are a way of support (pati.t.tha) for oneself. The tiika: As to the bhikkhu who is endowed with siila etc. this is called a protection, it protects, rules (iisati), overcomes (abhibhavati). The co. : as regards the good friend (kalya.namitta), he is endowed with good qualities, to begin with siila, he is of good speech (suvaco). He is patient when spoken to with in a strong, harsh and rough way, he is not angry. As to performing tasks with skilfulness, these are both noble and common tasks. As to high or noble (ucca) tasks: making robes, cleaning the cedi (stupa) of dust, seeing to the uposatha hall, the cedi and the Bodhitree. As to low tasks: washing and anointing feet (N: of superiors or visitors). He is good at planning and performing his tasks. He has affection for the Dhamma (dhammakamo). He is fond of the Buddhas words contained in the Tipi.taka. When others preach he listens intently, carefully (sakkacca.m), and he himself likes to teach others. The tiika explains: he likes to teach others carefully (sakkacca.m). As to abhidhamma and abhivinaya: dhamma, abhidhamma, vinaya and abivinaya can be seen as fourfold. Thus, dhamma is the book of the suttanta. Abhidhamma: the seven books. The vinaya: both books of analysis, vibhangas. Abhivinaya: the Khandhakas and the Parivaara(N: sixth book, an appendix, index of the preceding books). Further: dhamma is the suttanta pi.taka as well as the abhidhamma pi.taka. Magga-phala (N: lokuttaracittas that are path-consciousness and fruition) are abhidhamma. The entire book of the vinaya is vinaya. The calming of defilements is abhivinaya (higher vinaya). The tiika states that higher vinaya is the fulfillment of the brahman life, of the divine life (brahmacariya dhamma). Tiika: mentions that the words of the Buddha contained in the Tipi.taka are pariyatti dhamma. It mentions that dhamma includes two pi.takas. Magga and phala are abhidhamma; these experience the dhamma that is nibbaana. As to the calming of defilements (abhivinaya), in short the three trainings, samatha and vipassanaa. Co: as to the kusala dhammas he establishes: these are of the four planes (N: of the sense sphere, ruupa-jhaana, aruupa-jhaana, lokuttara). He does not shake off the burden in order to attain these. The tiika adds, with regard to the kusala dhammas he attains: viiriyaarambho: the setting up of energy. ---------- Conclusion: The right friend (kalyaa.namitto) is emphasized here. Noble friendship is one of the conditions for enlightenment. Pariyatti dhamma is mentioned here, and this is often translated as theory. However, it is not theoretical study, but study of the realities appearing at the present moment according as it is taught in the Tipi.taka. The Buddha teaches about seeing and visible object and attachment or other defilements arising on account of the object that is experienced. All this pertains to daily life. As to not shaking off the burden, dhuro, for the bhikkhu there is a twofold burden: the burden or task as to the scriptures, gantha (or pariyatti) dhuro, and the task of vipassanaa. This is a reminder for all of us not to neglect this twofold task. Abhidhamma, when mentioned in the suttas is often translated as higher dhamma, but the meaning is more specific. Here, in the commentary, we see that it has been explained as specifically the seven books of the Abhidhamma. Moreover, by the words magga/phala it is emphasized that the Abhidhamma is not theoretical, that it means development of understanding leading to enlightenment. The three kinds of training are: higher siila (adhisiila), higher concentration (adhicitta) and higher pa~n~naa (adhipa~n~naa). At the moment of right understanding of a reality that appears there are these three kinds of training, sikkhaa. They occur in a moment. Actually there are samatha and vipassanaa, calm and insight at that moment. Right concentration accompanies right understanding. As we read, the higher vinaya leads to the fulfillment of the brahman life, and this is arahatship. The aim of the monks life is arahatship. The brahman life is the eightfold Path leading to this aim. *********** Nina. #119296 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:29 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Arising & falling of citta. Same or different moment? dhammasaro Good friend connie, et al Warm thanks for responding. You wrote: A "mind moment" is not a "bhavanga-calana"!!! Did I understand what you wrote? peace... yours in the dhamma-vinaya, Chuck <....> #119297 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) nilovg Dear Sarah and Ann, Ann's questions made me think. Op 26-okt-2011, om 8:52 heeft sarah het volgende geschreven: > > S: The idea of self is so deeply rooted, so the latent tendency is > there conditioning attachment even when there is no apparent view > of self arising, such as when we try to work out the details, the > meaning and so on - all for oneself, actually, rather than just > understanding what appears now at this moment. We think the > straining to work it out or the joy at getting the details straight > is pariyatti, but often it's akusala - cheating dhammas disguised > as kusala. > > So now, is it reading and study just for understanding at this > moment or is it for scholarship, for working out the details? Only > panna can tell. -------- N: Only pa~n~naa can tell. Kh Sujin says so often: when there is no awareness of seeing... lobha... it is you. Intellectually we understand that there is no self, but we still cling to self. This clinging can also be without wrong view. I understand that one kind of akusala that has been accumulated can condition another kind of akusala. I read in the Co. to the Minor Readings, Precepts (Illustrator of Ultimate Meaning) that the transgression of one precept can condition transgression of any other precept. Wrong view does not arise all the time, but we like so much our body and our cittas. However, it is hard to find out all this without awareness and direct understanding. The realities have fallen away when we think about them. Then there is no way to know. A good remark by Ann. Nina. #119298 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:43 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sabhava or 'essence'- Ven. Dhammapiyo nilovg Dear Phil, Op 26-okt-2011, om 2:25 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > BTW, do you remember your story of the oven door smashing, and all > the realities involved, especially the rupa, I think. ------ N: I do, but mostly dosa. As to fear about giving up self, I remember Kh Sujin speaking about this. I think at the moment of pa~n~naa, when it is firm enough, there cannot be akusala at the same time. But I do not have to think about this now, still far away. Nina. #119299 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:53 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sabhava or 'essence'- Ven. Dhammapiyo nilovg Hi Howard, Yes, while I mentioned what Kh Sujin said, I was also thinking of your experience you wrote about long ago. Such an experience can come suddenly, but I do not know about such an experience. It shows again that one cannot know much while thinking about it afterwards. We cannot help thinking, but best to realise that it is only thinking, nothing more. Then it is time for other naama and ruupa that appear. Nina. Op 25-okt-2011, om 14:31 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > There was a time, years ago on a Goenka retreat, that for an hour or > so (and, not while meditating) the sense of self/personal identity/ > knower > was gone (at the conscious level). I was unfortunately emotionally > unprepared for this - possibly due to ultra-minimal prior jhana > experience, and the > result, instead of great calm or joy, was tremendous fear and a > desparate > effort to "return to my prison cell." Unfortunately that effort > succeeded, > and I'm still "doing time"! LOL! > -------------------------------------------------------- > #119300 From: "charlest" Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 9:04 pm Subject: Re: Vinaya was intended for the monks. dhammasaro Good friend Scott, Please forgive my delay in responding... [bummer] Warm thanks for your very kind response. peace... yours int the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Chuck, > > C: "Question: Do you agree the Vinaya-pitaka is only for monks?" > > Scott: I can read it if I want. I'm not a monk. The rules for monks would be only for monks (or 'buddhists' who want to play at being monk-like). > > Scott. #119301 From: "charlest" Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 9:16 pm Subject: Re: Vinaya was intended for the monks. dhammasaro Good friends Connie, Scott, et al Yes, I fully agree... Fortunately for me, the first Buddhist monk I met was fluent in English and had been a Thai business person dealing with westerners before becoming a monk. Hence, imho and experiences; it is best for observing laypersons to know some of, if not all, the Vinaya-pitaka to help the Bhikkhu observe her/his multitude of rules... there are many more than the simple, although difficult, 227/more for bhikkhuni rules... peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > connie, Chuck, > > c: "two, namely, the one-sessioner's practice and the bowl-food-eater's practice, are proper for male and female lay followers to employ." > > Scott: Cool. > > c: "If I wanted / expected to be around any monks, I might also like to know what was allowable for them so that I didn't put them on the spot..." > > Scott: Also a good point. I was around one once or twice and did sort feel a bit like I did changing a diaper for the very first time. Not that I was changing his diaper - I just didn't quite know what was the right thing to do. It was weird. Then we went for a walk and a chat and it was normal. > > Scott. #119302 From: "philip" Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 9:39 pm Subject: Re: Sabhava or 'essence'- Ven. Dhammapiyo philofillet Hi Nina (p.s to Howard) Thanks for your feedback > N: I do, but mostly dosa. > As to fear about giving up self, I remember Kh Sujin speaking about > this. I think at the moment of pa~n~naa, when it is firm enough, > there cannot be akusala at the same time. But I do not have to think > about this now, still far away. Ph: Can there ever be akusala at the same time as panna? I mean, if akusala is the object of panna, the citta is kusala, isn't it? Metta, Phil p.s thanks also for your anecdote, Howard. from the Goenka retreat. #119303 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 10:27 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Same citta doesn't arise, persist & cease ? upasaka_howard Hi, Connie (and Alex) - In a message dated 10/25/2011 8:13:43 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, nichicon@... writes: > How can the same citta that arises (i), cease (iii)? Point #1 means that citta which ceases is not citta that arises, and the citta which arises is not citta that ceases. > > same way we say we are the same person that was born some time ago. one life-span with different periods or chapters or ... see the 'moment of citta' as a window with three panes. don't sweat the small stuff. ==================================== It's not such small stuff, Connie. What you are saying, and with which I agree, puts cittas (and rupas, BTW) on the same level as persons, namely the level of convention. With metta, Howard Unreal /He who neither goes too far nor lags behind and knows about the world: "This is all unreal," — such a monk gives up the here and the beyond, just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin./ (From the Uraga Sutta ) #119304 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 11:04 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Arising & falling of citta. Same or different moment? upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 10/26/2011 12:14:03 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard and Alex, --------- <. . .> >> A: What is the answer? Do sub-moments have arising or are they eternally existing or not-existing? If something eternally exists then it cannot ever arise & fall. If something doesn't ever exist, then it can never arise & persist since it doesn't exist. >> > HCW: The question you are asking exactly the same as Nagarjuna had asked. --------- KH: Are you sure Nagarjuna asked a question about sub-moments? Alex seems to be confusing sub-moments with dhammas. He seems to think the dhamma that arises is not the dhamma that ceases. But surely it's the same dhamma, and its lifespan has been categorised into three phases. I doubt Nagarjuna would have wasted much time over that. ---------------------------------------------- HCW: He did spend time on it, and it wasn't time wasted. ------------------------------------------------ -------------------------- > HCW: If one thinks of the stages of arising, changing while standing, and ceasing as things/entities, this becomes a genuine problem, -------------------------- KH: Yes, if there were three separate dhammas then each of them could be divided into three and, as Scott said, we would be looking at infinite regression. ------------------------------------------------- HCW: Mmm, yes, discussed by Nagarjuna. ---------------------------------------------------- ---------------- > HCW: but if these are not considered to be "things," then there is no problem at all. ---------------- KH: Then there is a *huge* problem! What are these "things" that you and Nagarjuna consider not things? How can there be a thing that is not a thing? Please be specific in your answer; don't resort to smoke and mirrors. --------------------------- > HCW: Arising, altering, and falling away are simply behavioral features of phenomena. --------------------------- KH: That's right; every conditioned reality exists for three sub-moments during which it arises, persists and falls away. So where's the problem? ------------------------------------------- HCW: Already answered. -------------------------------------------- -------------------- > HCW: Isn't it quite enough already to reify, say, "a warmth" -------------------- KH: What is this so-called "warmth" that you say is being reified? ---------------------------------------------- HCW: You don't know? An imagined "heat atom". --------------------------------------------- Please don't say it is "experiential content." That's what I would call a smoke-and-mirrors answer. --------------------------- > KH: without engaging in even further thing-making? At some point with regard to substantialism, enough is enough. ;-) --------------------------- KH: Yes, well, blame Alex. He's the one who was making three dhammas out of one. -------------------------------------------------- HCW: If a rupa or citta should arise, then change while standing, and then fall away, noting especially the changing-while-standing, where is its vaunted "reality". ---------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------- >> A: I've asked a fair question. >> > HCW: It *is* in case substantialism is running rampant, Under such a perspective, the question is quite fair, but otherwise not. ----------------------------------- KH: Here, we almost agree. But as I said, Alex is the only one making three dhammas out of one (and then nine out of three, and then twenty-seven . . .). And then he's using that argument to make the Abhidhamma look silly. It's seems a rather unfair tactic, wouldn't you say? ---------------------------------------------------- HCW: When there is talk of "realities" (plural), the substantialist cat has been let out of the bag. I don't know, however, that Abhidhamma engages in that. But I've seen such terminology quite a bit here. ------------------------------------------------ ------------------ > HCW: This reminds me of the story of a farmer telling a city guy that a sprout, when planted in rich soil and well watered, has the power to grow into an apple tree, and the city guy then asks the farmer to show him where that power is located in the sprout. The farmer, of course, stares at the urbanite as if he is a lunatic! ------------------ KH: My guess is the power was in the cells of the sprout. ------------------------------------------------- HCW: LOL! The speaking of "the power" as a thing to be found somewhere is absurd reification. All that it means to say that the sprout "has the power to grow into an apple tree" is that a variety of conditions will lead to such growth. There is no "power-to-grow" thing. for that matter, there is no "growth" thing. -------------------------------------------------- --------------------------- > HCW: Insubstantial and Lacking in Essence > > /Form is like a glob of foam; feeling, a bubble; perception, a mirage; > fabrications, a banana tree; consciousness, a magic trick â€" 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./ ---------------------------- KH: What did the Buddha mean by "however you observe them"? To which "them" was he referring? To nothingness? Is there ultimately nothing that can be observed in this way? ------------------------------------------------- HCW: Ordinary speech, Ken. -------------------------------------------------- Surely he was referring to conditioned absolute realities. ------------------------------------------------- HCW: Surely! "Absolute realities," huh? That is not the way the Buddha spoke, Ken. I give an indication of how he spoke about what is real and what is unreal at the end of this post. ------------------------------------------------ They can be observed as being anicca dukkha and anatta (unsatisfactory and devoid of eternal essence). Ken H ================================== With metta, Howard How the Buddha Spoke about Real and Unreal /Form is like a glob of foam; feeling, a bubble; perception, a mirage; fabrications, a banana tree; consciousness, a magic trick — this has been taught by the Kinsman of the Sun. However you observe them, appropriately examine them, they're empty, void to whoever sees them appropriately./ (From the Phena Sutta) ____________________ /He who does not find core or substance in any of the realms of being, like flowers which are vainly sought in fig trees that bear none — such a seeker gives up the here and the beyond, just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin./ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ /He who neither goes too far nor lags behind and knows about the world: "This is all unreal," — such a monk gives up the here and the beyond, just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin./ (From the Uraga Sutta ) _________________ /Now suppose a man, when dreaming, were to see delightful parks, delightful forests, delightful stretches of land, & delightful lakes, and on awakening were to see nothing. In the same way, householder, a disciple of the noble ones considers this point: 'The Blessed One has compared sensuality to a dream, of much stress, much despair, & greater drawbacks.' Seeing this with right discernment, as it actually is, then avoiding the equanimity coming from multiplicity, dependent on multiplicity, he develops the equanimity coming from singleness, dependent on singleness, where sustenance/clinging for the baits of the world ceases without trace./ (From the Potaliya Sutta) ____________________ /See how the world together with the devas has self-conceit for what is not-self. Enclosed by mind-and-body it imagines, 'This is real.' Whatever they imagine it to be, it is quite different from that. It is unreal, of a false nature and perishable. Nibbana, not false in nature, that the Noble Ones know as true. Indeed, by the penetration of the true, they are completely stilled and realize final deliverance./ (From the Dvayatanupassana Sutta) #119305 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 11:14 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sabhava or 'essence'- Ven. Dhammapiyo upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 10/26/2011 5:53:13 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, Yes, while I mentioned what Kh Sujin said, I was also thinking of your experience you wrote about long ago. Such an experience can come suddenly, but I do not know about such an experience. It shows again that one cannot know much while thinking about it afterwards. --------------------------------------- HCW: I agree. I have an opinion about it, but it is only opinion, not genuine knowledge. -------------------------------------- We cannot help thinking, but best to realise that it is only thinking, nothing more. ----------------------------------- HCW: Yes, thinking and tentative opinion. ------------------------------------- Then it is time for other naama and ruupa that appear. --------------------------------------- HCW: Yes, what is passed is passed, though everything has its eventual consequences - for good or ill. --------------------------------------- Nina. ============================ With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #119306 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 11:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sabhava or 'essence'- Ven. Dhammapiyo upasaka_howard Hi, Phil - In a message dated 10/26/2011 6:52:29 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, philco777@... writes: Hi Nina (p.s to Howard) Thanks for your feedback > N: I do, but mostly dosa. > As to fear about giving up self, I remember Kh Sujin speaking about > this. I think at the moment of pa~n~naa, when it is firm enough, > there cannot be akusala at the same time. But I do not have to think > about this now, still far away. Ph: Can there ever be akusala at the same time as panna? I mean, if akusala is the object of panna, the citta is kusala, isn't it? Metta, Phil p.s thanks also for your anecdote, Howard. from the Goenka retreat. ------------------------------------------ HCW: :-) ==================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #119307 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 11:26 pm Subject: Re: Can a Non-Buddhist Act as a Buddhist? was: Off Topic: An Unkownd Texas Ranger scottduncan2 Phil, (Chris), Regarding: Ph: "Check note 53 on p.1055 of your SN anthology for a prime example of how sutta browsers get an example of free interpretation right from +the+ top authority, giving the whole idea of self-reliance a stamp of approval!..." Scott: The sutta is from the Khandhasa.myutta in SN (43), the footnote at the end of this excerpt: "At Saavatthii: 'Bhikkhus, dwell with yourselves as an island, with yourselves as a refuge, with no other refuge; with the Dhamma as an island, with the Dhamma as a refuge; with no other refuge..." Saavatthinidaana.m . 'Attadiipaa, bhikkhave, viharatha attasara.naa ana~n~nasara.naa, dhammadiipaa dhammasara.naa ana~n~nasara.naa. Attadiipaan.m, bhikkhave, viharata.m attasara.naana.m ana~n~nasara.naana.m, dhammadiipaana.m dhammasara.naana.m ana~n~nasara.naana.m yoni upaparikkhitabbaa... Scott: And the note: "These words are identical with the Buddha's famous injunction to Aananda in the Mahaaparinibbaana Sutta (at DN II 100,20-22)...In explaining the expression attapida, 'with self as island,' Spk says: 'What is meant by self? The mundane and supramundane Dhamma (kho pan' ettha atta naama? lokiyalokuttaro dhammo). Therefore he says next, with the Dhamma as an island, etc.' This comment overlooks the obvious point that the Buddha is inculcating self-reliance." Scott: I can see the spin. I note that he capitalized the word 'Dhamma' ('the mundane and supramundane Dhamma'). I'd take 'dhammo' to refer to 'dhammas', both of the lokiya and the lokuttara type. And these all have the characteristic of anatta. A Paa.li expert would be able to suggest more about Dhamma vs dhamma as far as translating. Scott. #119308 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 12:28 am Subject: Re: Same citta doesn't arise, persist & cease ? scottduncan2 connie, c: "ok, Alex,...anything else? what's the significance? what are you getting at?" Scott: Perhaps Alex is reading Nagarjuna? Scott. #119309 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 1:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sabhava or 'essence'- Ven. Dhammapiyo nilovg Dear Phil, Op 26-okt-2011, om 12:39 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > Ph: Can there ever be akusala at the same time as panna? I mean, if > akusala is the object of panna, the citta is kusala, isn't it? ------ N: Yes, correct. Pa~n~naa sees akusala dhammas as it is, only a kind of naama, conditioned. If sati is not mindful of akusala and pa~n~naa does not understand the akusala that appears it can never, never be eradicated. I want to add that, if I remember correctly, Kh Sujin also said that one has to be very brave to face the nature of anattaa. We have to be heroes, don't we? Nina. #119310 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 2:28 am Subject: Do you wield power over khandas? (was [dsg] Re: No-control & Destiny epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > > Hi Rob E (& Scott), > > Good discussion you're having... > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Scott: Consider the following, from the commentary to the Saama~n~naphala Sutta: > > > > > > "'Wrong mindfulness becomes established' (micchaasati santi.t.thati): wrong mindfulness is the craving associated with the theory, and it is this which becomes established. <...> > > > Is there a subcommentary explaining this passage further, or can you explain it further? Or is there a passage that applies this idea to the false understanding of conventional activities that are meant to effect a particular result? > .... > S: just a reminder: I think you may well find that the Sama~n~naphala sutta and commentaries is amongst the small translation booklets that Ken O kindly sent you, so you may like to take a look at your pile of books for it.... Well...hm...Yes! I did find it among the books that Ken O. very kindly sent me - how did you know...? ;-) In addition, as I thumbed through it just now, my thumb literally clicked the book over directly to the page where the subcommentary on this very passage is cited. That seems like an interesting "coincidence..." Thanks, Sarah -- and Ken O.! I'll look at the subcommentary and see if I have anything to report... Best, Rob E. = = = = = = #119311 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 3:04 am Subject: Re: view 'I have no self' is wrong view moellerdieter Hi Sarah, you wrote: " 2. Translated from the Visuddhi-Magga (chap. xviii) > > Just as the word "chariot" is but a mode of expression for axle, wheels, chariot-body, pole, <....> but when we come to examine the elements of being one by one, we discover that in the absolute sense there is no living entity there to form a basis for such figments as "I am," or "I"; in other words, that in the absolute sense there is only name and form. ...." S: "In the absolute sense there is only name and form" - this is the point of these similes - in the absolute sense, there are only namas and rupas. Anything else is a concept, an idea, a means of expression only. D: Yes, 'when we come to examine the elements of being one by one ' there is only nama and rupa , in an absolute sense only mental and bodily phenomena ..leaving aside the arupa states of Jhana. Recalling from a previous quotation 'the particle is fundamental but the ant is more signicant ' reminds on the need to be aware that an ant can be examined in all details , but from all its parts the idea what the ' functioning system ant ' means , can not be concluded. When you say it is a means of expression only , the knowledge underlying the given term or category , how things are functioning in our world , is neglected. This knowledge -which we arduously aquired by experience -is the understanding we need in our encounter with the world. S:(DImportant point of the discussion was/is the issue of reality . I still like to claim that there are 2 realities , the everyday or common one and the abolute/ultimate one, > The choice of view is up to the unique experience of the individual , the conscient being .... S: And yet, as we agree, in the absolute sense, in absolute reality, there is no individual, no "conscient being", so there is no "choice of view up to the unique experience" of any being. Absolutely, there are just elements, just conditioned namas and rupas (apart from the one unconditioned element). When we or the texts refer to sammuti sacca or conventional truth, such as "house" or "chariot", it is just a usage of terms for convenience. Only in this sense is it called conventional reality. In truth, there is no house, no chariot at all. Now, if you don't think about house or chariot, where is it? They are just ideas in the mind, like when we dream. D: We wouldn't survive without these ideas.. I agree with the proposition of truth in an absolute sense ( reserving 'ulimate truth ' for nibbana), but concede the conventional truth more significance. Whereas you - as far as I understand - admit the latter only as a means of expression only . S: thank you for your other comments and for sharing Jinavamsa's/Mitchell's D:thanks for your answer . I imagine to work through all the postings can be quite a burden ..no envy for this task ;-) I copied Jina's comment because he emphasized something important : the whole Dhamma (incl.dhammas) has to be understood as raft to the other shore. Means in order to get disentchanted, develop dispassion and so detachment from the world of suffering. To see truth from the angle of an absolute sense only , involves the danger of neglecting the path training. I think it is that what ' the other camp' tries to convey but met with refusal. with Metta Dieter #119312 From: "philip" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 3:13 am Subject: Re: Can a Non-Buddhist Act as a Buddhist? was: Off Topic: An Unkownd Texas Ranger philofillet Hi Scott > Scott: I can see the spin. I guess in Bhikkhu Bodhi's case, up to now at least, "spin" isn't quite fair, since - unlike Thanissaro Bhikkhu - he is not promoting any particular form of Buddhist "practice", not being a meditator himself because of medical problems. This gave him further credibility in my eyes, an objective, academic vibe. But his MN talks are really simplistic in promoting a practical, technique oriented approach, training the mind, etc, and I got caught up in it. And I think now that he has an agenda with his "global action" thing the AN anthology could be ripe with "engaged Buddhism". So what, I know, it doesn't really matter that popular Buddhist understanding will drift even further away from the heartwood, especially for people like me who don't make an effort to engage people of different views in discussion/debate/a2d-ing. But for those who make an effort to lead people towarwds correct intellectual understanding, an even tougher job ahead, I bet. Well, when the book comes out, we'll see. Metta, Phil #119313 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 3:29 am Subject: Re: Arising & falling of citta. Same or different moment? truth_aerator Dear Chuck, all, By moment, I've meant "Khana" . So is the moment of arising different from the moment of ceasing? They can't be the same moment as those are contradictory qualities. If they are different and if nothing endures for two moments, then the citta that ceased is different from citta that arose. Just like motion through space is denied*, same with "motion" through time within khanikavada doctrine. *it is denied because no same object lasts for two moments or more in order to move, and motion is just appearance of different dhammas at different places thus making an illusion of motion. Same can be said about citta changing. Citta requires to remain the same for two or more moments in order to change. With best wishes, Alex #119314 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 4:02 am Subject: Re: Can a Non-Buddhist Act as a Buddhist? was: Off Topic: An Unkownd Texas Ranger scottduncan2 Hey Phil, Ph: "I guess in Bhikkhu Bodhi's case, up to now at least, 'spin' isn't quite fair, since - unlike Thanissaro Bhikkhu - he is not promoting any particular form of Buddhist 'practice', not being a meditator himself because of medical problems. This gave him further credibility in my eyes, an objective, academic vibe..." Scott: 'Fair' enough. I think there is still quite enough 'spin' in the phrase: "...This comment overlooks the obvious point that the Buddha is inculcating self-reliance." Scott: I mean, 'self-reliance?' Not at all. You yourself have rightly called to task those who think that the sutta about the Kalamas is the call for all to 'think for themselves and make up whatever you want and call it Dhamma' in the name of 'not relying on a teacher.' Here comes this talented monk who suggests that it is 'obvious' that the Buddha was 'inculcating self-reliance.' I say 'huh?' Scott. #119315 From: "connie" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 4:31 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Arising & falling of citta. Same or different moment? nichiconn heya Chuck, > > You wrote: A "mind moment" is not a "bhavanga-calana"!!! > > Did I understand what you wrote? > Let me rephrase: a bhavanga-calana is one instance of a mind-moment, but not every mind-moment or citta is a bhavanga citta. In a complete 17 mind-moment/citta sense door process, there are three bhavanga cittas at the beginning: the atita-, calana- and bhavanguppaccheda cittas; and (I believe) another two bhavangas at the end called/performing tadaarammana (registration or retention). Bhavanga cittas are all vipaka-cittas but I'm not sure all vipakas are bhavanga. It's probably in the SPD or CMA. connie #119316 From: "connie" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 4:44 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Same citta doesn't arise, persist & cease ? nichiconn hi Howard, > > same way we say we are the same person that was born some time ago. one > life-span with different periods or chapters or ... see the 'moment of > citta' as a window with three panes. > > don't sweat the small stuff. > ==================================== > It's not such small stuff, Connie. What you are saying, and with which > I agree, puts cittas (and rupas, BTW) on the same level as persons, namely > the level of convention. > As long as we're just talking about and trying to understand what's in the texts, it's bound to be that way, I think. I wouldn't take the person comparison too far. I myself had had quite a few different jobs, for instance, while a given citta has but one. I've already retracted the "window-pane hallucination". How much of what we might say is going to hinge on the term "exactly" here, I wonder... but 'no sweat', connie #119317 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Wed Oct 26, 2011 9:54 pm Subject: Factors for predominance condition dhammasaro Good friend Philip, et al If I may ask: 1. What is your definition of, "predominance condition"? 2. What do you mean by, "represent more rarefied factors"? 3. What do your definition of, "predominance factor"? Thanks Philip, only when you have time... peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck <....> #119318 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 3:32 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Arising & falling of citta. Same or different moment? dhammasaro Good friend alex, et al Warm thanks... Have to peruse, "khana." peace... yours in the dhamma-vinaya, Chuck To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com From: truth_aerator@... <....> By moment, I've meant "Khana" . So is the moment of arising different from the moment of ceasing? They can't be the same moment as those are contradictory qualities. <....> #119319 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 4:40 am Subject: Disagreeing w/ Bhikkhu(s) dhammasaro Good friend Philip, Scott, et al In recent DSG messages you both have made what some may call "very disparaging comments/remarks" against two somewhat well known American Bhikkhu(s). However, you do not provide examples of the these very major false teachings by these two American Bhikku(s). Please help me by providing your evidence. Sincere warm thanks. peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck Post script: Please note; I not only "talk the talk"; I tried "walk the walk"... and, I had many discussions with Wat Bowon senior Bhikku(s) in which we never agreed on some small point... quite often, the disagreement was due to poor translations of Pali, Thai and English among us... and, to add to the problem, I only know, "Texan English"!!! [bummers] However, I never disparage any of my ajahns... #119320 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 5:21 am Subject: Re: Disagreeing w/ Bhikkhu(s) scottduncan2 Chuck, C: "In recent DSG messages you both have made what some may call 'very disparaging comments/remarks' against two somewhat well known American Bhikkhu(s). However, you do not provide examples of the these very major false teachings by these two American Bhikku(s). Please help me by providing your evidence." http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/119307 Scott: First of all, I don't worship monks. Secondly, comments about the various views that given monks express, especially comments that express disagreement, are not necessarily 'disparaging' to the monk - it's the view that is problematic and possibly worth of contempt. Thirdly, discussing opinions about the views of given monks is hardly anywhere near the same as speaking 'disrespectfully' in person with one or the other of the two monks in question. Fourthly, such monks, seemingly contrary to at least the idealized version of 'monks,' stick their necks way, way out by the very fact of their totally public, international, and even sensational interactions with the community. Fifthly (?), with your direct experience in the community of monks you ought to have a true vision that monks would have to be, and are, first and foremost, another group of men having all the foibles of any other group of men. And sixthly (??), I thought you agreed that the Dhamma is the teacher. Scott. #119321 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 5:37 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Disagreeing w/ Bhikkhu(s) dhammasaro Good friend Scott, Warm thanks for your response. However, you ignored my question and did not present evidence to support your somewhat negative comments against certain Bhikkhu(s) This ole sentient bag of bones quietly asks you again to provide the evidence to substantiate your negative comments against certain Bhikkhu(s). peace... yours in the dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #119322 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 5:45 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Disagreeing w/ Bhikkhu(s) scottduncan2 Chuck, C: "...However, you ignored my question and did not present evidence to support your somewhat negative comments against certain Bhikkhu(s)" Scott: Go to my last post. Click on the link. Read. If you do, you will see that I have given the relevant sutta portion, the Paa.li, the relevant commentarial portion, and the controversial remarks. If you have already done so, and can't find in all of that the 'evidence' that you seek, then I fail to see what it is you are asking for. Scott. #119323 From: "connie" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 5:46 am Subject: Re: Same citta doesn't arise, persist & cease ? nichiconn hi Scott, > > Scott: Perhaps Alex is reading Nagarjuna? > Perhaps! And I'm not really reading Alex, come to think of it. connie #119324 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 5:49 am Subject: Re: Same citta doesn't arise, persist & cease ? scottduncan2 connie, c: "Perhaps! And I'm not really reading Alex, come to think of it." Scott: *Actual reply deleted. Scott. #119325 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 6:13 am Subject: Re: Same citta doesn't arise, persist & cease ? truth_aerator >Scott: Perhaps Alex is reading Nagarjuna? Scott, rather than attacking a person, can you please answer: 1) Every new moment (khana) is a different moment 2) Same citta does not persist for more than one moment 3) There is moment of arising (i), persisting (ii), and falling (iii) 4) What persists (ii) is not exactly arising (i), and what has fallen (iii) is not exactly that which is arising (i) or persisting (ii). Point # 1 & 2 means that citta which ceases is not citta that has arisen, and the citta which arises is not citta that ceases. How can the same citta that arises (i), cease (iii)? With best wishes, Alex #119326 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 6:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Same citta doesn't arise, persist & cease ? nilovg Dear Alex, ----- Op 26-okt-2011, om 21:13 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > How can the same citta that arises (i), cease (iii)? ------ N: Whatever arises must cease, it cannot stay. It is impermanent. Seeing arises but it cannot stay. Another citta arises, and it can only do so if the preceding citta has gone. There can be only one citta at a time. You cannot see and hear at the same time. Nina. #119327 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 6:25 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Same citta doesn't arise, persist & cease ? truth_aerator Dear Nina, >A: How can the same citta that arises (i), cease (iii)? > ------ > N: Whatever arises must cease, >============================== Does citta arise and cease in one moment or multiple moments? If nothing is the same for two moments then how can we say that the exactly the same citta that arose in one moment, ceased in another moment? Thank you very much for your reply. This issue is important. With best wishes, Alex #119328 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 7:18 am Subject: Re: Same citta doesn't arise, persist & cease ? scottduncan2 Alex, A: "...can you please answer..." Scott: Asked and answered. Scott. #119329 From: "connie" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 7:39 am Subject: Re: Same citta doesn't arise, persist & cease ? nichiconn Scott, > > c: "Perhaps! And I'm not really reading Alex, come to think of it." > > Scott: *Actual reply deleted. > That's pretty appropriate given that my original reply met the same fate. connie #119330 From: "connie" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 7:53 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Same citta doesn't arise, persist & cease ? nichiconn What IS the issue, Alex? Are you saying that rise and fall don't occur? Are you saying there is no citta? Are you confused and seeking clarification or are you trying to prove something? ARE you reading Nagarjuna? connie > > >A: How can the same citta that arises (i), cease (iii)? > > ------ > > N: Whatever arises must cease, > >============================== > > Does citta arise and cease in one moment or multiple moments? > > If nothing is the same for two moments then how can we say that the exactly the same citta that arose in one moment, ceased in another moment? > > Thank you very much for your reply. This issue is important. > > > With best wishes, > > Alex > #119331 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 8:17 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Same citta doesn't arise, persist & cease ? truth_aerator Hello Connie, all, >C:What IS the issue, Alex? >================= How can the same citta remain unchanged for 3 moments in order for it to cease. In order for something to change, it needs to remain for at least two moments. >C: ARE you reading Nagarjuna? I've read a little about him a long time ago. To tell the truth, I am not a big fan of his. With best wishes, Alex #119332 From: "connie" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 8:28 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Same citta doesn't arise, persist & cease ? nichiconn Hi Alex. > > How can the same citta remain unchanged for 3 moments in order for it to cease. In order for something to change, it needs to remain for at least two moments. > A citta last 3 submoments... that's long enough to grow and fade in strength. What other kind of change are you suggesting is (or might be) there? I still don't get what you're after. Sorry. > > >C: ARE you reading Nagarjuna? > > I've read a little about him a long time ago. To tell the truth, I am not a big fan of his. > whew - nice we agree on that much! #119333 From: "Ken H" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 8:51 am Subject: Re: Can a Non-Buddhist Act as a Buddhist? kenhowardau It seems to me that the monk's life compared to the lay life is similar to right view compared to wrong view. In accordance with the vinaya, a monk does no conventional work in the community even when the community desperately needs someone to do that work. Similarly, right understanding knows there are(for example) no cars and no trees even when a car is speeding towards a tree. [People with] wrong view will scorn right view saying "Look out, this is not an appropriate time for satipatthana!" But right view knows differently (and the tree is still avoided). In the same way, a monk with wrong view will think, "Now is not the right time for obeying the vinaya," but now is always the right time for obeying the vinaya. If he chooses to do conventional work he can first leave the Sangha, and no rules will be broken. Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Phil, > > Ph:"...Now that he is a social activist, we can expect even more freestyling in the upcoming AN anthology, I bet. Get ready for it, eat lots of Wheaties, you'll have your work cut out for you." > > Scott: Yeah, I'm actually looking forward to the AN translation- the whole thing apparently! Coming to a bookstore near me (when I order it) in 2012! He already did the anthology. I've got the PTS volumes. I'll ignore the freestyling but will hope that we get at least some of the commentaries translated. > > Scott. > #119334 From: "Ken H" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 8:55 am Subject: Re: Can a Non-Buddhist Act as a Buddhist? kenhowardau Hi all, Sorry about the incomplete and untrimmed message I just posted. I was trying to modify the subject heading when - bang - it was suddenly posted for no apparent reason. Ken H #119335 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 9:34 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Same citta doesn't arise, persist & cease ? truth_aerator Hello Connie, all, >C: A citta last 3 submoments... that's long enough to grow and fade in >strength. What other kind of change are you suggesting is (or might >be) there? I still don't get what you're after. Sorry. >=========================== How long does each of these 3 submoments last? Is citta exactly the same in each of these 3 submoments, or is it a different citta in each of them? With best wishes, Alex #119336 From: "connie" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 9:57 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Same citta doesn't arise, persist & cease ? nichiconn hi Alex, > > How long does each of these 3 submoments last? As long as it takes, no more, no less. Why do you ask? I think though, there will never be a scientific tool that will be able to measure the speed of thought. > Is citta exactly the same in each of these 3 submoments, or is it a different citta in each of them? > What is "exactly"? I've already said I think the same citta's strength changes thru-out it's overall existence... and that afaic, it's still the "very" same citta. You still haven't said what you think changes, if anything, about the citta/s in question. connie #119337 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:06 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Same citta doesn't arise, persist & cease ? truth_aerator Hi Connie, all, >A: How long does each of these 3 submoments last? >============================================ >C: As long as it takes, no more, no less. Why do you ask? >I think though, there will never be a scientific tool that will be >able to measure the speed of thought. > >A:Is citta exactly the same in each of these 3 submoments, or is it >a different citta in each of them? >============================================== > >C: What is "exactly"? I've already said I think the same citta's >strength changes thru-out it's overall existence... and that afaic, >it's still the "very" same citta. You still haven't said what you >think changes, if anything, about the citta/s in question. >================================================ If the same citta itself doesn't last for two moments, then how can same citta last through three moments of (arising, persisting, ceasing)? With best wishes, Alex #119338 From: "philip" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:16 am Subject: Re: Factors for predominance condition philofillet Hi Chuck You got me there! Quite often I read some sections of Nina's very excellent book "The Conditionality of Life: an outline of the Twenty Four Conditions as taught in the Abhidhamma" and I get excited, because it is dealing with the very deepest aspects of Dhamma. But I really don't understand it at all! > 1. What is your definition of, "predominance condition"? > > 2. What do you mean by, "represent more rarefied factors"? > > 3. What do your definition of, "predominance factor"? Blushing (well not really) I say I have no idea! But it is a great book. We have to very, very gradually develop our intellectual understanding of the deepest points of Dhamma. For example, paticca-sammuppadha, dependent origination. There is a tendency when we first come across it to want to work it all out in our brains, and we end up forming some vaguely, partially correct shadow of what it really is all about. And the stronger that we cling to and have confidence in that paltry semblance of the truth that our thinking conjures up, the more wrong we will be. It's just way too deep for us to understand now. We have to start with what we *can* truly understand now, or begin to - seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touch and the thinking that arises from those sense door processes. So I thank you for pointing out my playing with deep topics represented by those questions above! But, having said that, reading the chaper on predominance condition will provide a beginning of understanding for questions 1 and 3. As for 2, without reading my original post, I have no idea what I was talking about! It sure sounds deep though! :) The book I mentionned can be found online by a Google search. Metta, Phil > Thanks Philip, only when you have time... > > peace... > > yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, > > Chuck > > <....> > #119339 From: "philip" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:23 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Sabhava or 'essence'- Ven. Dhammapiyo philofillet Hi Nina > I want to add that, if I remember correctly, Kh Sujin also said that > one has to be very brave to face the nature of anattaa. > We have to be heroes, don't we? We have to accept that a lot of the conventional ways to feel better about the hardship of life are really empty when it comes down to the crunch. I have mentionned this before, but the talk in which a Thai woman mentionned a friend who is suffering from loneliness, and A.SUjin said, help them understand. (i.e correct understanding that there is only nama and rupa, a beginning of understanding deep liberating Dhamma, intellectually.) But what if he can't understand, she was asked? Then he will have to suffer from loneliness, was the answer. That seems very tough, almost cold, the cold shower that you mentionned once. But it is the truth. So by accepting that the conventional kinds of comforting do not truly lead out of suffering, yes, we have to be heroic. Of course we still have an accumulated tendency to enjoy those comforts, such as letters from friends, visits from friends, sweet little gifts when we are ill etc, and we will continue to do so, and continue to offer them to others. They are not "bad", of course, just don't lead out. Only understanding really and truly helps. Metta, Phil #119340 From: "philip" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:35 am Subject: Re: Disagreeing w/ Bhikkhu(s) philofillet Hi Chuck > In recent DSG messages you both have made what some may call "very disparaging comments/remarks" against two somewhat well known American Bhikkhu(s). However, you do not provide examples of the these very major false teachings by these two American Bhikku(s). Life is short, we may die today. I have provided one example, there are tons of examples for Thanissaro Bhikkhu. I think in the Useful Posts section, under "anatta," there is a special section devoted to his teaching. Please have a look. As for Bhikkhu Bodhi, if you believe that it is all right to sit and meditate movitated by a desire to gain results by training the mind as one trains a wild animal, you will find nothing wrong with his teaching. But as I said, life is short. Don't get worked up by the opinions of guys on the internet. That's silly. We should study the Dhamma, not the opinions of guys on the internet. But I think the latter is what we too often do here! Well, guys and gals. Yee-haw! (Sorry, I enjoy your Texisms, I know "yee-haw" isn't a real one!) Metta, Phil #119341 From: "connie" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:43 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Same citta doesn't arise, persist & cease ? nichiconn Hi Alex, > > If the same citta itself doesn't last for two moments, then how can same citta last through three moments of (arising, persisting, ceasing)? > If I say the minute between 4:19:00 and 4:20:00 is one and the same minute regardless of being made up of 60 seconds, is that acceptable? A second is not a minute and a submoment is not a full moment. 1 submoment of arising + 1 submoment of persisting + one submoment of ceasing = one thought moment. I don't recall any text saying whether the submoments are of equal length, but i would guess persisting is the longest portion. I think i am pretty much just repeating myself. Sorry. If i see anything different in a text or think of anything else, i will get back to you. connie #119342 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 11:28 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Same citta doesn't arise, persist & cease ? truth_aerator Hi Connie, >C: If I say the minute between 4:19:00 and 4:20:00 is one and the >same >minute regardless of being made up of 60 seconds, is that >acceptable? >================================ If one says that one and the same person throughout life from birth to growing up and dying exists regardless of being made up of changing 5 Khandhas, would that be acceptable? With best wishes, Alex #119343 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 11:46 am Subject: Translating Alex scottduncan2 Alex, (connie), When Alex appears to ask: "If the same citta itself doesn't last for two moments, then how can same citta last through three moments of (arising, persisting, ceasing)?" Scott: Alex means to say: "I have never, ever agreed with the notion of 'moments' (check the archives if you don't believe me). I am still disagreeing with it, despite my 'questions.' To be clear, I'm saying that any division into 'moments' or 'sub-moments' is arbitrary, and thus breaks up the flow of experience needlessly. I'm saying that since a moment is a moment, whether you call it a sub-moment or not, one 'moment' of citta is just the same as three 'moments' you call 'sub-moments.' This means that citta doesn't last one 'moment' but it actually last three 'moments' therefore 'moments' are irrelevant and so the whole thing is refuted." Scott: Say it isn't so, Alex. Scott. #119344 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 12:01 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Disagreeing w/ Chuck scottduncan2 Chuck, These replies showed up on my email but not on the list. I think that the source of the 'censorship' might be the fact that you either don't sign in and send an e-mail to the recipient instead, or you are clicking the e-mail icon. I don't know. As pt. -------------------------------------- 1) Good friend Philip, et al Good friend Scott was not responsive in his responses... [bummers] What say you, Philip? Sincere thanks in presenting concrete evidence on your apparent disparaging remarks against certain Bhikkhu(s)? ----------------------------------- 2) As a closure to this thread... Please remember no man nor woman is infallible until arahant... Hence, in my minority experiences as a Bhikkhu and as a layperson; there is no commandment to listen to nor to follow a Bhikkhu or layperson if in your mind; the Bhikkhu or layperson does not teach the Dhamma-vinaya!!! However, in ones' ignorance; please do not defame on emotional basis... please politely correct without emotion... please correct with the Brahma-vihara... peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck ------------------------------------- Scott. #119345 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 12:08 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Disagreeing w/ Chuck scottduncan2 Chuck, C: "...Please remember no man nor woman is infallible until arahant... Hence, in my minority experiences as a Bhikkhu and as a layperson; there is no commandment to listen to nor to follow a Bhikkhu or layperson if in your mind; the Bhikkhu or layperson does not teach the Dhamma-vinaya!!! However, in ones' ignorance; please do not defame on emotional basis... please politely correct without emotion... please correct with the Brahma-vihara..." Scott: Again, since you 'closed' before actually discussing anything, I've not heard where Bhikkhus are infallible, nor have I heard that disagreeing with views is 'emotional.' And, as a Texican, you at least must know that freedom of speech is a world-wide right. Scott. #119346 From: "philip" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 12:12 pm Subject: Re: Can a Non-Buddhist Act as a Buddhist? was: Off Topic: An Unkownd Texas Ranger philofillet Hi Scott > > Scott: 'Fair' enough. I think there is still quite enough 'spin' in the phrase: > > "...This comment overlooks the obvious point that the Buddha is inculcating self-reliance." I guess for me "to spin" means trying to sell an agenda in the face of opposition. Obviously true for TB, with his blatant eternalism. In BB's case, he is just sliding along with the general misunderstanding of Dhamma being something people can do, he wouldn't have enough awareness of the opposing, correct understanding to need to spin, cuz the correct understanding is so rarely voiced. And yes, I've said it before, but I really believe growing up in the West, especially North America (I suspect) we are indoctrinated from infancy with idealism about self-reliance, and that must surely interfere with our ability to hear the Dhamma correctly. Yes, the kalama sutta feeds that fire, in my opinion. ( An opinion that I'm not interested in taking the time to try to defend.) So I think the real spinning hasn't begun from BB, that will come as soon as the Introduction to the AN anthology, in which I bet you anything he will try to spin Buddha as a seeker of social justice, good works for the weak and hungry people of the world etc. That will take some real spinning. Enough cattiness for today. Chuck, remember, guys on the internet, guys on the internet! Metta, Phil #119347 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 12:19 pm Subject: Re: Can a Non-Buddhist Act as a Buddhist? was: Off Topic: An Unkownd Texas Ranger scottduncan2 Phil, Ph: "I guess for me 'to spin' means trying to sell an agenda in the face of opposition. Obviously true for TB, with his blatant eternalism. In BB's case, he is just sliding along with the general misunderstanding of DhammaYes, the kalama sutta feeds that fire, in my opinion..." Scott: Fair enough. Ph: "So I think the real spinning hasn't begun from BB, that will come as soon as the Introduction to the AN anthology..." Scott: Hopefully not. Scott. #119348 From: "connie" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 12:48 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Disagreeing w/ Chuck nichiconn hi Chuck, > > Please remember no man nor woman is infallible until arahant... > Was Sariputta an arahant when he gave one of his students an unsuitable meditation subject? http://www.tipitaka.net/tipitaka/dhp/verseload.php?verse=285 connie #119349 From: "connie" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 1:01 pm Subject: Re: Same citta doesn't arise, persist & cease ? nichiconn hi Alex, > If one says that one and the same person throughout life from birth to growing up and dying exists regardless of being made up of changing 5 Khandhas, would that be acceptable? One and the same person throughout life from birth to growing up and dying exists: yes. That is conventional truth. Is that "being made up of changing 5 Khandhas" or is our idea of "one and the same person" really something else? connie #119350 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 1:21 pm Subject: Re: Same citta doesn't arise, persist & cease ? truth_aerator Hello Connie, >C: One and the same person throughout life from birth to growing up >and dying exists: yes. That is conventional truth. >======================================================== Is there a single unchanging physical or mental state? Of course not. Body of a baby, a youth, and old person are different. Nothing to say about mental states. Similar is with citta. At best it is purely conventional abstraction to make it up containing three moments of arising, persisting and falling. Same "reality" as with the case with a person from birth to death. With best wishes, Alex #119351 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 1:33 pm Subject: Re: Same citta doesn't arise, persist & cease ? scottduncan2 Alex, (connie), A: "...Similar is with citta. At best it is purely conventional abstraction to make it up containing three moments of arising, persisting and falling. Same 'reality' as with the case with a person from birth to death." Scott: Finally. The coda. I came pretty close didn't I? Scott. #119352 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 1:41 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Disagreeing w/ Chuck scottduncan2 More from Chuck that keeps showing up on my own e-mail while not appearing on the list and I hope it stops appearing there because it will always end up here: Good friend Scott, et al Please it is not of any concern; okay... Please remember, I once was a computer/radar guru... That is how, indirectly, I was led to Theravada Buddhism in Thailand... my three alpha-agency [no. not DOD] sent me twice to teach the Royal Thai Air Force. It was under the approval of the DOD-USAF to teach my courses in Radar Analysis. It is maipenrai, okay? Fortunately, this ole bag of bones is still alive to make merit for... peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck Good friend Scott, et al You may disagree with me as much as you want, okay? No problem (maipenrai). Please remember, this ole Texican bag of bones is no teacher... On your statement... Did you not write, "Scott: First of all, I don't worship monks." A repeated query to you: Where in the Theravada Teachings' is it taught to "worship monks"? peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #119353 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 1:46 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Disagreeing w/ Chuck scottduncan2 All, Part of an unusual 'off-list' post: Chuck: "Please remember, I once was a computer/radar guru..." Scott. #119354 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 6:00 am Subject: Scott Non-responsive; was: Disagreeing w/ Bhikkhu(s) dhammasaro Good friend Scott, Yes, I have been closely and silently following your myriad discussions. Yes, I read and studied your reference(s) already... Hence, shall we just end my polite sincere quiet request... End as you, Scott, are being non-responsive, okay? peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #119355 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 7:09 am Subject: The Relationship between Teacher and Student is Like... dhammasaro Good friends all, May I share a few thoughts??? In Theravada, the relationship between teacher and student is like that between a master craftsman and his apprentice. The Dhamma is a skill, like carpentry, archery, or cooking. The duty of the teacher is to pass on the skill not only by word and example, but also by creating situations to foster the ingenuity and powers of observation the student will need to become skillful. The duty of the student is to choose a reliable master someone whose skills are solid and whose intentions can be trusted and to be as observant as possible. After all, there's no way you can become a skilled craftsman by passively watching the master or merely obeying his words. You can't abdicate responsibility for your own actions. You have to pay attention both to your actions and to their results, at the same time using your ingenuity and discernment to correct mistakes and overcome obstacles as they arise. This requires that you combine respect for your teacher with respect for the principle of cause and effect as it plays out in your own thoughts, words, and deeds. ... So I swallowed my pride and learned to take my mistakes as my teachers. Before, I could never tolerate being in the wrong. But when I could finally admit to being wrong, I started finding the inner resources I needed to start setting things right. ... Nevertheless, he [teacher] was a human being with human foibles. Because my Christian upbringing had taught me to reserve my ultimate respect for a supposedly infallible being, I was awkward in handling the occasions when Ajaan Fuang was a little less than perfect. At the same time, I didn't know quite what to do with my strongly ingrained streak of independence. So one day, out of the blue, Ajaan Fuang told me a story about a time when he had had a disagreement with his own teacher, Ajaan Lee Dhammadharo. oOo Good friends all, To read all: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/thinklikeathief.html Comments after your studied perusal of referenced web site? peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #119356 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 7:28 am Subject: Philip: was; Disagreeing w/ Bhikkhu(s) dhammasaro Good friend Philip, et al Good friend Scott was not responsive in his responses... [bummers] What say you, Philip? Sincere thanks in presenting concrete evidence on your apparent disparaging remarks against certain Bhikkhu(s)? peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #119357 From: "charlest" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 7:37 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Disagreeing w/ Bhikkhu(s) dhammasaro Good friend Scott, Yes, I have been closely and silently following your myriad discussions. Yes, I read and studied your reference(s) already... Hence, shall we just end my polite sincere quiet request... End as you, Scott, are being non-responsive, okay? peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Chuck, > > C: "...However, you ignored my question and did not present evidence to support your somewhat negative comments against certain Bhikkhu(s)" > > Scott: Go to my last post. Click on the link. Read. If you do, you will see that I have given the relevant sutta portion, the Paa.li, the relevant commentarial portion, and the controversial remarks. > > If you have already done so, and can't find in all of that the 'evidence' that you seek, then I fail to see what it is you are asking for. > > Scott. > #119358 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 8:27 am Subject: Off-topic: Earthquakes & Floods dhammasaro Good friends all, If you believe in transferring merit please do in your personal way... chant/meditate/pray and financial aid... I just watched the France24 TV news about more flooding in Thailand... earlier, it was about Pakistan and Turkey earthquakes... may all have peace... sincere warm thanks... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #119359 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 8:54 am Subject: Pali: Bhanga dhammasaro Good friends all, Please help me with this Pali word: Bhanga. Please (1) explain your interpretation of this Pali word and (2) provide a credible reference to support your interpretation. Sincere warm thanks for your help. peace... yours in the dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #119360 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 8:57 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Can a Non-Buddhist Act as a Buddhist? dhammasaro Good friend Ken H, et al Would you provide the documentation in the Vinaya-pitaka to support your assertion? Warm thanks... peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com From: kenhowardau@... <....> It seems to me that the monk's life compared to the lay life is similar to right view compared to wrong view. In accordance with the vinaya, a monk does no conventional work in the community even when the community desperately needs someone to do that work. Similarly, right understanding knows there are(for example) no cars and no trees even when a car is speeding towards a tree. [People with] wrong view will scorn right view saying "Look out, this is not an appropriate time for satipatthana!" But right view knows differently (and the tree is still avoided). In the same way, a monk with wrong view will think, "Now is not the right time for obeying the vinaya," but now is always the right time for obeying the vinaya. If he chooses to do conventional work he can first leave the Sangha, and no rules will be broken. <.....> #119361 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 9:21 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Opinions are One Thing dhammasaro Good friends all, All agree, then? No more opinions? yours in the dhamma-vinaya, Chuck __,_._,_ <...> #119362 From: "charlest" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 9:36 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Disagreeing w/ Bhikkhu(s) dhammasaro Good friend Scott, Yes, I have been closely and silently following your myriad discussions. Yes, I read and studied your reference(s) already... Hence, shall we just end my polite sincere quiet request... End as you, Scott, are being non-responsive, okay? peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Chuck, > > C: "...However, you ignored my question and did not present evidence to support your somewhat negative comments against certain Bhikkhu(s)" > > Scott: Go to my last post. Click on the link. Read. If you do, you will see that I have given the relevant sutta portion, the Paa.li, the relevant commentarial portion, and the controversial remarks. > > If you have already done so, and can't find in all of that the 'evidence' that you seek, then I fail to see what it is you are asking for. > > Scott. > #119363 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 9:47 am Subject: Final Wisdom! bhikkhu5 Friends: What are the 3 Supramundane Mental Abilities? The Blessed Buddha once said: Bhikkhus, there are these three supramundane abilities. What three? 1: The ability to come to know, what one did not yet know... 2: The ability to gradually achieve the highest and final wisdom... 3: The ability of one, who dwells in the highest and final wisdom... These are the three supreme supramundane abilities. (aññā-indriya) <....> Source of reference (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikāya. Book [V: 204] 48 The Mental Abilities: 23 Final Wisdom.. Final Wisdom! #119364 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:20 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Factors for predominance condition dhammasaro Good friend Philip, et al 1. So, what I am to deduce from your rather eloquent fluid response? 2. Can you condense your response into a short simple, active voice sentence? Warm thanks for responding... peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com From: philco777@... <....> You got me there! Quite often I read some sections of Nina's very excellent book "The Conditionality of Life: an outline of the Twenty Four Conditions as taught in the Abhidhamma" and I get excited, because it is dealing with the very deepest aspects of Dhamma. But I really don't understand it at all! > 1. What is your definition of, "predominance condition"? > > 2. What do you mean by, "represent more rarefied factors"? > > 3. What do your definition of, "predominance factor"? Blushing (well not really) I say I have no idea! But it is a great book. We have to very, very gradually develop our intellectual understanding of the deepest points of Dhamma. For example, paticca-sammuppadha, dependent origination. There is a tendency when we first come across it to want to work it all out in our brains, and we end up forming some vaguely, partially correct shadow of what it really is all about. And the stronger that we cling to and have confidence in that paltry semblance of the truth that our thinking conjures up, the more wrong we will be. It's just way too deep for us to understand now. We have to start with what we *can* truly understand now, or begin to - seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touch and the thinking that arises from those sense door processes. So I thank you for pointing out my playing with deep topics represented by those questions above! But, having said that, reading the chaper on predominance condition will provide a beginning of understanding for questions 1 and 3. As for 2, without reading my original post, I have no idea what I was talking about! It sure sounds deep though! :) The book I mentionned can be found online by a Google search. Metta, Phil <....> #119365 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:46 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Disagreeing w/ Bhikkhu(s) dhammasaro Good friend Philip, et al Sincere warm thanks for your response. In case you do not recognize the inaccurate Thai spelling of: So what, Who Cares, No problem, or as my grandson translates it: "I don't give a sh*t." Those are the general translations of my on-line moniker: "maipenlai." Trust you know where the ole bag of Texian bones is at... However, you did not respond as requested... so be it... life is short, tis id knot??? peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #119366 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 11:09 am Subject: Hopefully a Closure: was; Disagreeing w/ Bhikkhu(s) dhammasaro Good friends all, As a closure to this thread... Please remember no man nor woman is infallible until arahant... Hence, in my minority experiences as a Bhikkhu and as a layperson; there is no commandment to listen to nor to follow a Bhikkhu or layperson if in your mind; the Bhikkhu or layperson does not teach the Dhamma-vinaya!!! However, in ones' ignorance; please do not defame on emotional basis... please politely correct without emotion... please correct with the Brahma-vihara... peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #119367 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 11:25 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Disagreeing w/ Bhikkhu(s) dhammasaro Good friend Phil, et al Well, since seriously taking the moniker; it has kept me out of USA prisons and some other rather foreign unpleasant places... [verily beeg Texican smiles] I have communicated with you both off-list and on-list. Please check!!! On-list is delayed up to some 24 hours for DSG to approve... Texicans are very suspect!!! Even, when a Texican is a temporary monk!!! So be it... maipenrai... [verily beeg Texican grins] peace... yours in the dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #119368 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 12:32 pm Subject: Closure of this Thread: was; Disagreeing w/ Chuck dhammasaro Good friend Scott, et al Please it is not of any concern; okay... Please remember, I once was a computer/radar guru... That is how, indirectly, I was led to Theravada Buddhism in Thailand... my three alpha-agency [no. not DOD] sent me twice to teach the Royal Thai Air Force. It was under the approval of the DOD-USAF to teach my courses in Radar Analysis. It is maipenrai, okay? Fortunately, this ole bag of bones is still alive to make merit for... peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck . #119369 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 12:43 pm Subject: Scott on Worshipping Monks: was; Disagreeing w/ Chuck dhammasaro Good friend Scott, et al You may disagree with me as much as you want, okay? No problem (maipenrai). Please remember, this ole Texican bag of bones is no teacher... On your statement... Did you not write, "Scott: First of all, I don't worship monks." A repeated query to you: Where in the Theravada Teachings' is it taught to "worship monks"? peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com From: scduncan@... <...> Scott: Again, since you 'closed' before actually discussing anything, I've not heard where Bhikkhus are infallible, nor have I heard that disagreeing with views is 'emotional.' And, as a Texican, you at least must know that freedom of speech is a world-wide right. <....> #119370 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 1:19 pm Subject: Credible Evidence: Disagreeing w/ Chuck dhammasaro Good friend Connie, et al Warm thanks for your question. I do not know the answer to your question whether the Bhikkhu was an arahant at the time,,,. What does it have to do with my statement? But, back to the statement to which you did not really respond... [bummers] Do you have credible evidence contrary to my initial statement? peace... yours in the dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #119371 From: "philip" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 2:06 pm Subject: Re: Philip: was; Disagreeing w/ Bhikkhu(s) philofillet Hi Chuck I answered already, as did Scott, but just one more time. Re BB, Scott provided a link to a post showing Pali and English for a commentarial note in which BB places his opinion above the commentary. He does that often in the commentarial notes to his Nikaya anthologies, if I had a life of leisure I would chronicle them for you. Also, in his introduction to the SN anthology, he denies the authenticity of the canonical (?) telling of the origin of Abhidhamma. Very much a bummer for a bhikkhu in his position in charge of translating the tipitika to do so, publically. He should keep his opinions to himself, and translate the tipitka as faithfully as possible. As for TB, please see section devoted to his wrong view under "anatta" in the Useful Posts section. Over and out, Chuck. Life is short. Metta, Phil > Sincere thanks in presenting concrete evidence on your apparent disparaging remarks against certain Bhikkhu(s)? > > peace... > > yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, > > Chuck > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > #119372 From: "connie" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 2:27 pm Subject: Re: Credible Evidence: Disagreeing w/ Chuck nichiconn Chuck, > > Warm thanks for your question. I do not know the answer to your question whether the Bhikkhu was an arahant at the time,,,. > > What does it have to do with my statement? > > I don't think arahants are "infallible". Your statement seemed to me to imply that they are. I'm not sure, either, but I think Sariputta WAS an arahant at the time of the story. > But, back to the statement to which you did not really respond... [bummers] > > Do you have credible evidence contrary to my initial statement? > Evidently, I didn't feel like answering whatever your initial statement was. I don't recall it. No, I don't have any evidence to offer at this time... for or against. Is there some special reason I should feel like I need to answer every post and point or that anyone should expect someone to? Evidently, your posts are getting through to the list so there is no need for you to send copies to me offlist. connie #119373 From: "Lukas" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 2:35 pm Subject: Re: Sabhava or 'essence'- Ven. Dhammapiyo szmicio Dear Nina and Phil, > >N: I want to add that, if I remember correctly, Kh Sujin also said that > > one has to be very brave to face the nature of anattaa. > > We have to be heroes, don't we? L:brave to face nature of anatta? So you mean that we accept that whatever happens to us in life is conditioned, we cannot change it? Does the braveness is to lead our normal life and accept that? Best wishes Lukas #119374 From: "philip" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 2:38 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Factors for predominance condition philofillet Hi Chuck > 1. So, what I am to deduce from your rather eloquent fluid response? > > 2. Can you condense your response into a short simple, active voice sentence? Read Nina's book, or the section on paccayas in Visudhimagga! That would be best. If you do so because of my post, it will have been a predominant condition, I think. But read the related chapter in the book mentionned earlier, please. Over and out on this topic, thanks. Metta, Phil > > Warm thanks for responding... > > peace... > > yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, > > Chuck > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > From: philco777@... > <....> > > You got me there! > > > > Quite often I read some sections of Nina's very excellent book "The Conditionality of Life: an outline of the Twenty Four Conditions as taught in the Abhidhamma" and I get excited, because it is dealing with the very deepest aspects of Dhamma. But I really don't understand it at all! > > > > > 1. What is your definition of, "predominance condition"? > > > > > > 2. What do you mean by, "represent more rarefied factors"? > > > > > > 3. What do your definition of, "predominance factor"? > > > > Blushing (well not really) I say I have no idea! But it is a great book. We have to very, very gradually develop our intellectual understanding of the deepest points of Dhamma. For example, paticca-sammuppadha, dependent origination. There is a tendency when we first come across it to want to work it all out in our brains, and we end up forming some vaguely, partially correct shadow of what it really is all about. And the stronger that we cling to and have confidence in that paltry semblance of the truth that our thinking conjures up, the more wrong we will be. It's just way too deep for us to understand now. We have to start with what we *can* truly understand now, or begin to - seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touch and the thinking that arises from those sense door processes. > > > > So I thank you for pointing out my playing with deep topics represented by those questions above! > > > > But, having said that, reading the chaper on predominance condition will provide a beginning of understanding for questions 1 and 3. As for 2, without reading my original post, I have no idea what I was talking about! It sure sounds deep though! :) > > > > The book I mentionned can be found online by a Google search. > > > > Metta, > > > > Phil > > <....> > #119375 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 2:45 pm Subject: Re: Disagreeing w/ Chuck scottduncan2 More from Chuck that keeps showing up on my own e-mail while not appearing on the list and I hope it stops appearing there because it will always end up here: Really???? No more opinions here??? DSG??? Oh, come on, now!!!! To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com From: dhammasaro@... Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 18:21:25 -0400 Subject: RE: [dsg] Opinions are One Thing Good friends all, All agree, then? No more opinions? yours in the dhamma-vinaya, Chuck __,_._,_ <...> I do not wish to receive any more off-lists messages from you. Please take note. Scott. #119376 From: "philip" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 2:47 pm Subject: Re: Sabhava or 'essence'- Ven. Dhammapiyo philofillet Hi Lukas Always nice to hear from you. I'm rushing, but a quick word, more later. > L:brave to face nature of anatta? So you mean that we accept that whatever happens to us in life is conditioned, we cannot change it? > Does the braveness is to lead our normal life and accept that? > The Buddha said develop kusala and abandon akusala, it can be done. Understanding develops. But as A Sujin said, any movement away from this monent is done by lobha, there has to be detachment from the beginning, moments of it, at least. Obviously we can't have such moments by our selecting and wishing for them, so there must be patience and the courage that is involved in not trying for quick fixes. Talk to you later, Lukas, gotta run now. Metta, Phil #119377 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 3:00 pm Subject: Re: Disagreeing w/ Chuck scottduncan2 More from Chuck that keeps showing up on my own e-mail while not appearing on the list and I hope it stops appearing there because it will always end up here: Good friend Scott, et al If you do not want off-list messages from me which are congruent with my DGS messages; just block my e-mail addy. I send both to you and DSG as: 1. DSG filters my messages up to 24 hours before allowing you to receive. Very difficult for a timely discussion; do you not agree? 2. DGS censors delete my messages without informing me of their actions!!! Rather non-Buddhist; do you not agree??? peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck I asked you to stop. And you don't. #119378 From: "Ken H" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 3:02 pm Subject: Re: The Relationship between Teacher and Student is Like... kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Maipenrai Dhammasaro wrote: > > > Good friends all, > > May I share a few thoughts??? > > In Theravada, the relationship between teacher and student is like that > between a master craftsman and his apprentice. -------------------------- Hi Chuck, When you are sharing those thoughts are you remembering that there is no teacher and no student? There are only dhammas, and if some of those dhammas can be labelled "teacher" or "student" then that is well and good for the purposes of learning about dhammas. Apart from that, however, "teacher" and "student" "man" "motor car" and all the other concepts are irrelevant to satipatthana. Aren't they? ------------------- > C: The Dhamma is a skill, like carpentry, archery, or cooking. The duty of the teacher is to pass on the skill not only by word and example, but also by creating situations to foster the ingenuity and powers of observation the student will need to become skillful. ------------------- KH: In ultimate reality we don't even exist - there are only dhammas. Therefore, if we consider ourselves to be the student or the teacher we have lost the plot, haven't we? -------------------------- > C: The duty of the student is to choose a reliable master someone whose skills are solid and whose intentions can be trusted and to be as observant as possible. -------------------------- KH: Different dhammas have different functions, but none of them have a duty. They are conditioned to arise, perform their functions and cease. They don't care a hoot one way or the other. ------------------------------------- >C: After all, there's no way you can become a skilled craftsman by passively watching the master or merely obeying his words. You can't abdicate responsibility for your own actions. You have to pay attention both to your actions and to their results, at the same time using your ingenuity and discernment to correct mistakes and overcome obstacles as they arise. This requires that you combine respect for your teacher with respect for the principle of cause and effect as it plays out in your own thoughts, words, and deeds. -------------------------------------- KH: When there is wrong understanding there will inevitably be thoughts of "I can do this," "I will become enlightened one day." ---------------------- > C: So I swallowed my pride and learned to take my mistakes as my teachers. Before, I could never tolerate being in the wrong. But when I could finally admit to being wrong, I started finding the inner resources I needed to start setting things right. ------------------------ KH: Good companions can lead us to develop good habits in this lifetime. But what about next lifetime? There may not be good companions next time, and bad habits may again rise to the fore. But so what? The point of the Dhamma is to understand the way things are now. -------------------------------------- > C: Nevertheless, he [teacher] was a human being with human foibles. Because my Christian upbringing had taught me to reserve my ultimate respect for a supposedly infallible being, I was awkward in handling the occasions when Ajaan Fuang was a little less than perfect. At the same time, I didn't know quite what to do with my strongly ingrained streak of independence. So one day, out of the blue, Ajaan Fuang told me a story about a time when he had had a disagreement with his own teacher, Ajaan Lee Dhammadharo. oOo Good friends all, To read all: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/thinklikeathief.html -------------------------------------- KH: Argh! Up until now I thought that was *you* talking! :-) Instead it was Bhikkhu Thanissaro, the man who wants us to believe anatta does not mean no self! ------------------------ > C: Comments after your studied perusal of referenced web site? ------------------------ No thanks, I have read more than enough of Thanissaro's hertodoxy. Ken H #119379 From: "connie" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 3:46 pm Subject: Re: Pali: Bhanga nichiconn hi Chuck, > > Please help me with this Pali word: Bhanga. > > Please (1) explain your interpretation of this Pali word and (2) provide a credible reference to support your interpretation. > In case you don't have a pali dictionary: bha"nga: (m) breaking up; dissolution. (nt.), the humped cloth. I would be inclined to say it means "fall". connie #119380 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 2:28 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Opinions are One Thing dhammasaro Really???? No more opinions here??? DSG??? Oh, come on, now!!!! To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com From: dhammasaro@... <...> All agree, then? No more opinions? yours in the dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #119381 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 2:47 pm Subject: Philip Non-responsive: was; Factors for predominance condition dhammasaro Good friend Philip, et al Okay, chalk you down to being non-responsive, okay? Good friend Phil, et al Imho, telling me to read a book is not responsive!!! [bummers] peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com From: philco777@... <...> 1. So, what I am to deduce from your rather eloquent fluid response? 2. Can you condense your response into a short simple, active voice sentence? Read Nina's book, or the section on paccayas in Visudhimagga! That would be best. If you do so because of my post, it will have been a predominant condition, I think. But read the related chapter in the book mentionned earlier, please. <...> #119382 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 3:08 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: The Relationship between Teacher and Student is Like... dhammasaro Good friend Ken H, et al Sincere warm thanks for sharing your very heartfelt opinions. I do appreciate them. They help this ole bag of bones on a rather lonely journey... peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com From: kenhowardau@... <...> When you are sharing those thoughts are you remembering that there is no teacher and no student? There are only dhammas, and if some of those dhammas can be labelled "teacher" or "student" then that is well and good for the purposes of learning about dhammas. Apart from that, however, "teacher" and "student" "man" "motor car" and all the other concepts are irrelevant to satipatthana. Aren't they? <...> #119383 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 3:19 pm Subject: RE: Pali: Bhanga dhammasaro No help? [bummers] From: dhammasaro@... To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com <...> Please help me with this Pali word: Bhanga. Please (1) explain your interpretation of this Pali word and (2) provide a credible reference to support your interpretation. Sincere warm thanks for your help. peace... yours in the dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #119384 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 3:38 pm Subject: What are the Four Constituents of Sammappadhana. dhammasaro Good friends all, I recently came across this: Lay persons and bhikkhus who profess to be followers of the Buddha can know whether or not the dissettlement and turbulence of their minds in the matter of viriya have disappeared and whether or not they are thus persons who have obtained mastery over their minds, only when they come to the four constituents of sammappadhana. Question: What are the four constituents of sammappadhana? yours in the Dhamma-vinaya Chuck 0038 eastern #119385 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 3:52 pm Subject: Pali: Bhanga dhammasaro Good friend Connie, Excellent!!! Sincere warm thanks. How is it used in a sentence or paragraph in the Tipitaka? Again, sincere warm thanks. peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com From: nichicon@... <..> In case you don't have a pali dictionary: bha"nga: (m) breaking up; dissolution. (nt.), the humped cloth. I would be inclined to say it means "fall". <...> #119386 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 5:55 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Pali: Bhanga nilovg Dear Chuck and Connie, Op 27-okt-2011, om 6:52 heeft Maipenrai Dhammasaro het volgende geschreven: > How is it used in a sentence or paragraph in the Tipitaka? ------ N: Ba.nga ~naa.na is a stage of vipassanaa. Knowledge of dissolution.The fifth vipassanaa ~naa.na, or the second stage of principal insight. Arising after the arising and falling away of realities has been directly known. The attention turns more to the falling away of realities, and it is more clearly realized that naama and ruupa cannot be of any refuge (Survey, p. 332). At this stage there is more detachment. ------ Nina. #119387 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 6:06 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sabhava or 'essence'- Ven. Dhammapiyo nilovg Dear Lukas, good to hear from you again. Op 27-okt-2011, om 5:35 heeft Lukas het volgende geschreven: > > > >N: I want to add that, if I remember correctly, Kh Sujin also > said that > > > one has to be very brave to face the nature of anattaa. > > > We have to be heroes, don't we? > > L:brave to face nature of anatta? So you mean that we accept that > whatever happens to us in life is conditioned, we cannot change it? > ----- N: It is so much in our nature to like to control dhammas. We want life to be in this way, not in that. Through insight the truth of non- self, or in other words, the nature of beyond control is realized more deeply. Anattaa can be expressed as beyond control, as the late ven. Dhammadharo repeatedly said. Not just by words or intellectually. There is firm understanding. Even understanding does not develop as fast as we would like it. But still, we continue learning and learning, beginning to study and be aware of whatever dhamma presents itself, even if it is very disagreeable. it is conditioned; nobody can change it, as you express so well. See, you have a good understanding. -------- > > L: Does the braveness is to lead our normal life and accept that? > ------- N: Very well expressed. We have to continue, never tire of developing understanding in daily life. It is in daily life that dhammas appear and we do not select what appears, how could we, they are all conditioned. As Azita says, courage and good cheer. Good cheer also, since it is a rare occasion to hear the Dhamma, and we should be happy about that. Not wasting our life with insignificant things and worry. Worry does not lead to anything. Thus, again, courage and good cheer! Nina. > #119388 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 7:31 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sabhava or 'essence'- Ven. Dhammapiyo nilovg Dear Phil, Op 27-okt-2011, om 1:23 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > > I want to add that, if I remember correctly, Kh Sujin also said that > > one has to be very brave to face the nature of anattaa. > > We have to be heroes, don't we? > > We have to accept that a lot of the conventional ways to feel > better about the hardship of life are really empty when it comes > down to the crunch. I have mentionned this before, but the talk in > which a Thai woman mentionned a friend who is suffering from > loneliness, and A.SUjin said, help them understand. (i.e correct > understanding that there is only nama and rupa, a beginning of > understanding deep liberating Dhamma, intellectually.) But what if > he can't understand, she was asked? Then he will have to suffer > from loneliness, was the answer. That seems very tough, almost > cold, the cold shower that you mentionned once. But it is the truth. > ------- N: Loneliness: he thinks of himself instead of being concerned for others. He does not know what true friendship is: thinking of others' welfare and then one is not lonely at all. It all pertains to the citta, kusala citta or akusala citta. --------- > > Ph: So by accepting that the conventional kinds of comforting do > not truly lead out of suffering, yes, we have to be heroic. > > Of course we still have an accumulated tendency to enjoy those > comforts, such as letters from friends, visits from friends, sweet > little gifts when we are ill etc, and we will continue to do so, > and continue to offer them to others. They are not "bad", of > course, just don't lead out. Only understanding really and truly > helps. > ------ It is not all lobha, kusala and akusala are alternating. We can appreciate the comfort friends are giving us, that is not akusala. You spoke before about seeking comfort in Dhamma, and the inclination to lobha. I think of 'Dhamma kamo', fondness of Dhamma, as one of the protections or supports, just posted in Sangiitisutta: < he loves the Dhamma and delights in hearing it, he is especially fond of the advanced doctrine and discipline (abhidhamme abhivanaye)..> Kusala citta with wisdom can be accompanied by happy feeling. One can rejoice in the truth. ------- Nina. #119389 From: "philip" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 7:38 pm Subject: Re: Philip Non-responsive: was; Factors for predominance condition philofillet Hi Chuck > > Imho, telling me to read a book is not responsive!!! [bummers] Well, do your want to develop correct understanding of Dhamma? If so, read the book (or Vism, or Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma) and then ask questions based on what you read, and not to someone who already explained to you that he doesn't know the answer! That seems the sensible approach to me, sorry to disappoint! Metta, Phil #119390 From: "philip" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 7:44 pm Subject: Re: Philip Non-responsive: was; Factors for predominance condition philofillet Hi again Chuck BTW, if you check the chapter on predominance condition, you will find what you need to know in only 3 or 4 pages! Piece of cake! Metta, Phil #119391 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 7:57 pm Subject: predominance-condition. nilovg Dear Chuck, somewhat shortened: Predominance-Condition (Adhipati-Paccaya) We read in thePa.t.thna (II, Analytical Exposition, 3) about two kinds of predominance-condition: conascent-predominance-condition (sahajtdhipati-paccaya) object-predominance-condition (rammadhipati-paccaya) As to conascent-predominance-condition, the conditioning factor (paccaya) which has a dominating influence over the realities it conditions (paccayupanna dhammas) is conascent with these, that is, it arises together with them. Phenomena never arise alone, they arise simultaneously with other phenomena. Citta does not arise alone, it is accompanied by cetasikas; citta and cetasikas arise together and fall away together. There are four factors which condition the dhammas they arise together with by way of conascent-predominance-condition, and these are: chanda (desire-to-do) viriya (energy or effort) citta vima.msa (investigation of Dhamma, pa cetasika) Three of these factors, namely, chanda, viriya and vimasa are cetasikas and one is citta, but not every citta can be a predominant factor as we shall see. It is due to these four factors that great and difficult enterprises can be accomplished. Whenever we wish to accomplish a task, one of these four factors can be the leader, the predominance-condition for the realities they arise together with and also for the rpa which is produced at that moment by citta. Only one of these four factors at a time can be predominant. For example, when chanda is foremost, the other three factors cannot be predominant at the same time. Chanda, viriya and citta can be predominant in the accomplishment of an enterprise or task both in a wholesome way and in an unwholesome way, whereas vimasa, investigation of Dhamma, which is pa, a sobhana cetasika, can only be predominant in a wholesome way. The conascent predominant factors can operate at the moments of javana-cittas (kusala cittas or akusala cittas in the case of non- arahats). Kusala cittas are always accompanied by the two beautiful roots (sobhana hetus) of non-attachment (alobha) and non-aversion (adosa) and, in addition, they can be accompanied by pa. Akusala cittas can be accompanied by two akusala roots: by ignorance (moha) and attachment (lobha) or by ignorance and aversion (dosa), or they may have ignorance as their only root. There are two types of akusala cittas which have moha, ignorance, as their only root: moha-mla- citta (rooted in moha) accompanied by uddhacca (rest- lessness) and moha-mla-citta accompanied by doubt (vicikicch) and these cittas are weak compared to the akusala cittas that have two akusala hetus. The conascent predominant factors do not operate in the case of these two moha-mlacittas, they only operate in the case of javana-cittas that are accompanied by two or three roots. When one undertakes a work of art, such as painting, or when one applies oneself to music, one is bound to do so with lobha-mla-citta (citta rooted in attachment). Lobha is attached to the object it experiences, but it cannot accomplish anything, it is not a predominant factor. Chanda, zeal or wish-to-do, which accompanies lobha-mla-citta can be a predominant factor in the accomplishment of ones undertakings, it conditions the citta and the other cetasikas it accompanies by way of conascent-predominance.... When we accomplish a task with cittas which are resolute, firmly established in kusala, the citta can be the predominance-condition for the accompanying dhammas. Jhnacittas (kusala jhnacitta and kiriya jhnacitta of the arahat), accompanied by the three roots of alobha, adosa and pa, cannot arise without predominance-condition. The lokuttara cittas, the maggacittas and the phalacittas (lokuttara vipkacittas), accompanied by three roots, perform the function of javana; the phalacittas which immediately succeed the maggacittas are the only vipaakacittas that perform the function of javana. Lokuttara cittas cannot arise without predominance-condition. Lobha cetasika is not a predominant factor, but lobha-mla-citta, citta rooted in attachment, can be predominance-condition, as we have seen. For example, when there is wrong view and wrong practice, the citta arising at that moment is firm and steady in this way of akusala, and then that citta is predominance-condition for the accompanying dhammas. That type of citta is rooted in moha and lobha and thus it is conditioned by these two roots by way of root- condition. When we abstain from slandering, the citta which is firm in kusala can be predominant, and in that case chanda, wish-to-do, and viriya, effort, are not predominant. With regard to investigation of the Dhamma, vima.msa, this is pa cetasika. When we listen to the Dhamma, consider it and are mindful of realities, vimasa can condition the accompanying citta and cetasikas by way of predominance-condition. The rpas produced by citta can also be conditioned by way of predominance-condition. Body intimation (kya-viatti) and speech intimation (vac-viatti ) are rpas produced by citta... For the attainment of jhna the predominant factors are necessary conditions, and in that case they have to be sobhana. It is extremely difficult to develop samatha to the degree of jhna, and without the conditioning force of one of the four predominant factors one would not be able to attain jhna. Predominant factors can be of different degrees. When the four factors mentioned above have been developed to a high degree, they have become bases of success, iddhipdas, and then they can lead to the acquisition of supernatural powers (Visuddhimagga, Ch XII, 50-53) The rpas produced by citta which exercises such powers are also conditioned by way of predominance-condition. In the development of vipassan, right understanding of nma and rpa, one also needs the four bases of success for the realisation of the stages of insight wisdom and for the attainment of enlightenment. The arising of awareness and understanding of realities is beyond control, it is due to conditions. We need patience and courage to persevere studying and considering nma and rpa, and to be aware of them in daily life. For the accomplishment of our task, the development of right understanding, the factors which are predominance-condition are indispensable. ... As we have seen, there are two kinds of predominance-condition: conascent-predominance-condition and object-predominance-condition. In the case of conascent-predominance-condition the conditioning factor arises simultaneously with the conditioned dhammas, but this is not so with object-predominance-condition. As regards object- predominance-condition (ramma.ndhipati-paccaya), not every object citta experiences is object-predominance-condition. An object which is predominance-condition is highly regarded by citta and the accompanying cetasikas so that they give preponderance to it. The predominant object is the conditioning factor (paccaya), and the citta and cetasikas which experience that object are the conditioned dhammas (paccayupanna dhammas). Object-predominance-condition is different from object-condition. For example, when we like the colour of a certain cloth, but we do not particularly want to possess it, that object conditions the lobha-mla-citta by way of object- condition. When we like that cloth very much and want to possess it, that object conditions the lobha-mla-citta by way of object- predominance-condition. We then give preponderance to that object. Certain objects cannot be object-predominance-condition, because they are undesirable. Among them is the type of body-consciousness which is akusala vipka, accompanied by painful feeling. The two types of dosa-mla-citta (one type unprompted and one type prompted, c.f. Appendix 2) cannot be object-predominance-condition. They are accompanied by unpleasant feeling and thus they are not desirable. The two types of moha-mla-citta, one associated with doubt and one associated with restlessness, cannot be object- predominance-condition, they are not desirable. The akusala cetasikas which accompany dosa-mla-citta and moha-mla-citta are not desirable either, thus, they cannot be object-predominance-condition. One could not esteem regret, jealousy or stinginess, akusala cetasikas which may accompany dosa-mla-citta. We read in the Pa.t.thna (Faultless Triplet, VII, Investigation Chapter, Conditions: Positive, 1, Classification Chapter, Predominance, 10, 413): ... After having offered the offering, having undertaken the precept, having fulfilled the duty of observance, (one) esteems and reviews it. (One) esteems and reviews (such acts) formerly well done... Wholesomeness can be object-predominance-condition for kusala citta which esteems and considers the wholesome deed which was done. In this case one gives preponderance to that object. When we have been generous we can recollect our generosity and this is a condition for the arising of other kusala cittas. We read in the same section ( 414) that dna, sla and jhna can be object-predominance-condition also for akusala citta. ------- Nina. #119392 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 8:21 pm Subject: Understanding kamma and vipaaka. What I heard. nilovg Dear friends, What I heard: Kamma and vipaaka: Understanding kamma and vipaaka, kammassaka ~naa.na, explained by Kh Sujin: this occurs at all the stages of insight knowledge, including the first stage, knowing the difference between naama and ruupa. In theory we know that kamma produces its appropriate result, but this is a more general knowledge, intellectual understanding. This is quite different from sati that is aware of the characteristics of naama and ruupa as they appear. When insight knowledge arises, one does not try to be aware of certain realities like seeing or visible object. When sati is aware there is the understanding, when seeing arises, that seeing cannot be made to arise, that it cannot be controlled, and it is the same when visible object appears, hearing appears, sound appears. They all arise because of conditions and nobody can force them to arise. Also kusala citta or akusala citta, they arise because of their own conditions. Seeing is vipaakacitta, result of kamma, and when sati is aware of seeing it is truly known that it is conditioned in that way, beyond control. One is sure that there is kamma and that there is vipaaka and ones understanding is more detailed, deeper than intellectual understanding occurring when there is no vipassanaa. Such understanding occurs with each stage of insight, except saccanuloma ~naana, conformity knowledge, Kh Sujin said. N: This stage arises in the process when enlightenment occurs. The three cittas before gotrabhuu, change-of-lineage-knowledge, are called adaptation or conformity and they have one of the three general characteristics as object. This explanation about kamma and vipaaka helps us to understand that direct awareness and understanding are quite different from only understanding terms. Direct understanding is not to be compared with intellectual understanding and it does not need any words. It goes much deeper and it is much firmer. It is truly known that there is no person who can cause the arising of any reality. --------- Nina. #119393 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 9:59 pm Subject: Pt's visit by car - this moment does not mean crashing into trees! sarahprocter... Dear Friends, Pt came over to visit us, by car this time instead of the usual ferry, so no sea-sickness! He lives and works on the opposite side of Sydney, so this saves him time, but it's a concern as to when he'll now be able to write messages, as he no longer has his train journeys to compose on his Galaxy-tab! He arrived carrying a rocking computer chair to help Jon's back - he'd picked it up on the side of the road sometime back and re-upholstered it - v.multi-talented. We sat outside, sipped water (his favourite drink), chatted about life, the list, technical issues, briefly peered out to the dolphins at sea. Later, a simple lunch on the balcony (always a take-away kebab) overlooking the waves and we began to discuss some dhamma topics: In brief, to be elaborated on in due course by Pt if we're lucky: - thirasa~n~naa, strong sa~n~naa or firm remembrance as the proximate cause of sati. What are the "nuts and bolts" of this. Discussion about listening to the Dhamma and considering it carefully, sa~n~naa of what has been heard as conditioning sati. Also the firm sa~n~naa that arises with sati conditioning it too. Nothing to do with repeating a phrase or mantra or sutta repeatedly, trying to have strong sa~n~naa. The desire for results always creeps in. - jhana, concentration, kasinas - a discussion about something Jon had written. (I missed this discussion.) - strong concentration, kusala concentration - not the object, but the citta (and mental factors) which know and consider the object which determine whether it's kusala. - some ideas about breaking continuity - maybe a meditator idea, but forget the context - kusala thinking, akusala thinking, right development only with understanding. Thinking about past states, but what about the present reality? - Samatha development with understanding. Eg: kasina means everything. Earth is everywhere. Wisely reflecting on everything around us as just earth, this body as just earth as condition for calm, but not by wishing to have kusala or calm of any kind. From the beginning, right understanding. Concentration becomes more and more prominent as calm grows, but not at the beginning. - Breath, the rupa produced by citta - understanding this reality only as object of satipatthana, that is for the very few. - pariyatti, patipatti, pativedha. Pariyatti - thinking about dhammas in the right way without direct experience at that moment. Contemplation of the teaching on satipatthana. Not trying to analyse, review, develop metta, chanda or any other states. - chanda as "interest in", not 'wish-to-do' - kusala or akusala. *** A break sometime to have a tele-conference with Ken H in Queensland and ask for his opinion on some topics. Next time pt comes over, we can skype conference call anyone else if you're not asleep anytime between about 2 and 4 Aussie time, so let us know off-list with a skype or tel no if interested. - Samma buddha, recalling past lives, so recalling details of teachings heard in first watches??? Realisation in 3rd watch. Pt will definitely explain more on this in due course I'm sure. An interesting point. - Bhojjanga Samyutta, jhana mastery, enlightenment factors, p. 1573 in Bodhi's transl of SN. More later by one of us. - Knowing kusala and akusala - impossible to know what's past, just this moment. - Wanting to know, desire for results, clinging to kusala, to sati......leading to meditation.....more self - Young men (like Alex & pt) wishing to have something to fight for, to strive for, to inspire. Just understand in daily life, nothing special to *do* hardly seems the task of energetic, striving young men!! Wrong view always wants action and striving and something to *do*, avoiding facing up to, understanding and being detached from the reality now. Right effort is the warrior which only develops when it accompanies right understanding - Pleasant feeling - striving after and wishing it to be the path or something along those lines. *** It's late and I forget what else. I know Pt has a list of post numbers waiting for action in due course! Jon and I have been turning down social invitations, telling friends and family our stay is too short to arrange anything, but for pt, we're always happy to make an exception as we love having him around. Like my mother, he's very easy to please ("just water and I'm not hungry"), loves to help with any tasks we have, including assisting us with the technical running of DSG, and we always have fun as we discuss Dhamma issues. Look f/w to seeing you in February, Pt! Metta Sarah ==== #119394 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:33 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) jonoabb Hi Rob E (119134) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > ... > > [J:] I'm more interested in what the training being recommended is. What is your reading of the sutta on this point, Rob? > > [RE:] Great question, Jon. I would go back to the actual statement to derive this point. > > "Therefore, monks, this is how you must train yourselves: 'We shall practice mindfulness as to body, develop it, make it our vehicle, our dwelling-place, our resort, we will build it up and undertake it thoroughly.'" > =============== J: Just pausing here to give the Bhikkhu bodhi translation of the saem passage (CDB 35:247): "'A strong post or pillar': this, bhikkhus, is a designation for mindfulness directed to the body. "Therefore, bhikkhus, you should train yourselves thus: 'We will develop and culitvat mindfulness directed to the body, make it our vehicle, make it our basis, stabilize it, exercise ourselves in it, and fully perfenct it.' Thus should you train yourselves." > =============== > [RE:] Taking the most relevant portion, the instruction is to "train oneself to develop mindfulness by practicing mindfulness of the body." The other admonitions have to do with how thoroughly and completely one will do this single task: We will "...make it our vehicle, our dwelling-place, our resort, we will build it up and undertake it thoroughly.'" > =============== J: As I read it, the training being recommended is: "We will develop and cultivate [mindfulness of the body]". In other words, it is the recognition that the development of mindfulness is the path taught by the Buddha, and it is the resolution to undertake that development and not some other. I think that is the plain meaning of the words of the sutta ;-)) Of course, it is not the mere recitation of such a resolution that is being proposed. The training is, as Scott's quote from the Sammohavinodanii shows, kusala citta and, in this case, the kusala citta that is the correct understanding of what the development of mindfulness involves. Jon #119395 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Oct 27, 2011 11:47 pm Subject: Does cetanaa wield power over khandas? scottduncan2 Rob E., From the Atthasaalinii, commentary to Dhammasa"nga.ni (pp.127-128): "Volition [cetanaa] is an act leading to a deed. But that (apperceptional) consciousness is not usually spoken of as mind door. (That is to say) because of the arising of (bodily) movement it does not go under the name of mind-door. The non-restraint here is that of the moving body. When such apperception arises, resulting in the movement of the vocal door, pure and simple, without the body door, then the contact co-existent with that consciousness is mind-contact. "Volition is an act giving rise to speech. But that (apperceptional) consciousness is not usually called mind-door. Because of the arising of movement (of the vocal organs) it does not go under the name mind-door. The non-restraint here is that of speech. But when such apperceptive consciousness arises, without the aid of physical limbs and vocal organs, as pure mind-door, then the contact co-existent with that consciousness is mind-contact. "**Volition is a mental act**; that consciousness is the door of mental act. The non-restraint is mind-contact." Scott: 'Apperception,' 'apperceptional' or 'apperceptive consciousness,' are the words and terms used to for the Paa.li 'javana.m,' which refers to 'the seven moments of javana (apperception)...'(Asl., p. 110.). Since the javana series of citta occurs so quickly, there is no making these happen, no willing them to be thus or so - kusala or akusala, and hence, 'volition' is not the same as thinking about doing this or that, or wanting to do this or that, or willing to this or that in the ordinary sense. Scott. #119396 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Oct 28, 2011 12:28 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Rob E > > (119134) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon. > > ... > > > [J:] I'm more interested in what the training being recommended is. What is your reading of the sutta on this point, Rob? > > > > [RE:] Great question, Jon. I would go back to the actual statement to derive this point. > > > > "Therefore, monks, this is how you must train yourselves: 'We shall practice mindfulness as to body, develop it, make it our vehicle, our dwelling-place, our resort, we will build it up and undertake it thoroughly.'" > > =============== > > J: Just pausing here to give the Bhikkhu bodhi translation of the saem passage (CDB 35:247): > "'A strong post or pillar': this, bhikkhus, is a designation for mindfulness directed to the body. > "Therefore, bhikkhus, you should train yourselves thus: 'We will develop and cultivate mindfulness directed to the body, make it our vehicle, make it our basis, stabilize it, exercise ourselves in it, and fully perfenct it.' Thus should you train yourselves." > > > =============== > > [RE:] Taking the most relevant portion, the instruction is to "train oneself to develop mindfulness by practicing mindfulness of the body." The other admonitions have to do with how thoroughly and completely one will do this single task: We will "...make it our vehicle, our dwelling-place, our resort, we will build it up and undertake it thoroughly.'" > > =============== > > J: As I read it, the training being recommended is: "We will develop and cultivate [mindfulness of the body]". > > In other words, it is the recognition that the development of mindfulness is the path taught by the Buddha, and it is the resolution to undertake that development and not some other. > > I think that is the plain meaning of the words of the sutta ;-)) > > Of course, it is not the mere recitation of such a resolution that is being proposed. The training is, as Scott's quote from the Sammohavinodanii shows, kusala citta and, in this case, the kusala citta that is the correct understanding of what the development of mindfulness involves. Of course, I think that even with the B. Bodhi translation, which seems equally credible, it is a stretch to propose that "We will develop and cultivate" does not involve intentional practice. You interpret such passages in a way to remove the imperative and volitional aspects and translate it into kusala citta with no volitional practice, but that is not the way in which the Buddha spoke of this, in either translation. I can imagine a way that Buddha could have spoken, had he wanted to clearly indicate that all that was involved in such practice was right understanding of the arising of kusala citta. He could have said "We will understand that the development and cultivation of mindfulness takes place through the arising of mindfulness and those wholesome mental factors that support it." It could have been said in such a way that it was clear that there was no practice and no practitioner, without using such abstruse terms that the ordinary follower would be confused. By putting it somewhat as I have it above, but perhaps more correctly, it would be clear that right understanding was the only "action" involved, and not meditation practice. But I find it significant that Buddha often speaks in such an imperative way, calling for active practice in cultivating mindfulness. I don't think it's incidental, or that the imperative and active sense that is in the Buddha's actual speech can be dismissed. Buddha speaks in a way that suggests he thinks that one can "take on" the intention to develop mindfulness, and that this is something that can be intentionally cultivated through practice - directing the mind to be aware of the arising object, whether it is the breath or one of the four foundations, and thus build the capability of mindfulness. You do not. If you look at the terms that the Buddha uses, they do suggest active practice, intentionally directing the mind to become more mindful: "We will develop and cultivate mindfulness..." "...make it our vehicle make it our basis stabilize it exercise ourselves in it fully perfect it.'" Thus should you train yourselves." This is B. Bodhi's translation, which you prefer. How do we stabilize mindfulness? How do we EXERCISE ourselves in it? How do we fully perfect it? These terms indicate direct, purposeful practice, not merely the arising of kusala citta without practice. When we EXERCISE mindfulness in order to develop and cultivate it, it is difficult to see such a term in any other way than indicating the practice of meditation, stabilizing, practicing/exercising mindful awareness until it is perfected. The sutta makes sense as it is written, if it is not unduly altered. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - #119397 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Oct 28, 2011 12:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Pt's visit by car - this moment does not mean crashing into trees! nilovg Dear Sarah, That was an interesting meeting with pt. I appreciate his helpfulness with everything, including the rocking chair, how kind. And he is so easy to entertain, water and kebab. Op 27-okt-2011, om 12:59 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > Samatha development with understanding. Eg: kasina means > everything. Earth is everywhere. Wisely reflecting on everything > around us as just earth, this body as just earth as condition for > calm, but not by wishing to have kusala or calm of any kind. From > the beginning, right understanding. Concentration becomes more and > more prominent as calm grows, but not at the beginning. ------- N: I heard Kh Sujin say that kasina also represents colour and that this can be an object of vipassanaa. Perhaps Jon can ask Khun Kampan end January for texts. When the Buddha speaks about samatha subjects I am inclined to think that this is also for vipassanaa. Samatha and vipassanaa together, because samatha alone, what is the use? Perhaps with this in mind we should read all the texts on samatha. Nina. #119398 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Oct 28, 2011 12:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Does cetanaa wield power over khandas? nilovg Dear Scott, appreciated! Nina. Op 27-okt-2011, om 14:47 heeft scottduncan2 het volgende geschreven: > Since the javana series of citta occurs so quickly, there is no > making these happen, no willing them to be thus or so - kusala or > akusala, and hence, 'volition' is not the same as thinking about > doing this or that, or wanting to do this or that, or willing to > this or that in the ordinary sense. #119399 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Oct 28, 2011 12:38 am Subject: Re: Does cetanaa wield power over khandas? epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > From the Atthasaalinii, commentary to Dhammasa"nga.ni (pp.127-128): > > "Volition [cetanaa] is an act leading to a deed. But that (apperceptional) consciousness is not usually spoken of as mind door. (That is to say) because of the arising of (bodily) movement it does not go under the name of mind-door. The non-restraint here is that of the moving body. When such apperception arises, resulting in the movement of the vocal door, pure and simple, without the body door, then the contact co-existent with that consciousness is mind-contact. > > "Volition is an act giving rise to speech. But that (apperceptional) consciousness is not usually called mind-door. Because of the arising of movement (of the vocal organs) it does not go under the name mind-door. The non-restraint here is that of speech. But when such apperceptive consciousness arises, without the aid of physical limbs and vocal organs, as pure mind-door, then the contact co-existent with that consciousness is mind-contact. > > "**Volition is a mental act**; that consciousness is the door of mental act. The non-restraint is mind-contact." > > Scott: 'Apperception,' 'apperceptional' or 'apperceptive consciousness,' are the words and terms used to for the Paa.li 'javana.m,' which refers to 'the seven moments of javana (apperception)...'(Asl., p. 110.). > > Since the javana series of citta occurs so quickly, there is no making these happen, no willing them to be thus or so - kusala or akusala, and hence, 'volition' is not the same as thinking about doing this or that, or wanting to do this or that, or willing to this or that in the ordinary sense. a. I do not understand the distinction of cetana making "pure" contact with the speech door but not vocal organ, and what the significance is of it being considered mind door or something else. b. There is an acknowledgment of cetana leading to bodily action, whether it is speech or physical activity. Isn't that what always happens in order for there to be any physical action? There obviously has to be volition first and then that volition leads to the action, as it says. c. I don't understand why the action that takes place is referred to as a form of "non-restraint." Do you understand what the significance of this is? d. There's nothing here to suggest that the apperceptional volition, which I think is being said to lead to action under the conditions of "non-restraint" is of a different kind than any other volition. Are there two types of volition here - one that leads to action through "non-restraint" and another which is more "pure" that does not lead to action and is thus considered "mind-door?" If you can help me with these distinctions I will have a better idea of what is being proposed here. e. There is nothing in this passage to suggest that volition is not tied to activity, and that it would be impossible to have volition lead to "right practice" that is exercised through mind or body door, that would represent meditation practice to develop mindfulness. Obviously if one has the volition arise to take the bodily action of sitting, and then to practice mindfulness, that volition must have arisen or one would not do this. So I don't quite get the point about the "non-control" of arising cetana. No one is claiming it is "controlled," just that it "arises" and is then acted upon, and that this can lead to cultivation of mindfulness. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = =