#125000 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Jun 16, 2012 7:49 pm Subject: 2007 audio - 19. "Araha.m araha.m" sarahprocter... Dear Friends, When we recite the Buddha's words, is there any understanding? Can we even say there are kusala cittas? ***** KS: If there is a bead here, what are you going to do with that? Touching it? Han: the bead...If I recollect the Buddha's attributes, I'll say "araha.m*, araha.m..." KS: I see, no understanding.... Han: With understanding. The meaning of "araha.m", I must understand. KS: But at what moment is there understanding of "araha.m"? Han: "Araha.m" - The Buddha has eradicated all defilements. KS: Thinking. That is thinking. Thinking about his virtues. Han: Yes, thinking about his virtues. KS: Thinking about his virtues by one word "araha.m"? Han: Yes. KS: But lots of virtues from that word. Han: Mainly three things from "araha.m": One is the eradication of defilements, second, the Buddha will not do any evil things, even where other people cannot see, then the third one he is worthy of.... KS: And without awareness and right understanding can there be the understanding of citta at that very moment? Han: Understanding will be there. KS: We assume that it is kusala at the moment of touching and saying "araha.m". Anyone can say the word "araha.m". Can we guarantee that at that moment it is kusala citta? Han: It depends on the individual. KS: So it depends on the individual. It doesn't mean that when we speak "araha.m" and then it's kusala citta. Han: Even the same person, the same kusala citta may not arise all the time. KS: So at the moment of doing this, without right understanding and awareness, one cannot say it's kusala. Han: Yes, that I agree. Even in the same person, each time he may not have it. KS: And when it's not kusala, can there be panna? Han: No. ***** *Araha.m Sammasambuddho Bhagava (The Arahant, the Buddha perfected by himself, the Exalted One) Metta Sarah ===== #125001 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jun 16, 2012 8:06 pm Subject: Pilgrimage in India, Ch 2, 3. nilovg Dear friends, Renunciation, nekkhamma, is another of the perfections the Buddha had fulfilled. We read in the “Dialogues of the Buddha”, “The Great King of Glory” (Dígha Nikåya XVII), that the Buddha told Ånanda that he was once the Great King of glory in a former life. He was surrounded by all the pleasant things of life, he dwelt in beautiful palaces and had innumerable possessions. The rival kings in the region of the East came to see him and asked him to be their teacher. The Great King of Glory taught them the five precepts. The king was an example of virtue; he also practised dåna, he gave abundantly to those who were in need. He reflected wisely on his wealth and knew that this was the result of previous kusala kamma; the result of generosity in the past, of moderation and of restraint. We read that he could attain the four rúpa-jhånas (absorption concentration of the fine- material sphere) and practised the four Brahma-vihåras (divine abidings). This shows that he did not lead a life of indulgence in sense pleasures and that he was full of wisdom. When the queen thought that the end of his life was drawing near she tried to induce him to cling to life and to his possessions. The king told her that she should not speak thus but that she should address him in a different way. We read: “Thus, O Queen, should you address me-- The nature of all things near and dear to us, O King, is such that we must leave them, divide ourselves from them, separate ourselves from them. Pass not away, O King, with longing in your heart. Sad is the death of him who longs, unworthy is the death of him who longs. Yours, O King, are these four and eighty thousand cities, the chief of which is the royal city of Kusåvatí. Cast away desire for those, long not after life...” We read that the queen wept and shed tears. She then wiped away her tears and spoke to the king as he had told her. The king died full of noble thoughts (the Brahma-vihåras) and was reborn in the world of Brahma. The king had understood that all things in life are impermanent and that he should not cling to them. Although he possessed everything that is pleasant to the senses he was not enslaved to his possessions. He practised renunciation. The understanding that all that is dear to us will not last may be only intellectual understanding acquired through thinking about our life. This kind of understanding cannot achieve detachment from the things we are clinging to. There is a wisdom of a higher level, that is, the wisdom that directly experiences the arising and falling away of nåmas and rúpas appearing through the six doors. When this wisdom has been developed it can finally lead to complete detachment from all nåmas and rúpas. The Buddha had developed this wisdom during his lives as a Bodhisatta. He could not have become a Buddha by only thinking about realities. When he attained enlightenment his wisdom could bring about complete detachment. ****** Nina. #125002 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sat Jun 16, 2012 10:37 pm Subject: Re: Thinking stories about ourselves. A victim? rjkjp1 Hi Lukas She asked if you really want to understand and Sukin and me both vouched for you. So she said it is time to meet. She can come to Europe or you come here....lett's decide soon. I told her about your problems and she said understading is the best thing in life. Robert --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > > hej Rob K. > > If there will be also opportunity to rise this small request to Acharn. If she would come to Europe again if we would sponsor her trip and accomodation? That's the question > > And by the way: > Because that is easier if she come, because i know not only me want like to meet her , but also Alan and his boys. > And I actually have an opportunity to come in August, but I would rather give this money for her to come, if this is only possible. The rest of accomodation funds, can be arrange i think so. > > Best wishes > Lukas > #125003 From: "sarah" Date: Sat Jun 16, 2012 10:49 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Cetasika in daily life -project -viriya 1 - welfare for the householders sarahprocter... Dear Dieter, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dieter Moeller" wrote: > (D: arising and falling away are the phenomena/dhammas of the 6senses media ..).... > > S: The Buddha talked repeatedly about the arising and falling away of the khandhas. What are the "6 senses media" if not khandhas? For example, eye-sense arising and falling away now is khandha. Seeing consciousness..... and so on..... all conditioned dhammas, all khandhas. > matter what terms, what labels we use, there are dhammas now arising and falling away which can be known. We can just talk about seeing, visible object, attachment and other dhammas. All that is important is the understanding of them when they appear now > > D: let me bring our understanding to the point: you state no difference between khandhas and the 6 senses media .... S: By "6 senses media" are you referring to the 6 pairs of ayatanas or something else? Khandhas and ayatanas refer to different aspects of paramattha dhammas. They are used to help us understand these realities from different approaches. For example, heat is a rupa. It shares all the characteristics of rupa with all other rupa khandha realities. Each one is different - it arises and falls away never to reappear. All day we cling to that reality, that khandha which has gone. We cling to nothing in effect. Heat is also an ayatana - an outer ayatana or what I think you refer to as "sense media". The ayatanas stress the coming together or meeting of realities. In order for heat rupa to be experienced, there has to be the "meeting" of body sense, heat, body consciousness, contact and other associated mental factors. No self, no being involved at all - just conditioned dhammas. The "miracle" of conditioned dhammas coming together at this moment. So the characteristic of heat, the reality of heat is just heat whether we refer to it as a khandha, an ayatana or a dhatu. However, the Buddha used different ways of description and explanation because he knew that just one kind of description was not enough for most listeners to understand realities as anatta. .... > The issue concerns how we distínguish realities and concepts and I believe this is important in Abhidhamma . .... S: and what the Abhidhamma stresses is the understanding of realities now, such as heat or hardness or thinking - whatever appears now. This is the only way that the confusion about realities and concepts will ever be resolved. ... > > I think there are texts in which the Buddha talked about arising and falling away of the khandhas , ... S: Yes, I've quoted many suttas in this regard. No question about it. This is why the Buddha taught about dhammas as khandhas - to stress the impermanence of each one. ... >one question however is whether it doesn'tt concern the khandha breakdown ( of Dependent Origination ) i.e. temporarily at death or finally (nibbana). ... S: it's all about now, realities now. The Buddha taught us to understand what is real at this very moment. This is the only way that DO, death and so on can be understood. ... > The other is the consideration whether the Buddha distinguished at all between realities and concepts. .... S: Heat is a reality which can be directly known now. 'Butter-jar" is a concept which can only ever be thought about. All the teachings are for understanding, testing out at this moment. Metta Sarah ===== #125004 From: "sarah" Date: Sat Jun 16, 2012 11:06 pm Subject: Re: Broken heart? 4. Fuel? sarahprocter... Dear Lukas & all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > >S: Sujin: "The disciples of the Buddha > > experienced many different ways of living. One knows one has strong lobha as > > long as one is not a sakadaagaamii [at the second stage of enlightenment]. > > Understanding knows what degree it is when it appears." ... > L: I think Alan mentioned one of sotapannas, and falling in love. I told him there was also Sumana, Anatthapindika doughter, she died of broken heart. But we didnt discuss this further. She was sad that her sisters, that were sotapannas, had a successful and happy marridge. She got sad and so depressed that she starved to death. This is possible to sakadagami even. I was so suprised by that. .... S: Ven Dhammadharo liked to refer to this story of Sumana as you know. How strong was the lobha? I don't know. A sotapanna's lobha will not be of the strength that they would break the precepts for sure. The following is the only account of Sumana (from Dhp commentary) with which I'm familiar. It stresses her rebirth in the Tusita realm, so clearly a high degree of kusala kamma before death. It doesn't directly mention a 'broken-heart' here as the disease for which she stopped taking her food, but perhaps that is understood. Anathapindika was a sotapanna, but very distressed about his daughter's death until he listened to the Buddha. ***** THE STORY OF SUMANADEVI ( Verse 18 ) Yamaka Vagga, Khuddaka Nikaya, Suttanta Pitaka THE DHAMMAPADA COMMENTARY Translated by the Department of Pali University of Rangoon, Burma, 1966 Idha nandati, pecca nandati, katapunno ubhayattha nandati. "punnam me katan" ti nandati bhiyyo nandatisuggatim gato. (One who has done good deeds rejoices here and rejoices afterwards too; he rejoices in both places. Thinking "I have done good deeds" he rejoices, he rejoices all the more having gone to a happy existence. Dhammapada, v. 18.) The Master while residing at Jetavana delivered this religious discourse beginning with "Here (in this world) one who has done good deeds rejoices" in connection with Sumanadevi. At Savatthi, two thousand monks used to take their meals daily in the house of Anathapindika and a similar number in the house of the eminent female-devotee Visakha. Whosoever wished to give alms in Savatthi, they used to do so after getting permission of these two. What was the reason for this? Even though a sum of a hundred thousand was spent in charity, the monks used to ask: "Has Anathapindika or Visakha come to our alms-hall ? " If told, "They have not", they used to express words of disapproval saying "What sort of a charity is this ?" The fact was that both of them (Anathapindika and Visakha) knew exceedingly well what the congregation of monks liked, as also what ought to be done befitting the occasion. When they supervised, the monks could take food according to their liking, and so all those who wished to give alms used to take those two with them. As a result, they (Anathapindika and Visakha) could not get the opportunity to serve the monks in their own homes. Thereupon, pondering as to who could take her place and entertain the congregation of monks with food, and finding her son's daughter, Visakha made her take the place. She started serving food to the congregation of monks in Visakha's house. Anathapindika too made his eldest daughter, Mahasubhadda by name, officiate in his stead. While attending to the monks, she used to listen to the Dhamma. She became a Sotapanna and went to the house of her husband. Then he (Anathapindika) put Cullasubhadda in her place. She too acting likewise became a Sotapanna and went to her husband's house. Then his youngest daughter Sumanadevi was assigned the place. She, however, attained the fruition of sakadagami. Though she was only a young maiden, she became afflicted with so severe a disease that she stopped taking her food and wishing to see her father sent for him. Anathapindika received the message while in an alms-house. At once he returned and asked her what the matter was. She said to him, 'Brother, what is it ?' He said, 'Dear, are you talking in delirium?' Replied she, 'Brother, I am not delirious.' He asked, 'Dear, are you in fear?' and she replied, 'No, I am not, brother.' Saying only these words she passed away. Though a Sotapanna, the banker was unable to bear the grief that arose in him for his daughter and after having had the funeral rites of his daughter performed, approached the Master weeping. Being asked: 'Householder, what makes you come sad and depressed, weeping with a tearful face?', he replied, 'Lord, my daughter Sumanadevi has passed away.' 'But, why do you lament? Isn't death common to all beings ?' 'Lord, this I am aware of, but the fact that my daughter, who was so conscious of a sense of shame and fear of evil, was not able to maintain her self-possession at the time of her death and passed away talking in delirium, has made me very depressed.' 'But, noble banker, what was it that she said ?' 'When I addressed her as "Dear Sumana", she said, "What is it, dear brother? "* 'Then when I asked her "Dear, are you talking in delirium ?", she replied "I am not talking in delirium, brother". 'When I asked her "Are you in fear, dear?", she replied "Brother, I am not". Saying this much she passed away.' Thereupon the Master told him, 'Noble banker, your daughter was not talking in delirium.' When asked why she spoke like that, the Master replied, 'It is because of your lower spiritual position; indeed your daughter held a higher position than you did in the attainment of the path (magga) and fruition (phala); you are only a Sotapanna but your daughter was a sakadagami; it was because of her higher position in the attainment of path and fruition that she spoke to you in that way'. The banker asked, 'Is that so Lord ?', and the Master affirmed saying, 'It is so'. When asked, 'Where is she reborn at present?' the Master said, 'In the Tusita heaven, O householder'. Then the banker made this remark, 'Lord, having rejoiced here in this world in the midst of kinsmen, now again, after passing away, my daughter has been reborn in a place of joy'. Thereupon, the Master told him, 'Yes, banker, the diligent, whether they are householders or samanas, surely rejoice in this world as well as in the next', and uttered this stanza. Idha nandati, pecca nandati, katapunno ubhayattha nandati. "punnam me katan" ti nandati bhiyyo nandatisuggatim gato. (One who has done good deeds rejoices here and rejoices afterwards too; he rejoices in both places. Thinking "I have done good deeds" he rejoices, he rejoices all the more having gone to a happy existence. Dhammapada, v. 18.) ***** Metta Sarah ===== #125005 From: "sarah" Date: Sat Jun 16, 2012 11:17 pm Subject: Re: Broken heart? sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: >...Alan mentioned on meeting when he met Acharn at hospital, when her father was dying. That was very inspiring to hear. He told me that he was suprised that she was discussing Dhamma with him, when her father was dying. I asked if she was said at that moment. Alan mentioned, that she was not. I think this is a benefit of developing more understanding in life. No sadness. No grieve, No lamentation. And than we just know, no matter what happens in life, for that moment no conditions to condition A grieve. Imposible for all kind of sorrow to arise, cause there is no cause for that time. ... S: I think we need to be careful about thinking like this. As I just quoted, Anathapindika was very distressed when his daughter passed away. Many, many examples.....very ordinary and common. I was staying with K.Sujin and her father just before he died and not so long afterwards. It's not correct to say that there was no sadness or grief! Of course there was. Different moments! It can be a kindness or consideration not to show or pour out our grief, however. When K.Sujin (or anyone else) helps others with Dhamma and is concerned for their welfare, of course no grief at such moments. No one can have kusala all the time. Better not to speculate about others' cittas, I find. Otherwise, just more stories and speculations.... If we think that there will be no sadness, no grief when understanding develops it's some kind of unrealistic expectation - bound to lead to more disappointment, more sadness! Any dhamma at all - we never know by conditions.....no expectations of others or ourselves is best.... Metta Sarah ===== #125006 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Jun 16, 2012 11:39 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Thinking stories about ourselves. A victim? sarahprocter... Hi Lukas, Rob K & Sukin, >R: She asked if you really want to understand and Sukin and me both vouched for you. >So she said it is time to meet. >She can come to Europe or you come here....lett's decide soon. > >I told her about your problems and she said understading is the best thing in life. ... S: "Understanding is the best thing in life" is always her answer, THE answer. Wow - interesting that she'd consider a trip to Europe for dh discussions. A few years ago she told some of us that she was not going to travel anymore outside Asia now she's in her 80s. If she does, we'd join for sure as I can combine it with a family visit. Others in Europe and N.America might join too. Metta Sarah ===== #125007 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jun 16, 2012 11:43 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cetasika in daily life -project -viriya 1 - welfare for the householders nilovg Dear Dieter, Op 15-jun-2012, om 17:39 heeft Dieter Moeller het volgende geschreven: > However due to the deep(er) exploration of the Dhamma we find this > distinction in Abhidhamma , so that one may wonder why for this > issue your perspective is not mine ( 'Suttanist) and my perspective > is not yours ('Abhidhammika') :-) --------- N: I am disinclined to see the teaching expounded in the Suttanta and in the Abhidhamma as different. Also in the suttas we find many passages on paramattha dhammas, and also when the Buddha spoke by way of sammutti sacca this was in order to explain paramattha dhammas. --------- Heard in a Thai recording and I thought of you: Understanding D.O. is not different from vipassanaa ~naa.na. Without satipa.t.thaana we just think of the story of D.O., of the concept of it. We do not understand characteristics. We listen and consider and we begin to understand why ignorance is a condition for sa"nkhaara. Kamma conditions vi~n~naa.na, the rebirth- consciousness. It is the fruit of past kamma, and we can see how the results are so different when looking at humans and animals. Naama is different from ruupa, we can understand more and more and in detail the characteristics of naama and ruupa. Even when listening to Dhamma now we can begin to understand D.O. If there would not have been rebirth-consciousness there would not be any reality now. There are aayatanas, we can understand D.O. through the six doorways. The second vipassanaa ~naa.na is direct understanding of conditions. There is no self who can do this or that. Whatever arises, sati included, does so because of the appropriate conditions. Nobody can force the arising of any reality. ------- N: I find it very good how Kh Sujin stresses that only by knowing characteristics of naama and ruupa, by satipa.t.thaana, we can understand D.O. There is so little use of just thinking stories about D.O. , knowing the classifications and terms. Besides, there is always "me", "me", when we are doing so. No way to really grasp what D.O. is. The real purpose of the teaching of D.O. is teaching anattaa. But this is not a mere word. Characteristics of naama and ruupa should be understood, when they appear: now. That is the way to penetrate the meaning of anattaa. ------ Nina. #125008 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sat Jun 16, 2012 11:52 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Thinking stories about ourselves. A victim? rjkjp1 Hi lukas You might enjoy this video of a drug taking problem kids change to a buddhist. A bit heavy on the "meditation is the way" for me, but the message is still useful. His dad is steven levine of " who dies" fame. A rather good book http://www.cultureunplugged.com/documentary/watch-online/play/7860/Meditate-and-\ Destroy #125009 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jun 17, 2012 12:34 am Subject: Problems in life. nilovg Dear Ken H, Lukas, and all, I was considering the way Kh Sujin answers people's requests for advice. Ken, I also thought of you, re abortion Rob K mentioned the other day, and your reaction that this is a highly sensitive issue. I would like you to be happy about the Dhamma. Kh Sujin would never judge anybody about such issues. It is such a heavy decision and mostly it would not be taken lightly by the persons concerned. Rob K quoted an example of a monk giving advice about abortion, but that is a different matter. Monks are supposed to live like arahats, they cannot take any life or drink. They have to follow the rules of the Vinaya. In case of any problem, for example, addiction to alcohol, or suffering from a loss, people may seek advice from Kh Sujin. She will answer that so long as one is not a sotaapanna there are conditions to kill or to be enslaved to alcohol. Then she will bring people back to the present moment: now you are not drinking, not killing, you are just thinking. Even thinking now is a conditioned naama, not "your" thinking. Or seeing, is there no seeing now, know it, understand it as only a naama. This is satipa.t.thaana and the only way eventually leading to enlightenment. Instead of worrying or being distressed we can be happy about the Dhamma. As Sarah said to Dieter: All the teachings are for understanding, testing out at this moment. ------ Nina. #125010 From: "philip" Date: Sun Jun 17, 2012 3:35 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Thinking stories about ourselves. A victim? philofillet Hi Robert K and Lukas I definitely advocate meditation for drug addicts, the dopamine pleasure of lobha-rooted meditation as a healthy substitue for the dopamine of drugs, and Lukas is wise enough to understand that meditation as taught today is rooted in lobha so there needn't be the wrong view of meditators who foolishly believe they are on the path, he can use it as yoga. Staying off drugs is his first concern, more immediate concern even than meetiing A. Sujin. I don't believe she will help him stay off drugs, tgere needs to be a brain/body pleasure substitue, in my opinion. I will find out myself tgis summer when I go to Quebec, will meditate a lot to avoid the need for tge drugs, which I can't get in Japan because of the strict laws. Of cpurse tge understanding shared by AS is supreme, but opiates are a supreme beast in a different way. phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > Hi lukas > You might enjoy this video of a drug taking problem kids change to a buddhist. > > A bit heavy on the "meditation is the way" for me, but the message is still useful. > His dad is steven levine of " who dies" fame. A rather good book > > http://www.cultureunplugged.com/documentary/watch-online/play/7860/Meditate-and-\ Destroy > #125011 From: "philip" Date: Sun Jun 17, 2012 8:16 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Thinking stories about ourselves. A victim? philofillet Hello again I used "dopamine" but it probably doesn't have much or anything to do with that proven benefit of meditation, the activation of the frontal lobes or whatever it is those studies on meditators show. But I do believe the lobha-rooted pleasure arising from meditation can help replace or weaken a drug dependency. A far less harmful dependency is substituted, in conjunction with other treatment. phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > Hi Robert K and Lukas > > I definitely advocate meditation for drug addicts, the dopamine pleasure of lobha-rooted meditation as a healthy substitue for the dopamine of drugs, and Lukas is wise enough to understand that meditation as taught today is rooted in lobha so there needn't be the wrong view of meditators who foolishly believe they are on the path, he can use it as yoga. Staying off drugs is his first concern, more immediate concern even than meetiing A. Sujin. I don't believe she will help him stay off drugs, tgere needs to be a brain/body pleasure substitue, in my opinion. I will find out myself tgis summer when I go to Quebec, will meditate a lot to avoid the need for tge drugs, which I can't get in Japan because of the strict laws. Of cpurse tge understanding shared by AS is supreme, but opiates are a supreme beast in a different way. > > phil > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > > > Hi lukas > > You might enjoy this video of a drug taking problem kids change to a buddhist. > > > > A bit heavy on the "meditation is the way" for me, but the message is still useful. > > His dad is steven levine of " who dies" fame. A rather good book > > > > http://www.cultureunplugged.com/documentary/watch-online/play/7860/Meditate-and-\ Destroy > > > #125012 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jun 17, 2012 9:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Problems in life. sarahprocter... Dear Nina, Azita & all, >________________________________ > From: Nina van Gorkom >I was considering the way Kh Sujin answers people's requests for >advice. Ken, I also thought of you, re abortion Rob K mentioned the >other day, and your reaction that this is a highly sensitive issue. I >would like you to be happy about the Dhamma. Kh Sujin would never >judge anybody about such issues. It is such a heavy decision and >mostly it would not be taken lightly by the persons concerned. Rob K >quoted an example of a monk giving advice about abortion, but that is >a different matter. Monks are supposed to live like arahats, they >cannot take any life or drink. They have to follow the rules of the >Vinaya. ... S: Yes, I was going to mention in that context that the Parajika offense is for the monk, the lay-person. Azita, do you remember, a long time ago, you brought up this sensitive topic in the context of your work in a hospital theatre as a nurse. I may be wrong, but as I recall, sometimes you had to assist in such operations. K.Sujin's response, from my memory, was that these are all stories about situations and that then, like now, there are so many different dhammas and awareness can be aware anytime. She didn't say "change your job" or "say you can't do that" or anything else. It was just ordinary, daily life - develop understanding. As Nina said she always stresses that only a sotapanna will no longer take intoxicants, kill and so on. A man may be a monk for a long time following good Vinaya and then there may be conditions for all kinds of addictions to manifest if he disrobes or in another life-time if he is not a sotapanna yet. Azita, do you remember when the discussion was (Burma - beginning, end? India - which year?) and then maybe I can find it and transcribe it. Btw, Azita, how are your daughters and grand-children getting on? How's life in Cairns? Any chance of joining us in Bkk end Aug or next Jan? Metta Sarah ===== #125013 From: "sarah" Date: Sun Jun 17, 2012 9:20 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Thinking stories about ourselves. A victim? sarahprocter... Hi Phil, Lukas & all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > Of course the understanding shared by AS is supreme, but opiates are a supreme beast in a different way. .... S: I think you made many good points. If we're sick (and drug addiction is a very serious sickness), we need to take the appropriate medicine of whatever kind as you've pointed out. KS would agree and stress the importance of understanding no matter where or when. Best wishes for your trip back to Canada. Perhaps you'll have a chance to talk to Ned's family as well as spending time with your parents, brother and 'good' friends. Metta Sarah ===== #125014 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Jun 17, 2012 10:29 am Subject: Re: Audio 2012 "Do you really know breath?" epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear Pt, Jessica, Rob E & all, > > Here is an extract from our recent discussions in KK between K.Sujin & Jessica on understanding of breath which you may find interesting and relevant to recent discussions. K.Sujin likes to help us to see the ignorance of realities at the present moment! We all appreciated Jessica's contributions to the discussions with her good humour. > ***** > Jessica: I think what you're saying - no choice of object and place as object of awareness. Studying the Anapanasati Sutta, it's tempting to think of the breathing. Like Satipatthana Sutta, there's contemplation of different... body, kayanupassana. I guess there's no understanding when reading those suttas. There's a tendency to focus on a particular object. > > KS: Do you really know breath to be the object of right understanding? > > Jes: Sometimes do, sometimes not. > > KS: "Sometimes do" is not the understanding of breath because if there is the understanding of breath, you know breath anytime. I would like to understand this statement better. It suggests the level of understanding at which insight into the breath is a steady knowledge that arises at any time it is needed, which in my knowledge is only when it becomes a "power," a very advanced state. Is this what K. Sujin is referring to, and does that mean that she considers that one cannot know the breath until the degree of insight into those special rupas is a power? > Jes: I cannot know. > > KS: So how can you have breath as the object of understanding? It's only wanting to have it, selecting it to be [the] object to develop. Why not any reality because there is ignorance of everything when there's no right understanding of it? This suggests that when there is prior knowledge of breath as object it can be the object of understanding at any time, but when there is no steady ability to know the breath rupas, then it is wishful thinking and lobha - just the expression of attachment and desire. *** > KS: We don't have to use the word rupa if we don't know that that characteristic cannot experience at all. It has its own characteristic, like cold is cold, hot is hot, solidity is hard, something like that. It has its own characteristic. No one can make it to be that way. So what's breath? You call it breath, but what is it? > > Jes: That is the wind, movement, that's the air going... > > KS: So it's like the air or what? It does not appear now, so what appears? It depends on right understanding whether it's enough to be condition for the arising of awareness... But if sati is not there, ...it's just normal rupa in daily life without any understanding. What is the characteristic of the breath rupa when it is known, not just as the passage of air, but as the object of knowledge? Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - #125015 From: "philip" Date: Sun Jun 17, 2012 1:41 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Thinking stories about ourselves. A victim? philofillet Hi Lukas, Sarah all One problem is that if Lukas' exposure to meditation is thrpugh Goenka, it is impossible to do without wrong view, the technique is advocated is so forcefully top down. Yoga might be best....breath yoga. So pleasant!! Better than alcohol for me at least... Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > > Hi Phil, Lukas & all, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > Of course the understanding shared by AS is supreme, but opiates are a supreme beast in a different way. > .... > S: I think you made many good points. If we're sick (and drug addiction is a very serious sickness), we need to take the appropriate medicine of whatever kind as you've pointed out. > > KS would agree and stress the importance of understanding no matter where or when. > > Best wishes for your trip back to Canada. Perhaps you'll have a chance to talk to Ned's family as well as spending time with your parents, brother and 'good' friends. > > Metta > > Sarah > ===== > #125016 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Jun 17, 2012 2:56 pm Subject: Re: ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' epsteinrob Hi pt, and Rob K. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > It seems heart-base arises by default in the "heart area" so to speak, with other kalapas around it forming a physical heart, if it can be put that way. Is there an explanation in the texts why is it that heart base is tied to the "heart area". More like the heart function, rather than location. The rupas that are represented by the heart and blood must form supporting conditions for the heart-base to arise. > I mean, as far as a dhamma is concerned, I wouldn't have thought that a location (which seems like a concept to me) in timespace would be one of its individual characteristics. I would think that the kalapas that are represented by heart and blood would serve as conditions for the arising of heart base, but conditions are not characteristics. > Further, as you've mentioned in your old post, even if there was no heart, or the blood was artificial, heart base would still arise in the same area. So, I'm wondering how is that connection between a dhamma (ultimate) and a location (which seems like a concept to me) explained, if at all? Thanks. Where we see 'heart' and 'blood' there are actually certain types of kalapas arising. Seems to me that the 'heart and blood' which correspond to the particular rupas involved can arise as long as the heart, artificial or otherwise, is doing the function of the heart, pumping blood, etc. Whatever connection that all has, it boils down to rupas and supporting conditions, and isn't dependent on the type of conventional substance that is involved. I know my unschooled thoughts aren't of great value on their own - maybe Rob K. can say if I am on the right track. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - #125017 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Jun 17, 2012 3:05 pm Subject: Re: ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' epsteinrob Hi Rob K., and pt. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > It seems heart-base arises by default in the "heart area" so to speak, with other kalapas around it forming a physical heart, if it can be put that way. Is there an explanation in the texts why is it that heart base is tied to the "heart area". I mean, as far as a dhamma is concerned, I wouldn't have thought that a location (which seems like a concept to me) in timespace would be one of its individual characteristics. > +++++++++ > Dear Pt, > it's like asking why the cakkhu-pasada rupa is located in the physical eye, why not in the big toenail? > Why do humans have two legs; why is pali spoken in the deva worlds; why do buddhas always arise in jambudipa; why are there hell realms; when did it all begin. > This is just the nature of the universe it is not explained why these things are this way in Dhamma. Your other post impressed me where you seemed to indicate that we can use common sense without violating paramatha. It sort of makes sense that the rupas that support heart-base would occur in what we understand as heart and blood, and that eye-base would reside in the eye, etc. The idea that some people have that such concepts as eye and ear must be totally and completely separate from dhammas makes little sense. Why should they be separate in location, or not have some sort of synchrony to their functions? In the scripture that was recently cited by Nina about the distinction between the 'ear' as a concept and the 'ear' as the organ of hearing in paramatha terms, that the ear in paramatha terms is not the 'lump of flesh' but is the ear-base that recides within a specific location within the ear. I think we can understand that the ear-base is not in the same dimension as the 'lump of flesh' we call the ear, and yet there is some sort of correspondence there, and that is okay. I like your idea, as I paraphrase it, of not turning Dhamma into a torturous philosophical exercise, but to let it be a support for actually understanding what exists. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = #125018 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Jun 17, 2012 3:15 pm Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > S: No. As you suggest, pariyatti and wise reflection on dhammas precedes the panna of satipatthana which again needs to be developed before it is insight level. > > However, without pariyatti panna, wise reflection and understanding of (concepts of) dhammas now, there cannot be the arising and development of satipatthana (the direct understanding of realities). Thank you, that is helpful. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - #125019 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Jun 17, 2012 3:19 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Dhs epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > S: The only way is the development of understanding and awareness now of the present reality. If that is thinking or attachment or trying this or that - all dhammas that can be directly known now. Never and self involved as you've been stressing to Alex. That is hopeful, that the dhammas involved can be directly known, even though concepts are there as object of thinking. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - #125020 From: "aungsoeminuk" Date: Sun Jun 17, 2012 3:20 pm Subject: Dhamma aungsoeminuk Dear Dhamma Friends, Dhammo rakkhati dhammacaari. This is true. If you practice dhamma then you will practically see it. Dhamma Rakkhita #125021 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Jun 17, 2012 3:23 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Dhs epsteinrob Hi Phil. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > How can one be aware of anything with so much commentary going on? The best I can do is see that all of that is just sort of putting the finger on the scale, constantly trying to change or adjust what has already happened without any control, to turn it into something more pleasant or easier to fit into one's conceptual framework. It's kind of funny in a way, if it weren't so annoying. > > .... > > What do you expect when you spend so much time on the internet writing posts full of conceptualization and proliferation about dhammas? The observation I made above does not just apply to me, but I'm sure you enjoyed jumping on it. > Every post you write (and yes you write very very well) at DSG full of your commentary/opinuon/paraphrased undwrstanding will condition more of the same when you're away from the computer as well, that's pretty obvious. I'm not sure if it works that way, but in any case if you actually read the posts on dsg you will see that probably a large majority of my posts are questions about Dhamma and receipt of answers to Dhamma questions from Sarah or others, not vehicles for speculation and rampant conceptualization as you may think. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - #125022 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Jun 17, 2012 3:34 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Dhs epsteinrob Hi Rob K., and Phil. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: Rob E.: > > > > How can one be aware of anything with so much commentary going on? ... Phil: > > What do you expect... Every post you write...full of your commentary/opinion/paraphrased understanding will condition more of the same... > Dear phil and rob > Does it matter whether there is commentary or not. Thinking has to be known as it is. Thanks, Rob, that is a good point. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - #125023 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jun 17, 2012 5:36 pm Subject: Pilgrimage in India, Ch 2, 4. nilovg Dear friends, As a Bodhisatta he had accumulated renunciation in many different lives. We read in the “Discourse on Ghatikåra” (Middle Length Sayings II, no 81) that he renounced worldly life for the “homeless life” when he was born into a brahman family as Jotipåla, at the time of the Buddha Kassapa. Together with his friend the Potter Ghatikåra he visited the Buddha Kassapa and listened to the Dhamma. Jotipåla decided to renounce worldly life and to become a monk. He was ordained by the Buddha Kassapa. In his last life the Buddha, when he was born as Prince Siddhattha, renounced again his worldly life. He met on his way to the park, outside the palace, an old person, a sick person and he saw a corpse. Thus, he was confronted with old age, sickness and death; he considered how nobody can escape these. When he was on his way to the park for the fourth time he met a monk and then he decided to renounce worldly life in order to seek the truth. He who in a former life as Prince Vessantara had given up his wife and children renounced again his family life, his life with Queen Yasodhåra and his new-born son Råhula. Some people do not understand how he could leave his new-born son. However, after he had attained enlightenment he gave his son the greatest gift a father could possibly give his son: he taught him Dhamma and at the age of twenty Rahula reached the end of lobha (attachment), dosa (aversion) and moha (ignorance), when he attained arahatship. The Buddha renounced all in order to teach others to develop the wisdom leading to the end of clinging. During our pilgrimage we had many conversations about detachment. Sometimes fellow-guests of the hotels where we stayed happened to drop into the monk’s room where we were sitting on the floor, talking about right understanding of our life. They would join in our conversation and ask questions about the Buddha’s teachings and about detachment. For many people the goal of life is enjoyment of pleasant things which can be experienced through eyes, ears, nose, tongue and bodysense. They are afraid that the Buddha’s teachings will take the “spice” out of life. However, the Buddha taught the “Middle Way” which is the development of right understanding of all phenomena of life. We do not have to force ourselves not to enjoy the pleasant things of life but we can develop right understanding of whatever reality appears through one of the six doors, be it enjoyment, generosity or any other reality. Some people think that for the development of right understanding it is necessary to retire from worldly life. However, we should not force ourselves to lead a life for which we have no accumulations. Both monks and laypeople can develop the eightfold Path and attain enlightenment. ****** Nina. #125024 From: "philip" Date: Sun Jun 17, 2012 8:06 pm Subject: spd 31 understanding the characteristic of citta. philofillet Dear group Here is today's passage from Survey of Paramattha Dhammas by Sujin Boriharnwanaket: "When we study citta we should not believe that we can immediately have clear understanding of the chracteristic of citta. Moreover, the study of citta should not be motivated by the desire to be a peson with a great deal of knowledge about cita. The understanding acquired from study can be an accumulated condition, or sankarakkhanda (the khanda including all cetasikas, also all sobhana or beautiful cetasikas, except feeling and remembrance) for the arising of sati of satipatthana. Sati can be aware of the characteristic of citta that is naama, the element that experiences an object at this very moment. In the way, panna can eliminate the wrong view that takes all realities for self. This should be the aim of our study of the Dhamma." (64) (end of passage) #125025 From: "philip" Date: Sun Jun 17, 2012 8:21 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Dhs philofillet Dear Rob E > The observation I made above does not just apply to me, but I'm sure you enjoyed jumping on it. Yes, we enjoy our defilements, I enjoy writing things that I hope at the time will be irritating to you. That is just the way it works, nothing to be done about it for now. There may be conditions for not disliking you and therefore not writing antagonistic things in the future, no way to say. DSG seems to be a pocket of hostility for me, that I don't have in daily life. I guess it has to feed somewhere. > > Every post you write (and yes you write very very well) at DSG full of your commentary/opinuon/paraphrased undwrstanding will condition more of the same when you're away from the computer as well, that's pretty obvious. > > I'm not sure if it works that way, but in any case if you actually read the posts on dsg you will see that probably a large majority of my posts are questions about Dhamma and receipt of answers to Dhamma questions from Sarah or others, not vehicles for speculation and rampant conceptualization as you may think. > Ph: Hmm, I don't read your posts often, that's true, there are too many of them and they are too long for me. Their frequency and length led me to assume you are writing a lot of ideas or trying to explain your understanding, which must of course be "speculation and rampant conceptualization." I *have* seen your questions on occasion, and it is clear that they are not just leading questions a la alex. Kudos. Carry on, no further comment. Phil #125026 From: "sarah" Date: Sun Jun 17, 2012 10:19 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Problems in life. sarahprocter... Dear All, typo correction: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > S: Yes, I was going to mention in that context that the Parajika offense is for the monk, the lay-person. ... S: this should be: " *not * the lay-person". Metta Sarah ===== #125027 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sun Jun 17, 2012 10:46 pm Subject: Re: ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' ptaus1 Hi RobK, > RobK: it's like asking why the cakkhu-pasada rupa is located in the physical eye, why not in the big toenail? ... > This is just the nature of the universe it is not explained why these things are this way in Dhamma. Ok, thanks. Perhaps rephrasing the question: during a moment of satipatthana, when eye-base (or heart-base) is the object of citta with panna, does panna know the location of eye-base (heart-base) at the time? Best wishes pt #125028 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sun Jun 17, 2012 11:04 pm Subject: Re: ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' ptaus1 Hi RobK, > Quote: ... The highest > meaning has been declared by the Teacher, without transgressing the concept. So, > another wise man also should NOT, IN EXPLAINING THE HIGHEST MEANING OVERRUN A CONCEPT" < pt: Thanks for this and other quotes. I have to admit that I don't fully follow these English translations at this point, so I'll take the quotes to say what you say they are saying. > > pt: What am I missing? > ++++++++++++ > RobK: What you are missing is some common sense. > The Dhamma is not some sort of legalese whereby quibbles and argumentation over arcane technicalities take precedence over useful expanation. < pt: Ok, I'll hold you to that in future discussions :) > RobK: And the heart base is explained in detail and clarity in the Visuddimagga. < pt: It's good if that's how things are for you, I still don't understand most of it, hence the need to ask questions, but I understand that questioning might come across as if the validity of the text itself is being questioned. > RobK: It becomes a great obfuscation of Dhamma when confused Buddhists deliberately or unknowlingly try to use ultimate terms to wiggle out of accurate Dhamma. The paramattha terms, for them, rather than clarify has become an intellectual escape from seeing the vastness of Dhamma and the true dukkha of samsara. The medicine has become the source of their illness. < pt: I'm not sure what you are saying here, so I'll leave it at that if you don't mind. Best wishes pt #125029 From: "Lukas" Date: Sun Jun 17, 2012 11:36 pm Subject: Re: Thinking stories about ourselves. A victim? szmicio Dear Rob K, Sukin, > She asked if you really want to understand and Sukin and me both vouched for you. > So she said it is time to meet. > She can come to Europe or you come here....lett's decide soon. L: Than let me to arrange this money I told. In few days i give u details. I think everything will be good. It is much better if Acharn come to Europe, so many people would like to meet her. That is also my cousin brother. Best wishes Lukas #125030 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sun Jun 17, 2012 11:47 pm Subject: Re: ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > > Hi RobK, > > > RobK: it's like asking why the cakkhu-pasada rupa is located in the physical eye, why not in the big toenail? > ... > > This is just the nature of the universe it is not explained why these things are this way in Dhamma. > > > Ok, thanks. Perhaps rephrasing the question: during a moment of satipatthana, when eye-base (or heart-base) is the object of citta with panna, does panna know the location of eye-base (heart-base) at the time? > > Best wishes > pt Dear pt Without knowing the details od Dhamma there will never be any moment of satipatthana. Understandng that visible object, color, can only arise together with the 4 elements, even though seeing only experiences visible object, not the 4 elements, is a part of pariyatti. As is heart base, as is not imagining eyebase is outside the body of some other wrong idea. If one is so very caught up by conventional ideas from science say, as to think mind is based in the brain then satipatthana is not going to be a feature one needs to be too concerned with. Robert #125031 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jun 17, 2012 11:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Audio 2012 "Do you really know breath?" nilovg Dear Rob E, Op 17-jun-2012, om 2:29 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > > What is the characteristic of the breath rupa when it is known, not > just as the passage of air, but as the object of knowledge? > ------- N: First of all, breath is a ruupa is conditioned by citta. So long as we live we are dependent on breath, and at death there is the last breath. But we cling to it, we want to live. Through satipa.t.thaana there can be awarenes of breath when it appears, awareness of hardness, softness, heat, cold, motion or pressure. We can learn that it is only a very tiny ruupa, not mine. Pa~n~naa knows its characteristic and detaches from it. This object is so subtle and it is difficult to be aware of it and not to confuse it with a passage of air. ------ Nina. #125032 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jun 17, 2012 11:55 pm Subject: Awareness and thinking, no 1. nilovg Dear friends, This is an extract from a Thai recording, Pakinnaka (miscellaneous) no. 10. 0539 Awareness and thinking. Kh Santi: When there is mindfulness of realities, we can consider them, but, mindfulness is so short, there is no time to consider them. Acharn Sujin: There is still the idea of self who considers. When there is satipa.t.thaana we realize that what we began to understand on the level of pariyatti occurs actually now, at this moment. If we do not consider the reality appearing now, how can we know what naama is? If it is not known now it will not be known in the future either. Naama is an element that knows or experiences something, it is different from the ruupa that appears, such as visible object. Listening again and again is very valuable for the understanding on the level of pariyatti. Ruupa is entirely different from naama. When colour appears the element that knows can see it. The element that sees is the leader in knowing the object, it is not feeling, not remembrance. It knows different colours. Each colour is different because the conditions for different colours are varied. This is one level of understanding. There is another level of understanding: one begins to know that seeing now arises because of conditions. First there is no seeing and then seeing arises, it is a dhamma. First there is no hearing and then hearing arises, it is a dhamma. Because of listening one knows that that is the characteristic of dhamma. ------- Nina: An additional explanation: it is a dhamma, a conditioned reality, non-self. It arises entirely because of its own conditions. At first there is no seeing, then it arises and it falls away and after it has fallen away it is nowhere to be found. --------- Acharn: There is no need to give names to realities, one pays attention to the characteristic that appears. This is the way to know the difference between the reality that knows something and the reality that does not know anything. One is attentive to the characteristic that appears, little by little. Thinking still arises in between, such as thinking: “this is the reality that knows something”. Then there is thinking of a story, a concept. Sometimes there is no thinking and just awareness of the characteristic that appears. One can come to know the difference between the moments of thinking and the moments that there is no thinking. ------- Nina. #125033 From: "Lukas" Date: Sun Jun 17, 2012 11:58 pm Subject: Re: Thinking stories about ourselves. A victim? szmicio Dear Sarah, It is wonderful news. I still have so much faith to Acharn. When I hear her Dhamma it gives me so much shelter. I think this Dhamma brings real understanding of misery. And all miserable people should listen. I 've read sutta in kindred sayings. What is a right way and what is wrong way? Wrong way is that, from ignorance comes sankharas, from sankharas comes vinnanas...all grieve. This is how all this misery comes to be. all dukkha. And what is the right way? With the cesation of ignorance come the cesation of sankaras, with cesation of sankharas comes the cesation of vinnanas....and ceasation of all misery comes. This is how all the dukkha comes to an end. this is the right way. This is so true. I think even one moment with right understanding and all this misery comes to an end, even for while. So no practices, meditations, looking, wanting to understand, but understanding is that what brings less misery in life. Best wishes Lukas > Wow - interesting that she'd consider a trip to Europe for dh discussions. A few years ago she told some of us that she was not going to travel anymore outside Asia now she's in her 80s. If she does, we'd join for sure as I can combine it with a family visit. Others in Europe and N.America might join too. L: This is also a task for me, coming back home. Not to drink or indulge in intoxicants, but try to organise this trip, even a little. In Poland if it would be possible for her to visit, I am quite sure I can arrange some place and meetings for her and everyone interested, on the countryside. Best wishes Lukas #125034 From: "Lukas" Date: Mon Jun 18, 2012 12:00 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Thinking stories about ourselves. A victim? szmicio Dear Phil, I dont do meditation at least 3 and more years. Even here if I am asked to sit, I just sit. But usaully have a suttas with me, and read. Best wishes Lukas > One problem is that if Lukas' exposure to meditation is thrpugh Goenka, it is impossible to do without wrong view, the technique is advocated is so forcefully top down. Yoga might be best....breath yoga. So pleasant!! Better than alcohol for me at least... #125035 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Mon Jun 18, 2012 1:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Audio 2012 "Do you really know breath?" moellerdieter Hi Rob E, all, you wrote: "What is the characteristic of the breath rupa when it is known, not just as the passage of air, but as the object of knowledge?" I think Anapanasati Sutta ,MN 118, answers your question: (excerpt , trs.by Ven.Nyanatiloka http://www.budsas.org/ebud/word-of-buddha/wob4nt12.htm ) I. Whenever the disciple (1) mindfully makes a long inhalation or exhalation, or (2) makes a short inhalation or exhalation, or (3) trains himself to inhale or exhale whilst experiencing the whole (breath-) body, or (4) whilst calming down this bodily function (i.e. the breath)-at such a time the disciple dwells in 'contemplation of the body', full of energy, comprehending it, mindful, after subduing worldly greed and grief. For, inhalation and exhalation I call one amongst the corporeal phenomena. II. Whenever the disciple trains himself to inhale or exhale (1) whilst feeling rapture (piiti), or (2) joy (sukha), or (3) the mental functions (cittasankhaara), or (4) whilst calming down the mental functions-at such a time he dwells in 'contemplation of the feelings', full of energy, clearly comprehending them, mindful, after subduing worldly greed and grief. For, the full awareness of In- and Out-breathing I call one amongst the feelings. with Metta Dieter #125036 From: "philip" Date: Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:50 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Thinking stories about ourselves. A victim? philofillet Hi Lukas OK. But opiates are very powerful. Reading your post about organizing a trip to Europe for A Sujin is very encouraging though, you have a lot of faith in the Dhamma, more than me, excellent conditions. Maybe you can beat drugs, but I hope you continue to look for treatment and therapy (such as yoga) other than Dhamma. Please listen to good friends and good family members that are unrelated to your Dhamma friends too, if there are such people. And above all professionals who know how to fight drug addiction. Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > > Dear Phil, > I dont do meditation at least 3 and more years. Even here if I am asked to sit, I just sit. But usaully have a suttas with me, and read. > > Best wishes > Lukas > > > One problem is that if Lukas' exposure to meditation is thrpugh Goenka, it is impossible to do without wrong view, the technique is advocated is so forcefully top down. Yoga might be best....breath yoga. So pleasant!! Better than alcohol for me at least... > #125037 From: "philip" Date: Mon Jun 18, 2012 9:11 am Subject: Re: Thinking stories about ourselves. A victim? philofillet Lukas, this is a great post. I can really feel your confidence in understanding that frees not only from wrong practices but also drugs. I was inspired by your post and made a decision of my own, thank you. It might not last but these momentary decisions might gradually build up accumulated power. We can defeat our addictions through moments or right understanding. Phil > > Dear Sarah, > It is wonderful news. I still have so much faith to Acharn. When I hear her Dhamma it gives me so much shelter. I think this Dhamma brings real understanding of misery. And all miserable people should listen. I 've read sutta in kindred sayings. What is a right way and what is wrong way? Wrong way is that, from ignorance comes sankharas, from sankharas comes vinnanas...all grieve. This is how all this misery comes to be. all dukkha. And what is the right way? With the cesation of ignorance come the cesation of sankaras, with cesation of sankharas comes the cesation of vinnanas....and ceasation of all misery comes. This is how all the dukkha comes to an end. this is the right way. This is so true. I think even one moment with right understanding and all this misery comes to an end, even for while. > So no practices, meditations, looking, wanting to understand, but understanding is that what brings less misery in life. > > Best wishes > Lukas > > > Wow - interesting that she'd consider a trip to Europe for dh discussions. A few years ago she told some of us that she was not going to travel anymore outside Asia now she's in her 80s. If she does, we'd join for sure as I can combine it with a family visit. Others in Europe and N.America might join too. > > L: This is also a task for me, coming back home. Not to drink or indulge in intoxicants, but try to organise this trip, even a little. In Poland if it would be possible for her to visit, I am quite sure I can arrange some place and meetings for her and everyone interested, on the countryside. > > Best wishes > Lukas > #125038 From: "Ken H" Date: Mon Jun 18, 2012 10:25 am Subject: Re: Problems in life. kenhowardau Hi Nina, Thanks for your message; it explained a point I was trying to make some time ago when I said satipatthana was "for mass murderers and snow sweepers alike." I attracted some criticism for that. What a pity I wasn't able to explain it the way you have here: ----- > N: … She will answer that so long as one is not a sotaapanna there are conditions to kill or to be enslaved to alcohol. Then she will bring people back to the present moment: now you are not drinking, not killing, you are just thinking. Even thinking now is a conditioned naama, not "your" thinking. Or seeing, is there no seeing now, know it, understand it as only a naama. ----- Ken H #125039 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Jun 18, 2012 2:29 pm Subject: Re: Audio 2012 "Do you really know breath?" epsteinrob Hi Dieter. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dieter Moeller" wrote: > you wrote: > > "What is the characteristic of the breath rupa when it is known, not just as the passage of air, but as the object of knowledge?" > > I think Anapanasati Sutta ,MN 118, answers your question: > > (excerpt , trs.by Ven.Nyanatiloka http://www.budsas.org/ebud/word-of-buddha/wob4nt12.htm ) > > I. Whenever the disciple (1) mindfully makes a long inhalation or exhalation, or (2) makes a short inhalation or exhalation, or (3) trains himself to inhale or exhale whilst experiencing the whole (breath-) body, or (4) whilst calming down this bodily function (i.e. the breath)-at such a time the disciple dwells in 'contemplation of the body', full of energy, comprehending it, mindful, after subduing worldly greed and grief. For, inhalation and exhalation I call one amongst the corporeal phenomena. > > II. Whenever the disciple trains himself to inhale or exhale (1) whilst feeling rapture (piiti), or (2) joy (sukha), or (3) the mental functions (cittasankhaara), or (4) whilst calming down the mental functions-at such a time he dwells in 'contemplation of the feelings', full of energy, clearly comprehending them, mindful, after subduing worldly greed and grief. For, the full awareness of In- and Out-breathing I call one amongst the feelings. This seems like a very nice version of the sutta. I will read it some more. However, on the subject of the breath rupa, I think there is a more specific indication of what in the breath it is, since it is said to be something different from just the passage of the air. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - #125040 From: "Staisha" Date: Mon Jun 18, 2012 2:16 pm Subject: Question about Jhanacitta staisha_perry Hi Lina, I have not wrote here in a long time, and apologize if this is not written in correct formatting. Q: when there are jhanacitta, no matter for how long, there cannot be bhavanga- cittas in between? Why is this so? -Staisha Perry #125041 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Jun 18, 2012 2:55 pm Subject: Re: Problems in life. epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Nina, > > Thanks for your message; it explained a point I was trying to make some time ago when I said satipatthana was "for mass murderers and snow sweepers alike." I attracted some criticism for that. What a pity I wasn't able to explain it the way you have here: Still, Ken, not sure if you should back off your original point, even though I was one of the people who objected to it - at a moment of satipatthana, the murderer could have his akusala cetana to "murder" as the object of satipatthana, and it would be just as valid an object of awareness as a more kusala object for the snow sweeper. I think that may have been your point, which is valid, but it sounded like you were saying that it doesn't matter if you are a murderer or not, or that a murderer is equally likely to experience satipatthana, which I don't think is what you were saying. > ----- > > N: … She will answer that so long as one is not a sotaapanna there are conditions to kill or to be enslaved to alcohol. Then she will bring people back to the present moment: now you are not drinking, not killing, you are just thinking. Even thinking now is a conditioned naama, not "your" thinking. Or seeing, is there no seeing now, know it, understand it as only a naama. > ----- > > Ken H > #125042 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Jun 18, 2012 3:01 pm Subject: Broken heart? 7. The 'situation' - the story sarahprocter... Dear Lukas & all, Aren't we always thinking about another time, another situation, another scenario when life will be easier/more enjoyable/ with more awareness and so on? What about being aware now? ***** I said something more about thinking of what’s valuable in a certain situation. Sujin: "Now there is thinking about the situation, but that situation is not now. What happens if one dies now? Only thinking of a situation that does not come now. It indicates one’s attachment and clinging which will condition more in the future lives." ***** Metta Sarah ===== #125043 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Jun 18, 2012 3:07 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma sarahprocter... Dear Htoo & friends, __________________________ > From: aungsoeminuk >Dear Dhamma Friends, >Dhammo rakkhati dhammacaari. This is true. If you practice dhamma then you will practically see it. >Dhamma Rakkhita .... S: I was about to welcome a new member, but found it was an 'old' member who had posted before. I was trying to work it out when Htoo sent me an off-list note to say it was him:-)) "Dhammo rakkhati dhammacaari": One who lives with Dhamma is protected by Dhamma. Perhaps you can add a little more. Good to see that you can post again, Htoo. Let's hope conditions become a little easier in this regard. Metta Sarah ===== #125044 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Jun 18, 2012 3:39 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Broken heart? 7. The 'situation' - the story nilovg Dear Sarah, Op 18-jun-2012, om 7:01 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > Sujin: "Now there is thinking about the situation, but that > situation is not now. What > happens if one dies now? Only thinking of a situation that does not > come now. It > indicates one’s attachment and clinging which will condition more > in the future lives." ------- N: I am just reading to Lodewijk my letter about perfections, that is a report about another pilgrimage. How I was clinging to the situation of Dhamma discussions, not wanting to miss out. Now I understand more that what counts is awareness of the present reality, no matter where one is. ----- Nina. #125045 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Jun 18, 2012 3:44 pm Subject: Pilgrimage in India, Ch 2, 5 nilovg Dear friends, Our life is nåma and rúpa, arising because of conditions. If right understanding has been developed, paññå, not self, will perform the function of detachment from nåma and reupa. Therefore, “we” should not try to change our life; all that occurs is beyond control, it is anattå. What matters most is the development of right understanding just now, and that also is not self, it is anattå. This development is conditioned by listening to the teachings and considering them. If one truly has accumulations to retire from worldly life, the conditions in one’s life will lead to this without the need to force oneself. We all are attached to what we can experience through the senses. Attachment makes us enslaved. The more one obtains for oneself the more will one wish to have. Our wishes will never be satisfied. Even the more subtle attachment is harmful, unknowingly one accumulates more and more. Attachment conditions aversion because if one cannot satisfy one’s wishes there will be aversion. Not everyone can see the difference between the moments of attachment and the moments of unselfish loving kindness in one’s relationship with family and friends. Attachment is akusala, it makes us enslaved. Pure loving kindness is kusala, it should be cultivated. The Buddha cultivated loving kindness during his lives as a Bodhisatta, because he wanted to help all people, without preference for this or that person. Therefore, he left his family in order to seek the truth. We cannot force ourselves not to have attachment because we have accumulated it for such a long time. Is there not at this moment attachment to what we see? Attachment to what we see is a reality. It is different from the reality which is visible object and different from the reality which is the experience of visible object. Right understanding of these different characteristics can be developed. What is it we see? We think that we see people and different things and we are bound to be attached to what we see. However, through the eyes it is only visible object which appears, nothing else. When visible object appears there must also be the experience of visible object, otherwise visible object could not appear. It is not self which experiences visible object, but a kind of nåma. We take visible object for “something”, for “self”, and we take the experience of visible object for self. Sati, which is nåma, not self, can be mindful of the different realities that apppear, one at a time, and in this way there will be less clinging to the self. When we begin to realize that what is seen is merely visible object which appears through the eyes and which cannot be experienced, for example, through touch, paññå will realize visible object as it is: just visible object, a kind of rúpa, not something or somebody. We can begin to understand that thinking about what we see is another reality, different from visible object and different from seeing. There is no self, no person in visible object, it is only visible object. ****** Nina. #125046 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Jun 18, 2012 3:45 pm Subject: Awareness and Thinking, no 2. nilovg Dear friends, (continuation of the Thai recording) Kh Santi: What is being attentive to characteristics? Acharn: that is satipa.t.thaana. Kh Santi: this is not clear yet. Acharn: There cannot be clarity in the beginning. Understanding has to be developed and it is a long process: a development that takes a long time (ciira kala bhaavanaa). It is not possible that one is aware and then understands immediately. Clear understanding must lead to detachment. When there is sati-sampaja~n~na (sati and pa~n~naa), there is awareness of a characteristic and this is not thinking. Gradually there will be a clearer understanding, but this takes a long time. We have to remember the sutta on the knife handle one holds every day and that wears away very slowly. One does not notice how much is worn away every day. The reality that appears now, not anything else, should be known by pa~n~naa. The sotaapanna and all ariyans do not know anything else but the present reality, appearing through one of the six doors, very naturally. If one has desire for result, it is an impediment that deters the development of understanding. There must be three rounds of understanding the noble Truths: sacca ~naa.na, understanding of what has to be known and what the Path is; kicca ~naa.na, understanding of the task, that is, satipa.t.thaana; kata ~naa.na: understanding of what has been realized, the realisation of the truth. If there are not these three rounds one will not know the four noble Truths. Kh. Santi: I think of two kinds of people: someone who begins to be aware of realities, and someone who can explain the teachings to others but who is not aware of realities. Acharn: the second person just remembers what he has heard. But someone who has really understood realities can give explanations in many varied ways by means of his own understanding. One should know that there are different levels of understanding: the level stemming from listening, the level of considering the Dhamma one heard, and the level of satipa.t.thaana. If one does not know that there are these levels there cannot be the development of pa~n~naa. People usually just remember the story or concept of the Dhamma that they heard. Awareness and understanding the characteristics of realities is of a different level. Kh Chin: Are realities known through the mind-door? Acharn: Do not use any name. The characteristic of naama dhamma, the reality that experiences something, should be known. One may use the term mind-door but one may not know the characteristic of naama dhamma. Considering the Dhamma means to understand correctly, to understand more and more, gradually. So long as we do not understand the characteristics of naama and ruupa, there is still the idea of “us”, the idea of “we” understand. Even though we say that there is no self, only, citta, cetasika and ruupa, there is still the idea of self. ********** Nina. #125047 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Jun 18, 2012 3:53 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Question about Jhanacitta nilovg Dear Staisha, good you post again. Op 18-jun-2012, om 6:16 heeft Staisha het volgende geschreven: > Q: when there are jhanacitta, no matter for how long, there cannot > be bhavanga- cittas in between? ------ N: A beginner in jkhaana has only one moment of jhaanacitta, and then bhavanacittas arise to be followed by a new process of cittas experiencing visible object, sound or one of the other sense objects. But those who are skilled in jhaana can have many jhaanacittas without interruption by bhavangacittas, even for a long time. Bhavangacittas arise before there is a new process of cittas experiencing an object through one of the six doors. So long as there are jhaanacittas one is removed from sense-door process cittas. The person who is skilled in jhaana has seen the disadvantages of sense objects. -------- Nina. #125048 From: "ptaus1" Date: Mon Jun 18, 2012 4:31 pm Subject: Re: ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' ptaus1 Hi RobK, > > pt: Perhaps rephrasing the question: during a moment of satipatthana, when eye-base (or heart-base) is the object of citta with panna, does panna know the location of eye-base (heart-base) at the time? > RobK: Without knowing the details od Dhamma there will never be any moment of satipatthana. > Understandng that visible object, color, can only arise together with the 4 elements, even though seeing only experiences visible object, not the 4 elements, is a part of pariyatti. As is heart base, as is not imagining eyebase is outside the body of some other wrong idea. > If one is so very caught up by conventional ideas from science say, as to think mind is based in the brain then satipatthana is not going to be a feature one needs to be too concerned with. pt: Ok, so I guess what you are saying is that the "location" issue is part of pariyatti, though not necessarily satipatthana. Fair enough. Thanks. Best wishes pt #125049 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Jun 18, 2012 5:05 pm Subject: 2007 audio - 20. Seclusion now! sarahprocter... Dear Friends, The following transcript follows on from several DSG discussions with Alex and others about "going to the forest, leading a secluded life" and so on: ***** S: Back to the seclusion and "how about now?", we know that references to the forest like in the satipatthana Sutta are referring to ... KS: One is already there. S: .... the monks already there by accumulations.... KS: By their lives. S: ...because it's the natural place to go. Now in the Visuddhimagga, what about when we read something like "gone to the forest or an empty place: this signifies that he's found an abode favorable to the development of concentration of mindfulness of breathing"*.... KS: OK, what about going with akusala? S: Could be going with akusala or kusala. KS: Yes, why not? Anyone can go to the forest with akusala, unwholesome [S: cittas]. S: But then why does it say "an abode favorable to the development of concentration..."? KS: Yes, because concentration is not the understanding of reality at any time. S: But it suggests that it's favorable for something that is kusala because... KS: For those who have accumulations and some can even attain the Divine Eye. S: So suggesting those that perhaps have already developed samatha to such a degree, but then it goes on to say "For this bhikkhu's mind has long been dissipated among visible data....etc"**, so this doesn't suggest someone who has the accumulations naturally. KS: Did he suggest any layman? S: Maybe not. No layman, but even for a bhikkhu - because usually the way I respond or answer is, like in the Satipatthana Sutta - for those who have the accumulations and those who have already gone to the forest and those who have already developed samatha.... KS: Shall we postpone the development of panna from now on? S: Well, of course it's not what I'm advocating, but a lot of people today talk about developing jhana and they don't see it as.... KS: Excuse me, with understanding or without understanding about jhana at all? S: We would say without understanding, but they.... KS: "They"? Nothing to do with us. S: No, but someone quoted this passage which suggests.... KS: Excuse me, if there is no panna right now to understand this moment - whether it is calm or not, can anyone reach jhana, that stage of calmness? So it has start or begin from this moment. S: Yes, no matter what is says or what we read. KS: Yes. If there is no panna at this moment, how can it grow? S: No matter what the place ....."seclusion" has to be now. ***** *Vism: VIII,153. "Gone to the forest ...or to an empty place: this signifies that he has found an abode favourable to the development of concentration through mindfulness of breathing." **"For this bhikkhu's mind has long been dissipated among visible data, etc., as its object, and it does not want to mount the object of concentration-through-mindfulness-of-breathing; it runs off the track like a chariot harnessed to a wild ox." Metta Sarah p.s please note that all this series (20) of short discussion transcripts have been made from one morning's discussion at the Foundation which can be listened to at www.dhammastudygroup.org 2007-07-04A a-d (Bangkok). I remember it as a wonderful occasion with Han at my side. Many thanks to all who participated. =========== #125050 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Jun 18, 2012 5:53 pm Subject: Re: Some way to study dhs and atth sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, Great reflections on the Dhammasangani #124884. As you say, just different dhammas --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: >It seems so simply, but it's so deep and profound. seeing, hearing,..bodily impressions are avyakata dhammaa, there are all the time in our life, now. kusala and akusala dhammaa follows, without anyone there. Later as you say: >We just study them, but no expectations. Right understanding, that may come or not is really conditioned and this is sankhara khandha that must gradually accumulated. ... S: yes, "no expectations" - we make all sorts of plans, but we never know what dhammas will arise, will follow on..... so the way is just the understanding of what is conditioned now. Thanks for sharing your comments. Metta Sarah ===== #125051 From: "Lukas" Date: Mon Jun 18, 2012 6:32 pm Subject: Re: Thinking stories about ourselves. A victim? szmicio Dear Phil, > OK. But opiates are very powerful. L: Yes that is true. Know that I am alos listening to u. And consider treatments or your advices not to do bad, things. And I also have a faith in what your saying. >Reading your post about organizing a trip to Europe for A Sujin is >very encouraging though, you have a lot of faith in the Dhamma, more than me, excellent conditions. Maybe you can beat drugs, but I hope you continue to look for treatment and therapy (such as yoga) other than Dhamma. L: But, what kind of help? Now I am thinking of a group, but I think i need more direct help. Also I dont want to be spereated from Dhamma. I want more and more Dhamma. >Please listen to good friends and good family members that are unrelated to your Dhamma friends too, if there are such people. And above all professionals who know how to fight drug addiction. L: if u suggest me some kind of help i can get. Because now I dont see much options. Best wishes Lukas #125052 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Jun 18, 2012 6:32 pm Subject: Re: 2007 audio - 3. If no trying or forcing, then what? sarahprocter... Hi Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > Ph: In my case any such specific encouragement was short lived and more in the form of heightened sensitivity to harmfulness than any inspiration to help others. (Well, did go the extra mile to write that letter. By the way, Ned's father read a part of it out at thegathering, apparently found it very comforting, I offer that kusala of mine for you to rejoice in, enjoy it while you can, haha) ... S: Anumodana...rejoicing while I have the chance:-) ... > And its gone now, as was the very short-lived liberation from hosility to GOTIWUBTA. (guys on the internet who understand better than abhidhamma.) I think the really helpful thing in all this was not finding myself inclined to help others, but understanding a liitle better that that inclination is a dhamma, or many dhammas, and arises beyond control, or doesn't, and no grief if it doesn't and there is hostility ibstead. I now believe that what we do is not as important as our understanding of what we do, and the anattaness of it, a notion which was for awhile anathema to me. Perhaps it will be again someday, no way to know. .... S: Yes, I agree that the understanding of the various inclinations, various dhammas are all anatta, all beyond control is most helpful. As it is for us, so it is for others - just passing, conditioned dhammas. No person to have hostility towards - just dhammas beyond anyone's control. Metta Sarah ===== #125053 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Jun 18, 2012 6:35 pm Subject: Re: Hello dear friends! sarahprocter... Hi James, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Buddhatrue" wrote: >Phil wrote a lovely letter to his cousin's family and friends. Here it is" > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/124354 > > > > I read it. Very nice. It is difficult to say the right thing about such a situation, but it is good that Phil made an effort to be helpful. Very sweet. ... S: I agree. ... > Wow, you actually agree with me. Shocking! ;-)) Yes, there can be moments of mindfulness in-between moments of sloth/laziness. I would guess that how effective those moments are depend on how frequent they are. ... S: it is a little shocking, isn't it? Sloth/laziness is real too - can be known now, just like any other phenomena in life which 'appear' now. ... > Yes, my parents are doing well. My mother is going to retire this year so they will be able to relax and enjoy each some rest. Thanks for asking! I will go back to visit next year. ... S: Glad to hear it. Metta Sarah ===== #125054 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Jun 18, 2012 6:49 pm Subject: Re: Thinking stories about ourselves. A victim? sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > L: But, what kind of help? Now I am thinking of a group, but I think i need more direct help. Also I dont want to be spereated from Dhamma. I want more and more Dhamma. .... S: One thing you could do in addition to other help and in addition to the Dhamma support you have, would be to join a drug addiction discussion group on-line. I just did a quick google for "drug addiction discussion group" and at a quick glance saw several that might be good. Some would be run by medical advisors too. When Jon had a serious (rare) medical issue a long time ago, we found a medical discussion group for those with the same condition very helpful. One gets information and companionship from others with the same disorder. You can write and receive specific feedback anytime day or night. That's what I'd do. No need to travel for it. It was the finding of that medical group as being so useful that gave us the idea of a dhamma discussion group. Metta Sarah ==== #125055 From: "Lukas" Date: Mon Jun 18, 2012 7:14 pm Subject: Re: Thinking stories about ourselves. A victim? szmicio Dear Sarah, This is a good solution. I will do it. > > L: But, what kind of help? Now I am thinking of a group, but I think i need more direct help. Also I dont want to be spereated from Dhamma. I want more and more Dhamma. > .... > S: One thing you could do in addition to other help and in addition to the Dhamma support you have, would be to join a drug addiction discussion group on-line. I just did a quick google for "drug addiction discussion group" and at a quick glance saw several that might be good. Some would be run by medical advisors too. L: When I am here. I talk and get a lot of compasion and help from one anagarika who is also alkohol addicted person. He explain me I should go as fast as possible to anonymous alkoholics and drug addicted group. For him that was great help. He gave me a book of twelve steps, how to live with this kind of disease. Unfortunately this guy is leaving to the states so I will not have more support from him. That was really a bit of relife to know that are others like me. He said this is a disease, and no shame or anything. I told I will attend such kind of groups. But my brother told me: 'Yes lukas, there are such groups, were we live, but they are so anonymous you know (laught), that other day everyone in town know about u'. I told it to anagarika and he told very sure: 'So WHAT? So What? This is your business'. It was helpful. Best wishes Lukas #125056 From: Lukas Date: Mon Jun 18, 2012 7:18 pm Subject: To Phil. Dhamma recording szmicio Hi Phil, This is a recording with Acharn. Rob K posted it before. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkvgmKYO30k From one birth moment, to another. That's life. Best wishes Lukas #125057 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Jun 18, 2012 7:50 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Thinking stories about ourselves. A victim? sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > L: When I am here. I talk and get a lot of compasion and help from one anagarika who is also alkohol addicted person. He explain me I should go as fast as possible to anonymous alkoholics and drug addicted group. For him that was great help. He gave me a book of twelve steps, how to live with this kind of disease. Unfortunately this guy is leaving to the states so I will not have more support from him. That was really a bit of relife to know that are others like me. > He said this is a disease, and no shame or anything. I told I will attend such kind of groups. ... S: Good - this is exactly what some of us recommended a long time ago. ... >But my brother told me: 'Yes lukas, there are such groups, were we live, but they are so anonymous you know (laught), that other day everyone in town know about u'. I told it to anagarika and he told very sure: 'So WHAT? So What? This is your business'. It was helpful. ... S: Yes, 'so what?' - let others know. People will respect you for it. So common. Just dhammas! I'm glad you've had the support of the anagarika. Metta Sarah ===== #125058 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Jun 18, 2012 11:16 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Hello dear friends! nilovg Dear Phil, Op 18-jun-2012, om 10:35 heeft sarah het volgende geschreven: > James: Phil wrote a lovely letter to his cousin's family and > friends. Here it is" ----- N: I had missed your letter but now I read it. I was moved by it. Especially your last meeting with Ned, this is really impressive. ----- Nina. #125059 From: "Lukas" Date: Mon Jun 18, 2012 11:56 pm Subject: Re: Broken heart? 7. The 'situation' - the story szmicio Dear Sarah, > I said something more about thinking of what’s valuable in a certain situation. > > Sujin: "Now there is thinking about the situation, but that situation is not now. What > happens if one dies now? Only thinking of a situation that does not come now. It > indicates one’s attachment and clinging which will condition more in the future lives." > ***** L: Yes this is true. But still no one there to stop this thinking. Just listening, reading and studying Dhamma. Whatever happens next, whatever kind of thinking follows, this is out of control. Agitated mind with thinking stories, conceited minds..whatever.. I had some time ago a short conversation with a monk, that seemed to be concerned of me. I didnt look good and all this stress. He ask me how I am? And how is my practice? I really didnt know what to answer. And I just told that It is no soo good with me, but I dont think so this is any kind of practice. I remeber I told him: 'I think this is more a matter of knowing what is True, than any kind of practices'. He fully agreed and I went away. I am sharing this, cause for that moment that was very Dhammic answer for me. I ment by this answer, that even there is sadness, or anger or whatever, this is exactly how it is. This is a Truth. Best wishes Lukas #125060 From: "Lukas" Date: Tue Jun 19, 2012 12:08 am Subject: Re: Broken heart? 7. The 'situation' - the story szmicio Dear Sarah, > L: Yes this is true. But still no one there to stop this thinking. Just listening, reading and studying Dhamma. Whatever happens next, whatever kind of thinking follows, this is out of control. Agitated mind with thinking stories, conceited minds..whatever.. I had some time ago a short conversation with a monk, that seemed to be concerned of me. I didnt look good and all this stress. He ask me how I am? And how is my practice? I really didnt know what to answer. L: I didnt know what to answer, cause I really dont know what people mean by practice. I really dont know. I was always trying to avoid monks, cause I was afraid they ask me this. How is your practice. And I really dont know how is my practice, and what they mean by that. For me this is life. And it's never good or bad. This is always exactly as it is. I really dont like to be asked like that, because I am tottaly uncapable to answer this. But this monk totally agreed with me, so I felt so happy afterwards, that he understand me. Really very very Dhammic short conversation, making mind more glad and happy >And I just told that It is no soo good with me, but I dont think so this is any kind of practice. L: Here a typo. 'But I dont think so this is a matter of any kind of practice'. Best wishes Lukas #125061 From: "philip" Date: Tue Jun 19, 2012 12:37 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Hello dear friends! philofillet Thanks Nina I received a letter from his father. I had heard that he read out (at a memorial ceremony) a part of a poem I had written for his son, and when I opened the letter I assumed it would be full of tender recollection of his son and regret for their troubled relationship. Instead, the feeling was that it was a relief for him and his wife that their troub led son was gone and they wouldn't have to worry about him anymore. I was quite impressed by that. As the father wrote in the letter, "you never know." Nobody is locked into feelings, you never know how we or others will respond to tragedies, and other situations. The parents of a suicide are not necessarily doomed to grieve intensely, there can be relief instead, there is no telling, anatta. Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Phil, > Op 18-jun-2012, om 10:35 heeft sarah het volgende geschreven: > > > James: Phil wrote a lovely letter to his cousin's family and > > friends. Here it is" > ----- > N: I had missed your letter but now I read it. I was moved by it. > Especially your last meeting with Ned, this is really impressive. > ----- > Nina. > > > > > #125062 From: "philip" Date: Tue Jun 19, 2012 12:48 am Subject: Re: To Phil. Dhamma recording philofillet Hi Lukas Thanks, so nice to see A.Sujin, it takes me right back to Thailand. I haven't been listening to her as much recently, just writing the passages from SPD. But to speak honestly, off the top of my head, I wonder if a person who is addicted to a drug that can cause his death is not possibly in danger from hearing a teaching that says, no one is born, no one dies, just conditioned realities, moment of death is just a reality and another rebirth citta, and countless, this goes on, countless lifetimes. I think this one lifetime is very precious because you are so young and so sensitive to the Buddha's teaching. Because the monster opiates are involved in your story, I am a bit concerned that they might possibly at some moment take the "just like this one moment, death citta and rebirth citta," and in what feels like right understanding at the time, you will fail to sufficiently treasure this lifetime in which you have been born with sensitivity to the Dhamma, and the opportunity to understand more deeply. I am not saying we should cling with fear to the one lifetime, but I am just not sure that it is best for a drug addict to be thinking in terms of lifetime as one citta. But I'm not sure about that. Just talking off the top of my head. Thank you for the recording. I will listen to it every day and see what understanding it conditions each time. Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Lukas wrote: > > Hi Phil, > This is a recording with Acharn. Rob K posted it before. > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkvgmKYO30k > > > From one birth moment, to another. That's life. > > Best wishes > Lukas > > > #125063 From: Lukas Date: Tue Jun 19, 2012 12:51 am Subject: Practice szmicio Dear Sarah and all, I think if someone considers more and more 5 khnadhas in his life, all realities that are really conditioned, even on intelectual level, then mind tends more and more into detachement, whether we want or not. And than the mind doesnt think at all what practice is. It is only mind that concern of what is there and what is real. And the concept of 'my practice', 'me practicing', 'me developing', 'me meditating' goes away. Like a dewdrop from a lotus flower goes away so naturally. And no space for any practices. Just a realities. And than the knowledge comes what is actually a way, a practice and what is no. The way is to know to understand each reality now. This is a corect way. And no need to think, 'oh now I develop this or that'. This is a knowledge of the 4th Noble Truth. The way leading to end of all dukkha. To end of all this conditioned dhammas. The way is not intention, no attention, not to try this or that. Not to try to have more this or that. This is just attachement and a lot of wrong views. This is not a right view that brings detachement. So I prefer listen and consider more and more of 5 khandhas. Not to think of Path, but really check it. I remember Acharn saying: 'This is not a matter of observing, this is a matter of right understanding'. A right view of each reality that appears now. Then we dont need to practice or do anything. All this ideas of practice it is just another wrong view. That doesnt help at all. And I think if someone is not scared of investigating each realities now, than one get more and more knowledge of understanding the 4 Noble Truths. Whatever appears now is dukka, attachement is dukkha, there is an end of dukkha, that is unconditioned reality and the way leading to an end of all dukkha, that is knowledge of the right way. And the way is to be developed, and will be developed. This is the correct way. We can think of 8fold Path. I will develop now more, right understanding, more right thinking. I will develop more silla or concentration, but this is not de way. The way is to understand each reality conditined to arise now. This is the first noble truth. And it must be understood, and will be understood. By knowing the 1st Noble Truth we know the 4th Noble Truth, that is practice. We cannot know the practice without knowing all realities now, that are dukkha. It must be understood first. So no more worries of practicing, just understanding of all five khandhas that are object of clinging and clinging itself. I think each one shall know what is a correct way of developement for himself. Just a thoughts to share. Best wishes Lukas #125064 From: "Lukas" Date: Tue Jun 19, 2012 12:58 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Hello dear friends! szmicio Dear Phil, I also miss the letter. Can u give me a link? best wishes lukas > I received a letter from his father. I had heard that he read out (at a memorial ceremony) a part of a poem I had written for his son, and when I opened the letter I assumed it would be full of tender recollection of his son and regret for their troubled relationship. Instead, the feeling was that it was a relief for him and his wife that their troub led son was gone and they wouldn't have to worry about him anymore. I was quite impressed by that. As the father wrote in the letter, "you never know." Nobody is locked into feelings, you never know how we or others will respond to tragedies, and other situations. The parents of a suicide are not necessarily doomed to grieve intensely, there can be relief instead, there is no telling, anatta. > > Phil > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > > > Dear Phil, > > Op 18-jun-2012, om 10:35 heeft sarah het volgende geschreven: > > > > > James: Phil wrote a lovely letter to his cousin's family and > > > friends. Here it is" > > ----- > > N: I had missed your letter but now I read it. I was moved by it. > > Especially your last meeting with Ned, this is really impressive. > > ----- > > Nina. > > > > > > > > > > > #125065 From: "Lukas" Date: Tue Jun 19, 2012 1:10 am Subject: Re: To Phil. Dhamma recording szmicio Dear Phil, > But to speak honestly, off the top of my head, I wonder if a person who is addicted to a drug that can cause his death is not possibly in danger from hearing a teaching that says, no one is born, no one dies, just conditioned realities, moment of death is just a reality and another rebirth citta, and countless, this goes on, countless lifetimes. L: The problem with opiat addiction disease it's that it's a mortal disease and very hard to cure. Only 1 percent of people after a proffesional treatments in a closed facilities are able to manage to go out fully. So I think it's better to be with Dhamma. What can I loose? >I think this one lifetime is very precious because you are so young and so sensitive to the Buddha's teaching. Because the monster opiates are involved in your story, I am a bit concerned that they might possibly at some moment take the "just like this one moment, death citta and rebirth citta," and in what feels like right understanding at the time, you will fail to sufficiently treasure this lifetime in which you have been born with sensitivity to the Dhamma, and the opportunity to understand more deeply. I am not saying we should cling with fear to the one lifetime, but I am just not sure that it is best for a drug addict to be thinking in terms of lifetime as one citta. L: But what else can I do? Best wishes Lukas #125066 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Tue Jun 19, 2012 1:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Audio 2012 "Do you really know breath?" moellerdieter Hi Robert, all, you wrote: (MN.118)I. Whenever the disciple (1) mindfully makes a long inhalation or exhalation, or (2) makes a short inhalation or exhalation, or (3) trains himself to inhale or exhale whilst experiencing the whole (breath-) body, or (4) whilst calming down this bodily function (i.e. the breath)-at such a time the disciple dwells in 'contemplation of the body', full of energy, comprehending it, mindful, after subduing worldly greed and grief. For, inhalation and exhalation I call one amongst the corporeal phenomena. > > II. Whenever the disciple trains himself to inhale or exhale (1) whilst feeling rapture (piiti), or (2) joy (sukha), or (3) the mental functions (cittasankhaara), or (4) whilst calming down the mental functions-at such a time he dwells in 'contemplation of the feelings', full of energy, clearly comprehending them, mindful, after subduing worldly greed and grief. For, the full awareness of In- and Out-breathing I call one amongst the feelings. This seems like a very nice version of the sutta. I will read it some more. However, on the subject of the breath rupa, I think there is a more specific indication of what in the breath it is, since it is said to be something different from just the passage of the air. D: I like Ven Nyanatiloka's translations , besides his wellknown Buddhist Dictionary ,he collected quite a number of sutta sources to explain by the Buddha's sayings the core of the Dhamma , i.e. the 4 Noble Truths. The mentioned link originated from 'The Word of the Buddha ' on-line version. I.M.H.O. one of the best Dhamma introductions . I compared with Ven. Thanissaro translation of MN 118 , different words but the key statements are similar: -inhalation and exhalation I call one amongst the corporeal phenomena. -full awareness of In- and Out-breathing I call one amongst the feelings.. I do not know how much time you (can) spend for contemplation ,sometimes hints like above may give a clue. As I understand it distinguishes between rupa and nama and it is quite easy to recognize : the bodily phenomena appears like a bellows (the handles stand for the muscles of respiration ) and nama means the awareness on the sensation when inhaling or exhaling of the air touches the respiratiory much more can be said about breath , in German 'Atem' with an interesting background of etymology , but I assume your question concerned to the nama -rupa relation.. with Metta Dieter #125067 From: Lukas Date: Tue Jun 19, 2012 1:37 am Subject: Re: To Phil. Dhamma recording szmicio Dear Phil, Just to be honest. I am really scared to come back. But now I cannot stay here any longer, no other place to go also. Best wishes Lukas #125069 From: "philip" Date: Tue Jun 19, 2012 1:52 am Subject: Re: To Phil. Dhamma recording philofillet Hi Lukas 1% seems very low, but in any case, those 99% didn't have Dhamma, you do. I am not saying that I think you shouldn't value the deep truth preached by A. Sujin, as long as you maintain perspective about the value of fighting for your health, and life, and opportunity to continue develop understanding. But already you are saying only 1% survive, what can I do? Anyways, I know you really value listening to Dhamma, so when you say you will not drink or do drugs while preparing for A Sujin's trip (and don't forget she might not be able to come) I have zero doubt you will make it. I am worrying more about later. Of course understanding will probably be developing too, there is no telling whether there will be abstinence or not. I told my drug addict cousin that his fate was out of my hands, and of course that is true for you too but to you who understands Dhamma I can also say your fate is out *your* hands! I'm quite optimistic about you, though, much more than I was about him. You have sensitivity to true Dhamma. , Phil p.s As for the link to that letter , sorry, I am falling asleep, please search under "letter about my dear fried", I think that was the title... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > > Dear Phil, > > > But to speak honestly, off the top of my head, I wonder if a person who is addicted to a drug that can cause his death is not possibly in danger from hearing a teaching that says, no one is born, no one dies, just conditioned realities, moment of death is just a reality and another rebirth citta, and countless, this goes on, countless lifetimes. > > L: The problem with opiat addiction disease it's that it's a mortal disease and very hard to cure. Only 1 percent of people after a proffesional treatments in a closed facilities are able to manage to go out fully. So I think it's better to be with Dhamma. What can I loose? > > > >I think this one lifetime is very precious because you are so young and so sensitive to the Buddha's teaching. Because the monster opiates are involved in your story, I am a bit concerned that they might possibly at some moment take the "just like this one moment, death citta and rebirth citta," and in what feels like right understanding at the time, you will fail to sufficiently treasure this lifetime in which you have been born with sensitivity to the Dhamma, and the opportunity to understand more deeply. I am not saying we should cling with fear to the one lifetime, but I am just not sure that it is best for a drug addict to be thinking in terms of lifetime as one citta. > > L: But what else can I do? > > Best wishes > Lukas > #125070 From: "philip" Date: Tue Jun 19, 2012 2:00 am Subject: Re: To Phil. Dhamma recording philofillet Hi Lukas As I just wrote in the other letter, I think you will be ok when you first get home, you will be preparing to welcome Ajahn, who has said that she wants to come to meet you. Don't forget that even in the end if she is unable to come because of her age, she said she would, Ajahn had that intention to come all the way to Europe to meet you, that intention arose. What a wonderful thing! You will not show disrespect for Ajahn and waste the opportunity on the cheap pleasure of intoxicants. Be careful, not even one beer. You can do it! Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Lukas wrote: > > Dear Phil, > Just to be honest. I am really scared to come back. But now I cannot stay here any longer, no other place to go also. > > Best wishes > Lukas > > > #125071 From: "philip" Date: Tue Jun 19, 2012 2:12 am Subject: Re: A letter about my dear friend... philofillet Hello Lukas, here is that letter. It is not hardcore Dhamma, but I was writing for people who don't know Dhamma. Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > > Dear Group > > > Here is the revised version of the letter that was sent out. I think it's interesting to note how I ended up just referring to "Buddhist metaphors" at two points to share the teaching of the two darts and the emotions as passing clouds rather than give what felt like a mini-lecture on "Buddhist psychology" which would have seemed as using the tragedy as an opportunity to proseletyze. (sp?) And I just talked about two other points - the fluidity of mind states and physical and verbal intimation - without using any reference to Buddhism whatsoever. So in the end, a more effective sharing of the Dhamma. > > I also took out some harsh language. I find it interesting that though I was getting irritated by the whole procedure, effort arose to keep working on the letter, and finally a warm, well-toned letter went out that has been receiving a lot of appreciation. I think this was a case of karuna at work. There wasn't aversion anymore, not about the death anyways, but something kept pushing me to get the letter out in a better form. > > I think this part is especially good: "We can assign the role of sufferer to people, but we don't know, so it isn't fair. Happy people don't commit suicide, right? Wrong. Because there are no "happy people", there are only moments of happiness, or fear, or guilt, or generosity, or compassion or whatever that come and go. So let's not latch on to the idea of "Ned the sufferer." It is not fair." > > Please read, if you are interested. No need for any comment, cheers. > > ************** > > Dear Friends, > > I am writing to express some thoughts about the sad news. This is out of the blue, and probably proper manners would mean waiting until later, I'm not familiar with the proper etiquette here. But I really wanted to get some things down and out to you all. > > The initial e-mail by which I learned that Ned had died was of course shocking, but I found that the e-mails that followed in which people expressed their first reaction compounded the pain involved in the first one. I think I could say that those following e-mails took the intense pain that was involved in hearing about Ned's suicide, and immediately started to compound it into suffering. > > I'm kind of interested in the difference between pain and suffering - we are all subject to pain, it arises along with certain things we see, taste, touch, feel and so on. There is a metaphor in Buddhist psychology of two darts. The first dart is the pain, but the second dart is the way our mind takes the pain and compounds it into suffering. So what I felt in the e-mails was that people were immediately taking the pain of hearing about Ned's suicide, and starting immediately to compound it into a lot more suffering. First of all, our own suffering, of course, as people who had lost a beloved friend. But also by taking the pain Ned must have of course felt at times, maybe many times, and weaving it into a story about "Ned, the sufferer, who killed himself", "Ned who had so many problems", "Ned who had cut himself off from people" etc. His death and the way he died, and indeed the troubles he had in recent years is in fact just one aspect of who he is (he lives on in our minds) and was and identifying it with him in a way that traps him into the story of "Ned who commited suicide, Ned who was suffering so much" is just not fair. We start to create this scenario of Ned the sufferer, and latch on to it. I am not saying that there wasn't suffering for Ned - of course there was - but we are doing a terrible disservice to our dear friend if we define him in those terms. And we are also doing a disservice to ourselves by identifying with a painful story that our minds have worked together to create and feed. > > As I understand the mind, and our behaviour, what we do and think and say is not the product of a person who is fixed and locked into behaving in certain ways, what we do and think and say is actually the working of impulses of mental moments or intentions, they arise in a wink of an eye, and fall away again. It's all so fluid. What we take for "I" or "Ned" is a fluid working of these impulses. So if we say "Ned was a sad person", we should actually say "there were a lot of sad moments for Ned", that is coming closer to the truth. And we don't know. Nobody knows what kind of moments arise for people except the understanding of that person him or herself. We can assign the role of sufferer to people, but we don't know, so it isn't fair. Happy people don't commit suicide, right? Wrong. Because there are no "happy people", there are only moments of happiness, or fear, or guilt, or generosity, or compassion or whatever that come and go. So let's not latch on to the idea of "Ned the sufferer." It is not fair. > > There is another Buddhist metaphor I like, emotions as clouds that come and go in the sky, so fluid. Is there something shining constantly beyond the clouds, even the darkest ones? Well, that will depend on each person's beliefs. But it is definitely true that emotions are fluid, they come and go. And that was true for Ned too. I think there might be a tendency, again, to think of Ned as trapped in some dark tunnel of suffering, that he could not see out of, just an occasional glimpse of light at the end of the tunnel, and he lost sight of that light, and so on. But we don't know and evidence to be shared later goes against my being able to believe that. My impression is that for all of us on the highway of life, there are of course tunnels, we speed along, go through dark days and back into the light. I guess it is safe to speculate that for people who suffer from alcoholism, for example, there are more tunnels, and that they are probably longer and darker than for those of us who don't - that is a fair speculation maybe - and also that in those tunnels there are more and sharper curves, and plunges and swerves. My feeling is that Ned got into one of those occasional tunnels, and he crashed, he didn't make it out this time. He made it out before, but not this time. But the tunnel and what he experienced in it was not who he is, who he was. Let's not define him in those terms, please. I suppose I'm repeating myself here.... > > Here is something I find encouraging. As with many of you who lost touch with him in recent years, I spent a few years hearing long distance stories about Ned down and out in Montreal, out of touch with everyone, cutting himself off from people, in deep and dark and very dire straights. (straits?) And I fell into that trap of making stories and images of what his life was like, speculating about the misery. After a couple of years of that I finally had the chance to meet him, down at St. Pat's. Oh my god! What kind of ravaged ghoul would appear before my eyes??? What could I say to him, would he even talk to me???? Ummmm, guess what? He hadn't changed a bit! The same dazzling wit and intelligence, and physically he looked better than most of the other age-ravaged people I was seeing down there, and in the mirror! (haha, it's a joke...) We can say that people's mental moments, those impulses, take shape in their movements, in their facial expressions, in their tone of voice, and are written on their faces. In more conventional terms, we say that people grow into the faces they have earned. Some people look battered down by life, embittered, worn out. Well, in case you didn't have a chance to meet Ned in recent years, I have some good news. His was not the face, not the body language, not the voice, not the hug, not the smile, not the general atmosphere of a person who was beat down and battered. That kind of thing can't be hidden, or faked. I'm saying that he was not a person who was living in a dark tunnel, deprived of hope. > > Here's the best part. I could have reduced this whole long letter to this one anecdote. I saw Ned again last summer, in Montreal. By some happy chance I booked a hotel room on Park Avenue, not knowing where he lived, and it turned out he was literally a stone's throw away. It was a hard few days for me, for reasons related to my mother's Alzheimer's disease, and Ned was such a great support for me. I remember one hot, hot afternoon in particular when I got off the #80 bus at the corner of Park Avenue and Mount Royal and was just kind of standing there, jet-lagged and kind of in shock in probably the bleakest and darkest and most exhausted mood I can remember being in. Mostly it was due to my mother's condition, dealing with it on my own for a few days before Bill and Sue arrived later that week. (By the way, another story, but I think she has gone beyond most hardship now, that is one silver lining, but last summer was very hard because she was still living in the general community at her home, and it was causing very upsetting troubles...No, not Sue!!! My mother! Sorry, a little comic relief.) So I was exhausted, kind of in shock. And I was standing there at a total loss, when - I'm not making this up - I heard a familar voice call out my name and there was Ned, coming along the street, a saviour for me at that moment. We went for lunch, and talked, and laughed a lot, and then to his apartment, he loved it so and was so proud of it, with its sprawling view of the mountain. We listened to music, and talked and talked, and by the time I left, I felt so much better. So he was a pillar of strength for me that day. So the next time you find yourself imagining Ned as living in some kind of misery, alone in Montreal (he has lots of friends who adore him there, by the way) please remember Ned the way I remember him, the last time I saw him, shining for me when I needed someone to shine. En bref, he was doing ok. I would like to say great, but I guess that would be going too far. > > Umm, where am I going with this? There was something else....oh yes, of course, life goes on. Depending on various degrees to which we believe it or not, life goes on. A return to the light that we were born from, to that divine essence? Rebirth? Evolution through many lifetimes? Or something simply unexpressable in conventional terms? As I'm concerned there are just way too many hints about something beyond death for me to possibly believe that there was a being known as Ned that was snuffed out like a candle after burning briefly, end of story. (By the way, I read something interesting recently, that death is not the opposite of life, it is the opposite of birth. Life is something indpendent of birth and death, it goes on.) But even for those who believe that Ned was nothing but that briefly burning candle, what a brilliant candle! What a beautiful intelligence Ned had. Let us pay honour to his great intelligence by considering our response to this tragedy with intelligence rather than reducing it to pitiful stories that are so limited and limiting compared to the intelligence he represents. Of course an intelligent response involves sorrow, a lot of it. But the intelligence lives on, and Ned is and was an agent of that light, I believe that absolutely. > > I hope that is helpful, I find that writing it helped me at the very least. Hope to see you all this summer. > > *********************** > > > Phil > #125072 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Tue Jun 19, 2012 2:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cetasika in daily life -project -viriya 1 - welfare for the householders moellerdieter Dear Sarah(and Nina), you wrote: D: let me bring our understanding to the point: you state no difference between khandhas and the 6 senses media .... S: By "6 senses media" are you referring to the 6 pairs of ayatanas or something else? Khandhas and ayatanas refer to different aspects of paramattha dhammas. They are used to help us understand these realities from different approaches. D: you are right 'sense media' refers to the pairs of ayatana .. 5th in place . When we are talking e.g. about vinnana khandha (3rd place) we speak of eye consciousness ,ear consciousness etc. Citta , Cetasika (and Rupa) provide the' picture'.. . the sense media ,isn't it? S:For example, heat is a rupa. It shares all the characteristics of rupa with all other rupa khandha realities. Each one is different - it arises and falls away never to reappear. All day we cling to that reality, that khandha which has gone. We cling to nothing in effect. Heat is also an ayatana - an outer ayatana or what I think you refer to as "sense media". The ayatanas stress the coming together or meeting of realities. In order for heat rupa to be experienced, there has to be the "meeting" of body sense, heat, body consciousness, contact and other associated mental factors. No self, no being involved at all - just conditioned dhammas. The "miracle" of conditioned dhammas coming together at this moment. So the characteristic of heat, the reality of heat is just heat whether we refer to it as a khandha, an ayatana or a dhatu. However, the Buddha used different ways of description and explanation because he knew that just one kind of description was not enough for most listeners to understand realities as anatta. D: I need to see that in practise , is the text below in line with your thinking? Maha Satipatthana Sutta:[3] "Furthermore, the monk remains focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the sixfold internal & external sense media. And how does he remain focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the sixfold internal & external sense media? There is the case where he discerns the eye, he discerns forms, he discerns the fetter that arises dependent on both. He discerns how there is the arising of an unarisen fetter. And he discerns how there is the abandoning of a fetter once it has arisen. And he discerns how there is no future arising of a fetter that has been abandoned. (The same formula is repeated for the remaining sense media: ear, nose, tongue, body, & intellect.) "In this way he remains focused internally on the mental qualities in & of themselves, or focused externally... unsustained by anything in the world. This is how a monk remains focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the sixfold internal & external sense media .... D:> The issue concerns how we distínguish realities and concepts and I believe this is important in Abhidhamma . .... S: and what the Abhidhamma stresses is the understanding of realities now, such as heat or hardness or thinking - whatever appears now. This is the only way that the confusion about realities and concepts will ever be resolved...> D: I think there are texts in which the Buddha talked about arising and falling away of the khandhas , ... S: Yes, I've quoted many suttas in this regard. No question about it. This is why the Buddha taught about dhammas as khandhas - to stress the impermanence of each one. ... D:>one question however is whether it doesn'tt concern the khandha breakdown ( of Dependent Origination ) i.e. temporarily at death or finally (nibbana). ... S: it's all about now, realities now. The Buddha taught us to understand what is real at this very moment. This is the only way that DO, death and so on can be understood. D: well , Ven . Buddhagosa's interpretation is understood by many to concern 3 lives. The old discussion of jati comes into my mind .. D:> The other is the consideration whether the Buddha distinguished at all between realities and concepts. .... S: Heat is a reality which can be directly known now. 'Butter-jar" is a concept which can only ever be thought about. All the teachings are for understanding, testing out at this moment. D: Sarah, you sidestepped the next sentence : "If not, what I suppose , to talk of arising and falling khandhas equally mean the dhammas which are grouped under them." In other words , if there the distinction between realities and concepts is only done within Abhidhamma and no such seperation in the Sutta Pitaka , the sayings of the Sutta Pitaka can not be used to argue that khandha isn't a concept in Abhidhamma , can it ? with Metta Dieter. #125073 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Jun 19, 2012 8:44 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Audio 2012 "Do you really know breath?" epsteinrob Hi Dieter, Sarah, Nina and all. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dieter Moeller" wrote: > I compared with Ven. Thanissaro translation of MN 118 , different words but the key statements are similar: > -inhalation and exhalation I call one amongst the corporeal phenomena. > -full awareness of In- and Out-breathing I call one amongst the feelings.. > > I do not know how much time you (can) spend for contemplation, sometimes hints like above may give a clue. > As I understand it distinguishes between rupa and nama and it is quite easy to recognize : > the bodily phenomena appears like a bellows (the handles stand for the muscles of respiration ) and nama means the awareness on the sensation when inhaling or exhaling of the air touches the respiratiory > > much more can be said about breath , in German 'Atem' with an interesting background of etymology , but I assume your question concerned > to the nama -rupa relation.. At the moment I am most interested in the detailed answer of what the subtle breath-rupa is. I understand in a general way that it will be the sensation of the breath as it is inhaled and exhaled, and in the Visudhimagga I believe it has been isolated as the sensation of the breath entering and exiting the nostrils, so that it is felt on the skin just below, and perhaps in, the nostrils. This rupa has been described, however, as an extremely subtle one that is difficult to focus on and experience, and so I am wondering if there is a particular subtle aspect of that sensation that is considered a special rupa pertaining to the breath that is not caught up in all the many general sensations that occur with each breath in various parts of the breathing apparatus. Perhaps the reason this meditation object is complicated is because it does involve so many operations, from muscles to lungs to passage of air in various areas, which would entail many, many different kinds of rupas that could be the object of awareness. In parts of the sutta different aspects of the breathing are emphasized, the "whole body" or "whole breath body" or the "breathing as it goes through the whole body," depending on translations, or the "calming of the bodily fabrication" or fabrications, or the series of the breath moving through the body and out of the body in a cycle of sensations, as has been spoken about in some commentaries, and other patterns and areas of attention that can attend the passage of the breath. So I would like to hear some more detail on what is to be taken out of all these possibilities and what is considered, in Abhidhamma commentary, to be the specific rupa or rupas that arise in awareness when breath is the object of satipatthana. This is one of those rare cases where I think the definition of the rupa is much more complicated than understanding what the nama is. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - #125074 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jun 19, 2012 2:55 pm Subject: Broken heart? 8. Security? More attachment. sarahprocter... Dear Lukas & all, We may think that we cannot live alone and that we need the support and companionship of another person. Isn't this just thinking with more attachment? ***** SECURITY?
 I asked if it was a matter of understanding attachment now. Sujin: "That’s all, because the previous moment has just gone. Life is just this arising and passing away. Life, it is conditioned. No one can keep it even for a second. If one were born as an animal, one could not help that way of life [i.e. a life with strong attachment], because there is not enough understanding to think whether to be married or not. But as a human being one has a higher level of understanding and considering. One knows the accumulations, that they are a condition for future moments. "What about being alone in this life, since one has been married many times before? Have we have not had enough yet of birth and death in sa.msaara? One can still live alone and enjoy oneself, as one does not have accumulations to be the ascetic in the jungle. Enjoy seeing people in society, helping as much as possible, leading a perfect life so one can have more time for developing kusala when one is single." I should mention here, that Khun Sujin is not referring to people who are married or in partnerships already. We should remember that in the absolute sense, living alone is living with and being aware of realities through the six doorways now. I asked what type of kusala she meant. Sujin: "All types of kusala. One will sleep better, having less boredom and cares. One does not have to think about one's children and grandchildren in future." I asked if this was for everyone. Sujin: "It’s not a rule to be followed. One cannot go against one’s conditions." ***** Metta Sarah ====== #125075 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jun 19, 2012 3:25 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: To Phil. Dhamma recording sarahprocter... Dear Lukas & all, Great reflections on "practice" and dhammas now if your other posts. >> From: Lukas >Just to be honest. I am really scared to come back. But now I cannot stay here any longer, no other place to go also. .... S: Only an anagami doesn't have fear. I heard K.Sujin (KK 20110 talking about how we usually think ahead - "I will do this" or "that's what should be done" - with no understanding of what is appearing now. She was stressing how the dhammas we talk about are the realities which appear now, like seeing and visible object. Otherwise, if there's no awareness now, our thinking takes us away from this moment to different thoughts, different concerns that seem so important. Without the understanding of reality now, there will be no conditions to ever become enlightened because there will be no knowing of whatever appears. **** KS: Are you interested in Dhamma? P: Yes. KS: You mean reality right now or what? Everything is a reality - reality which is not self. That is the most important.... The most important thing is understanding of dhamma that appears. *** Phil asks a question about a complicated Dhamma detail in one of the books. KS: If the words in the book will lead to more understanding of reality, that's right, but if they do not because one just thinks that one understands about the term "dhamma" already, but doesn't understand any dhamma now, it's useless. What about the next life? One will forget all about what one has read. **** Metta Sarah ===== #125076 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Tue Jun 19, 2012 5:12 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Problems in life. rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear Nina, Azita & all, > > >________________________________ > > From: Nina van Gorkom > > >I was considering the way Kh Sujin answers people's requests for > >advice. Ken, I also thought of you, re abortion Rob K mentioned the > >other day, and your reaction that this is a highly sensitive issue. I > >would like you to be happy about the Dhamma. Kh Sujin would never > >judge anybody about such issues. It is such a heavy decision and > >mostly it would not be taken lightly by the persons concerned. Rob K > >quoted an example of a monk giving advice about abortion, but that is > >a different matter. Monks are supposed to live like arahats, they > >cannot take any life or drink. They have to follow the rules of the > >Vinaya. > ... > S: Yes, I was going to mention in that context that the Parajika offense is for the monk, the lay-person. > > > +++++++++++ dear Sarah, Nina, kenh, all I realize that a laymen can't make a parajika (he doesn't wear robes, how could he be disrobed?) by advising someone to have an abortion.. My point with Kenh was really about the likelihood of it being akusala: here is the conversation again: ---------------------------------- RK: > What if the doctor who is scheduled to perform the abortion refuses because he believes it is bad kamma, is he also misguided? ---------------------------------- KENH: I think he is misguided in thinking of kamma as a medical >procedure rather than as a paramattha dhamma. In fact, he doesn't know which kamma is present at any one moment, and there is no efficacy in favouring one conventional story over another. >The doctor's livelihood is to perform operations as [legally] directed by the hospital. He should carry on that way, confident in his understanding of kamma and vipaka. << ++++++++++++++== Let's change it to a insect exterminator as it seems abortion is a sensitive issue.> IMHO the insect exterminator would be making akusala. I would never advise him to stop his job - heaven forbid-in fact please make him the pre-eminent insect exterminator in the country. . But what I wonder about is Ken's old reply where he says the Doctor (read insect exterminator) should carry on , 'confident in his understanding of kamma and vipaka'? What is the understanding ken is meaning? robert #125077 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 19, 2012 7:41 pm Subject: Pilgrimage in India, Ch 2, 6. nilovg Dear friends, We cling to what we see and we take for a “whole”, for “self” what in fact are many different realities appearing through different doorways. For example, we may think that we can touch what appears through the eyes, but what is touched is a completely different reality experienced through a different doorway; it is tangible object. Tangible object is entirely different from visible object and it arises through different conditions. Hardness, softness, heat, cold, motion and pressure are tangible objects which can be directly experienced through the bodysense, not through the eyesense. The understanding of different realities appearing through different doorways is the Middle Way that will lead to detachment from the concept of self and eventually from all realities. Before hearing the Dhamma we knew about the attachment that is coarse, but we did not realize that there is clinging time and again to what we experience through the six doorways. When we like what we experience, for example, through the eye-door, we continue thinking of it with attachment. We are inclined to build up in our mind long stories about the person or thing we believe we see. We all have accumulations for building up stories, but we can realize thinking as nåma, different from seeing or from visible object. We should not try to suppress thinking, but we should realize as it is. Thinking is a reality and, thus, its characteristic can be known when it appears. The story we are thinking of is not a reality, it is merely a concept. When we were outside in the garden of the hotel, talking about Dhamma, there was the sound of a band playing music. When hearing that sound several of us had a mental image of people marching and playing music. A mental image of people marching and beating drums is only a concept we can think of. We were again building up stories. Acharn Sujin gave an explanation of this in Thai which Bhikkhu Dhammadharo translated: “ When we see just for a moment then what we see has already fallen away. When we see things with which were familiar then immediately there's the tendency to build up or make up long stories about them. Things with which we are familiar, we tend to think about for a long time, whereas things we just know vaguely may only be with us for a moment or two and then we drop them. But things we are very familiar with, we carry on and on and on. They're both the same – say visual object appearing through the eyes in both cases, carrying on the story, fantasizing. The thinking about the visual object can go on and on and on, short or long depending, but really in both cases it's just visual object. It's the same with every doorway. Benares, Hotel de Paris, this garden and all the people who are sitting in it, talking about Dhamma - put them together in one moment of citta which is in fact what is happening because we have the concept of that all in one moment of citta, then suppose we should die at this very moment. Then as the citta containing the world, Benares, Hotel de Paris, people sitting in the garden, falls away. So does Benares, do does Hotel de Paris, so do all the people sitting in the garden, all fall away with that citta, never to appear again. But the only reason that it seems to us that Benares, Hotel de Paris, the people sitting in the garden talking about Dhamma don't fall away is because we are carrying on the story, we keep it going. But if we would die,there is the end of the story.” Venerable Dhammadharo remarked: “ This must lead to more detachment.” ****** Nina. #125078 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 19, 2012 7:53 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: To Phil. Dhamma recording nilovg Dear Sarah, A very good extract and also very good to be reminded that we uaually think: I will do this. Very useful for all of us. Nina. Op 19-jun-2012, om 7:25 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > heard K.Sujin (KK 20110 talking about how we usually think ahead - > "I will do this" or "that's what should be done" - with no > understanding of what is appearing now. She was stressing how the > dhammas we talk about are the realities which appear now, like > seeing and visible object. Otherwise, if there's no awareness now, > our thinking takes us away from this moment to different thoughts, > different concerns that seem so important. Without the > understanding of reality now, there will be no conditions to ever > become enlightened because there will be no knowing of whatever > appears. > **** #125079 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 19, 2012 8:06 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Audio 2012 "Do you really know breath?" nilovg Dear Rob E, Op 19-jun-2012, om 0:44 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > So I would like to hear some more detail on what is to be taken > out of all these possibilities and what is considered, in > Abhidhamma commentary, to be the specific rupa or rupas that arise > in awareness when breath is the object of satipatthana. > > This is one of those rare cases where I think the definition of the > rupa is much more complicated than understanding what the nama is. ------ N: As I said in a post to you before, I think the fact that this breath ruupa is conditioned by citta points to its subtlety. One has to be sure that it is this ruupa, not something else we take for breath. Another matter is: can one select the object of awareness that is the present reality presenting itself? ----- Nina. #125080 From: "sarah" Date: Tue Jun 19, 2012 11:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Problems in life. sarahprocter... Dear Rob K, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: ___________________________ > dear Sarah, Nina, kenh, all > I realize that a laymen can't make a parajika (he doesn't wear robes, how could he be disrobed?) by advising someone to have an abortion.. > My point with Kenh was really about the likelihood of it being akusala: .... S: Like most of the day, like now - when it's not dana, sila or bhavana, it's akusala. I understand your point, but I think that another point is that rather than in thinking in terms of various scenarios, various stories about particular situations, more precious is the understanding of the present paramattha dhammas. I'll let Ken explain his own meaning. Metta Sarah ===== #125081 From: "philip" Date: Wed Jun 20, 2012 1:02 am Subject: Re: Pilgrimage in India, Ch 2, 6. philofillet Dear Nina -- > > Before hearing the Dhamma we knew about the attachment that is > coarse, but we did not realize that there is clinging time and again > to what we experience through the six doorways. When we like what we > experience, for example, throug the eye-door, we continue thinking > of it with attachment. I remember hearing, or reading, "we *like* to recognize a tree." There is the simile of the bird landing on the branch and so so so soon its shadow to get at how quickly a sense door process is followed by a mind door process. Is there a smile that captures how quickly there is attachment? Of course I remember that the first javana cittas are rooted in lobha.. Phil We are inclined to build up in our mind long > stories about the person or thing we believe we see. We all have > accumulations for building up stories, but we can realize thinking as > nåma, different from seeing or from visible object. We should not try > to suppress thinking, but we should realize as it is. Thinking is a > reality and, thus, its characteristic can be known when it appears. > The story we are thinking of is not a reality, it is merely a concept. > > When we were outside in the garden of the hotel, talking about > Dhamma, there was the sound of a band playing music. When hearing > that sound several of us had a mental image of people marching and > playing music. A mental image of people marching and beating drums is > only a concept we can think of. We were again building up stories. > > Acharn Sujin gave an explanation of this in Thai which Bhikkhu > Dhammadharo translated: > > " When we see just for a moment then what we see has already fallen > away. > When we see things with which were familiar then immediately there's the > tendency to build up or make up long stories about them. Things with > which > we are familiar, we tend to think about for a long time, whereas > things we > just know vaguely may only be with us for a moment or two and then we > drop > them. But things we are very familiar with, we carry on and on and on. > > They're both the same – say visual object appearing through the eyes in > both cases, carrying on the story, fantasizing. The thinking > about the visual object can go on and on and on, short or long > depending, > but really in both cases it's just visual object. It's the same with > every > doorway. > > Benares, Hotel de Paris, this garden and all the people who are > sitting in it, talking about Dhamma - put them together in one moment of > citta which is in fact what is happening because we have the concept of > that all in one moment of citta, then suppose we should die at this very > moment. Then as the citta containing the world, Benares, Hotel de Paris, > people sitting in the garden, falls away. So does Benares, do does > Hotel de Paris, so do all the people sitting in the garden, all fall > away > with that citta, never to appear again. > > But the only reason that it seems to us that Benares, Hotel de Paris, > the people sitting in the garden talking about Dhamma don't fall away is > because we are carrying on the story, we keep it going. But if we > would die,there is the end of the story." > > Venerable Dhammadharo remarked: " This must lead to more detachment." > > ****** > > Nina. > > > > > > #125082 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Jun 20, 2012 3:29 am Subject: Re: 2007 audio - 20. Seclusion now! epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > S: Back to the seclusion and "how about now?", we know that references to the forest like in the satipatthana Sutta are referring to ... > > KS: One is already there. I hope this is not taken the wrong way, but this is very 'zen.' In a good way... The idea that the teaching is realized in the moment and that there is only the reality of this moment is an approach that I think is shared by K. Sujin with the zen masters. I'm sure everything else is very different, but I find it pretty neat, from opposite ends of the spectrum. In one zen story, the monk is chastised for saying that a 'bird has flown away' because he is thinking about the past event and the absence of the bird rather than the reality of the moment. The moment of thinking can also be known as such, but I don't think the zen master would disagree with that either. Anyway, I will now go hide... ... > S: But then why does it say "an abode favorable to the development of concentration..."? > > KS: Yes, because concentration is not the understanding of reality at any time. > > S: But it suggests that it's favorable for something that is kusala because... > > KS: For those who have accumulations and some can even attain the Divine Eye. > > S: So suggesting those that perhaps have already developed samatha to such a degree, but then it goes on to say "For this bhikkhu's mind has long been dissipated among visible data....etc"**, so this doesn't suggest someone who has the accumulations naturally. > > KS: Did he suggest any layman? > > S: Maybe not. No layman, but even for a bhikkhu - because usually the way I respond or answer is, like in the Satipatthana Sutta - for those who have the accumulations and those who have already gone to the forest and those who have already developed samatha.... It may be that for those who have the accumulations for concentration, going into physical seclusion is supportive. Wouldn't the rupas of the forest and the quiet also be a reflection of vipaka? So perhaps the going into concentration and the going into the forest is part of that person's natural development and the vipaka rupas that are experienced reflect that at that point...? > KS: Shall we postpone the development of panna from now on? > > S: Well, of course it's not what I'm advocating, but a lot of people today talk about developing jhana and they don't see it as.... > KS: ...Excuse me, if there is no panna right now to understand this moment - whether it is calm or not, can anyone reach jhana, that stage of calmness? So it has start or begin from this moment. ...If there is no panna at this moment, how can it grow? > > S: No matter what the place ....."seclusion" has to be now. > ***** > > *Vism: VIII,153. "Gone to the forest ...or to an empty place: this signifies that he has found an abode favourable to the development of concentration through mindfulness of breathing." > > **"For this bhikkhu's mind has long been dissipated among visible data, etc., as its object, and it does not want to mount the object of concentration-through-mindfulness-of-breathing; it runs off the track like a chariot harnessed to a wild ox." The implication here seems to be that the mind will want to run off to sense objects, so concentration is not natural at that point; and that physical seclusion is being suggested to train the mind. Still, K. Sujin's point that if one goes to the forest with akusala or without understanding, really adds to the understanding of conditions for development in any case. With understanding, and with kusala, could the physical conditions of quiet, etc. help to train the mind, or is this never the case? Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - #125083 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Jun 20, 2012 3:35 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Audio 2012 "Do you really know breath?" epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > N: As I said in a post to you before, I think the fact that this > breath ruupa is conditioned by citta points to its subtlety. One has > to be sure that it is this ruupa, not something else we take for breath. If the breath rupa is conditioned by citta, does that mean that it only arises when there is awareness for that citta? Or does any citta give rise to the breath rupa? Is there any way to describe what the characteristic of that rupa is? For instance, hardness is obvious, and so is 'visible object' at least to an extent. But it is hard to understand what the special breath rupa is like without any description of its physical characteristic. > Another matter is: can one select the object of awareness that is the > present reality presenting itself? I know the answer to that is that one cannot select the object of awareness that is presented at any moment. Still, there are those monks who were skilled in following breath and developing jhana, and I guess for them they would have many such occasions. For myself, of course there is no skill in that way, but if the breath rupa arises, it is just good to know how it would be identified, as opposed to the passage of air and other rupas that are not conditioned by citta. Any passage that describes the characteristic of this rupa would 'close the loop' for me on this. :-) Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - #125084 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Wed Jun 20, 2012 3:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Audio 2012 "Do you really know breath?" moellerdieter Hi Rob E, you wrote: At the moment I am most interested in the detailed answer of what the subtle breath-rupa is. I understand in a general way that it will be the sensation of the breath as it is inhaled and exhaled, and in the Visudhimagga I believe it has been isolated as the sensation of the breath entering and exiting the nostrils, so that it is felt on the skin just below, and perhaps in, the nostrils. This rupa has been described, however, as an extremely subtle one that is difficult to focus on and experience, and so I am wondering if there is a particular subtle aspect of that sensation that is considered a special rupa pertaining to the breath that is not caught up in all the many general sensations that occur with each breath in various parts of the breathing apparatus. Perhaps the reason this meditation object is complicated is because it does involve so many operations, from muscles to lungs to passage of air in various areas, which would entail many, many different kinds of rupas that could be the object of awareness. In parts of the sutta different aspects of the breathing are emphasized, the "whole body" or "whole breath body" or the "breathing as it goes through the whole body," depending on translations, or the "calming of the bodily fabrication" or fabrications, or the series of the breath moving through the body and out of the body in a cycle of sensations, as has been spoken about in some commentaries, and other patterns and areas of attention that can attend the passage of the breath. So I would like to hear some more detail on what is to be taken out of all these possibilities and what is considered, in Abhidhamma commentary, to be the specific rupa or rupas that arise in awareness when breath is the object of satipatthana. This is one of those rare cases where I think the definition of the rupa is much more complicated than understanding what the nama is. D: I think the main points you mention are becoming obvious when you practise anapanasati ( Wiki provides good sources to dig) and certainly there are many references in the Canon and commentaries to search for. with Metta Dieter #125085 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Jun 20, 2012 3:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Problems in life. epsteinrob Hi Rob K., Ken H., and Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > ...Monks are supposed to live like arahats, they > > >cannot take any life or drink. They have to follow the rules of the > > >Vinaya. > > ... > > S: Yes, I was going to mention in that context that the Parajika offense is for the monk, the lay-person. Rob K.: > ...My point with Kenh was really about the likelihood of it being akusala: > here is the conversation again: > ---------------------------------- > RK: > What if the doctor who is scheduled to perform the abortion > refuses because he believes it is bad kamma, is he also misguided? > ---------------------------------- > > KENH: I think he is misguided in thinking of kamma as a medical >procedure > rather than as a paramattha dhamma. ... He should carry on that way, confident in > his understanding of kamma and vipaka. > << > ++++++++++++++== > Let's change it to a insect exterminator as it seems abortion is a sensitive issue.> > > IMHO the insect exterminator would be making akusala. I would never advise him to stop his job - heaven forbid-in fact please make him the pre-eminent insect exterminator in the country. It seems to me that this continues an unresolved issue about conventional activities. Ken H. is correctly following his very strict understanding that paramatha dhammas and kusala and akusala have *nothing* to do with conventional activities and events as we experience them in everyday life. *Nothing,* because there is no relation between what are pure concepts, such as killing an insect, performing an abortion, or finding the mind connected to the brain, and actual paramatha dhammas, which are merely kusala or akusala dhammas that arise in a single individual moment. Rob K. holds a view which accords more directly with the statements in the suttas, but which does not have this severe view of the separation of conventional life and paramatha dhammas. In his view, doing conventional activities that take life or go against other prohibitions of the Dhamma are akusala and should not be carried out. There are really only paramatha dhammas in reality, but conventional activities partake of those dhammas, reflect those dhammas, and are also kusala or akusala. Rob K., I hope I am not speaking incorrectly of your view. This appears to be a split in understanding between those who accept the prohibitions in everyday life, and those who don't think everyday activities have anything to do with the Dhamma at all, or can be kusala or akusala at all. I agree with what I think is Rob K.'s view. It does not make sense to me to say you can be a Buddhist simply by understanding dhammas, without any regard to whether you are killing beings or not, drinking, engaging in wrong livelihood, wrong speech and action, etc. in everyday life. Maybe this issue could be raised with K. Sujin? Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - #125086 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Jun 20, 2012 3:53 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Audio 2012 "Do you really know breath?" epsteinrob Hi Dieter. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dieter Moeller" wrote: > This is one of those rare cases where I think the definition of the rupa is much more complicated than understanding what the nama is. > > D: I think the main points you mention are becoming obvious when you practise anapanasati ( Wiki provides good sources to dig) and certainly there are many references in the Canon and commentaries to search for. Thanks, Dieter - I appreciate the references and the encouragement. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - #125087 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jun 20, 2012 5:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Problems in life. nilovg Dear Rob E, Op 19-jun-2012, om 19:51 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > I agree with what I think is Rob K.'s view. It does not make sense > to me to say you can be a Buddhist simply by understanding dhammas, > without any regard to whether you are killing beings or not, > drinking, engaging in wrong livelihood, wrong speech and action, > etc. in everyday life. ------ N: Awareness and right understanding of whatever dhamma arises lead to more siila, higher siila, in action, speech and thought. No conflict between conventional actions and understanding of realities. ----- Nina. #125088 From: "Ken H" Date: Wed Jun 20, 2012 9:40 am Subject: Re: Problems in life. kenhowardau Hi Sarah and Rob K, --- <. . .> > S: I'll let Ken explain his own meaning. --- KH: Maybe I should have made it clearer to Robert; it's the Religious Right fanatics, who oppose a woman's right to choose, that make abortion a sensitive topic for me. I am likely to say something regrettable about them. Otherwise, I have no qualms about it. I think a doctor who is required to perform abortions is in the same boat as the blind monk (in the suttas) who walked on caterpillars. Why was that monk not blamed by the Buddha? Was it because he did not intentionally kill anything? I don't think so. He intentionally walked even though there was a caterpillar plague and walking would, in his case, inevitably mean killing. So it was the same thing. The monk was not blamed because he had right understanding. He knew in ultimate reality there were no caterpillars, no monks, and no physical activities. There were only dhammas, rising and falling by conditions, beyond anyone's control. In explanations of satipatthana it is always wrong view or right view that is blamed or praised, it is never a permanent, controlling, being. Ken H #125089 From: "philip" Date: Wed Jun 20, 2012 10:48 am Subject: Out of our hands? ( was Re: To Phil. Dhamma recording philofillet Hi again Lukas I want to consider more what I write, but about my addictions as well. We are brothers in addiction. Of course all beings in the sense realm are addicted (or infatuated) in a way to sense objects but for some of us the accumulated addictions are stronger. I wrote: "There will be abstinence or not. I told my drug addict cousin that his fate was out of my hands, and of course that is true for you too but to you who understands Dhamma I can also say your fate is out *your* hands! I'm quite optimistic about you, though, much more than I was about him. You have sensitivity to true Dhamma." Ph: How do yoy feel about the expression "out of your hands?". Some people will say it sounds fatalustic but I don't see it that way. In my case, I will talk about my addiction to alcohol. Recently I am less inrerested in the religious adpects of Dhamma, not intetested in monks and their precepts, or even in householder precepts. Why did this hapoen? A year ago or so I was so adamant about the importance of keeping the precepts. Now if there are conditions for compassion towards an insect and recollection of the danger of killing I don't kill the insect, if there aren't such conditions, the insect dies. For now it is usually noy-killing, but who knows if the trend towards less strict following of the precepts will continue. And alcohol. I had a drink two days in a row last week, and enjoyed it? Where is this leading? Why are there not conditions for believing tgat having a drink is very harmful? A hundred people could write a hundred posts each about the danger of alcohol, or lying or illicit sex, or whatever other akusala kamma patha (alcohol/intoxicantsisn't, as we know) but woyld tgey have an impact? Maybe yes, maybr no. The defilements are strong, but the words of our Dhamma friends and of course tge Buddha are strong too. In the case of opiates, the defilent is VERY strong, I was always a regulsr but controllled drinker, I dislike hangovers so never have more than one drink. ( That is the defilement speaking, see?) So for me and for yoy, how the conditioning forces move us to abstain or not. The conditioning force that is the decision "I will not drink when I meet my bad friends" us indeed a conditioning force as weak, but since it is rooted in self, how strong can it be? But it is in some way a force to abstain, so as long as we remember it is not very strong, the moments of resolving "I will not drink" can be appreciated for what they are, weak friends that push us weakly in the right direction. The understanding that understands those weak friends for what they are ( self seeking control) is already stronger and of course the understanding that arises in an effective but unpredictable and uncontrollable way(anatta) to remind us in a timely way why it would be foolish and harmful to drink is an even stronger friend, and the even deeper understanding at the kevel of satipatthana that is aware with detachment and understanding of arisen sense door objects is even more powerful, though it so very rare for us. So there are many conditioning forces that are our friends, including the words of friends like A Sujin. That's why I feel optimistic about you, because I know you are in tune with various aspects of the friendship of kusala forces, and have the rare wisdom to understand that "satipatthana meditation" like taught by Goenka is a false friend. (I still belueve a kind of yoga where you can find healthy pleasure in @chi" or "ki", the non-physical(?) energy fields that run in the body is a helpful support. For example, one reason I don't drink is that it interferes with the pleadure I get from the ki/chi/"light"/"energy" I experience when I "meditate"/do breath yoga.) It is also unpredictable and uncontollable whether you will listen to the voice of tge defilement that says "only 1% of addicts survive, what use is it to get professional treatment?" You need professional treatment together with the support of Dhamma! Great combination. And stop asking people in this group for advice about where to get treatment, that's just a silly game the deliements play, you are not stupid, you know how to use the internet to look for treatment in your country or elsewhere in Europe, you can use tge ibternet to hear from people who gave tried different treatments, "word of mouth" is the expression we use for that. Anyways, how do you feel about the idea "out of your hands?" Does it sound right to you? (That question is for Lukas, not you Rob E - though I know your own addiction - posting at DSG and elsewhere I am sure- has you itching to jump in. Thanks.) Phil #125090 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Wed Jun 20, 2012 11:59 am Subject: Re: Problems in life. rjkjp1 Dear ken Thanks so much for making things clearer. Needless to say I think you have it wrong but it's much better that We understand each other. Soo I think that blind monk had no intention to kill at all, just like us if we accidendlylt step on an ant. Right understanding should lead to less deliberate killing I think. robert Ps. Dont worry about insulting the religious right, we are all adults here, a bit of strong languGe wont make us blush. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Sarah and Rob K, > > --- > <. . .> > > S: I'll let Ken explain his own meaning. > --- > > KH: Maybe I should have made it clearer to Robert; it's the Religious Right fanatics, who oppose a woman's right to choose, that make abortion a sensitive topic for me. I am likely to say something regrettable about them. Otherwise, I have no qualms about it. > > I think a doctor who is required to perform abortions is in the same boat as the blind monk (in the suttas) who walked on caterpillars. > > Why was that monk not blamed by the Buddha? Was it because he did not intentionally kill anything? I don't think so. He intentionally walked even though there was a caterpillar plague and walking would, in his case, inevitably mean killing. So it was the same thing. > > The monk was not blamed because he had right understanding. He knew in ultimate reality there were no caterpillars, no monks, and no physical activities. There were only dhammas, rising and falling by conditions, beyond anyone's control. > > In explanations of satipatthana it is always wrong view or right view that is blamed or praised, it is never a permanent, controlling, being. > > Ken H > #125091 From: "azita" Date: Wed Jun 20, 2012 1:42 pm Subject: Re: Problems in life. gazita2002 Hallo Sarah, > Dear Nina, Azita & all, > > >________________________________ > > From: Nina van Gorkom > > >I was considering the way Kh Sujin answers people's requests for > >advice. Ken, I also thought of you, re abortion Rob K mentioned the > >other day, and your reaction that this is a highly sensitive issue. I > >would like you to be happy about the Dhamma. Kh Sujin would never > >judge anybody about such issues. It is such a heavy decision and > >mostly it would not be taken lightly by the persons concerned. Rob K > >quoted an example of a monk giving advice about abortion, but that is > >a different matter. Monks are supposed to live like arahats, they > >cannot take any life or drink. They have to follow the rules of the > >Vinaya. > ... > S: Yes, I was going to mention in that context that the Parajika offense is for the monk, the lay-person. > > Azita, do you remember, a long time ago, you brought up this sensitive topic in the context of your work in a hospital theatre as a nurse. I may be wrong, but as I recall, sometimes you had to assist in such operations. K.Sujin's response, from my memory, was that these are all stories about situations and that then, like now, there are so many different dhammas and awareness can be aware anytime. She didn't say "change your job" or "say you can't do that" or anything else. It was just ordinary, daily life - develop understanding. azita: I remember talking about this situation but do not remember A.Sujins answer. I suspect there was no answer - as you say, develop understanding. I also do not know where or when the discussion took place. > As Nina said she always stresses that only a sotapanna will no longer take intoxicants, kill and so on. A man may be a monk for a long time following good Vinaya and then there may be conditions for all kinds of addictions to manifest if he disrobes or in another life-time if he is not a sotapanna yet. > > Azita, do you remember when the discussion was (Burma - beginning, end? India - which year?) and then maybe I can find it and transcribe it. > > Btw, Azita, how are your daughters and grand-children getting on? How's life in Cairns? Any chance of joining us in Bkk end Aug or next Jan? azita: will be back in Bkk end of Sept. Cant make it any sooner. Daughters and grandkids are jst fine. In fact, I consider my daughters to be fine young women which amazes me given my 'upside down' type of parenting!!! Jst yesterday my 5yr old grandson said to me, after I had a day with him while his mum and dad were at work, "we had a good day today didnt we, Nani" - had to agree with him, we did have fun. Its all jst a concept eh? No Nani, no grandson etc. patience, courage and good cheer, azita #125092 From: "Sarah" Date: Wed Jun 20, 2012 8:30 am Subject: hcked e-mail dhammasanna My friend's e-mail and address book were hacked and has affected mine. I have changed my password bur don't open any attachments or links from me. Thanks, Sarah Jane #125093 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Jun 20, 2012 4:26 pm Subject: Re: Problems in life. epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob E, > Op 19-jun-2012, om 19:51 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > > > I agree with what I think is Rob K.'s view. It does not make sense > > to me to say you can be a Buddhist simply by understanding dhammas, > > without any regard to whether you are killing beings or not, > > drinking, engaging in wrong livelihood, wrong speech and action, > > etc. in everyday life. > ------ > N: Awareness and right understanding of whatever dhamma arises lead > to more siila, higher siila, in action, speech and thought. No > conflict between conventional actions and understanding of realities. Well, this makes sense to me - if there are kusala cittas arising, the cetana will lead to right action and to kusala action. That is very different than the idea that there is no relationship between kusala cittas and conventional actions. Obviously you cannot murder someone with kusala cittas arising at that time; I am not sure but I think Ken H. would say that murder does not exist since it is just a concept, and all that exists are the akusala cittas at that time. The rupas that arise of the 'murder' are real, I would say, not conceptual. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - #125094 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Jun 20, 2012 4:38 pm Subject: Re: Problems in life. epsteinrob Hi Ken H, Sarah and Rob K. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Sarah and Rob K, > > --- > <. . .> > > S: I'll let Ken explain his own meaning. > --- > > KH: Maybe I should have made it clearer to Robert; it's the Religious Right fanatics, who oppose a woman's right to choose, that make abortion a sensitive topic for me. I am likely to say something regrettable about them. Otherwise, I have no qualms about it. I have very negative feelings about the religious right as well, and their extremely oppressive views. I also support a woman's right to choose whether to have an abortion or not, or other personal health and life decisions. Obviously that is not especially on-topic here, but I am extremely progressive/liberal in my political views. On the other hand, I disagree with you that there is no prohibition against conventional killing in Buddhism -- unless I misunderstand you. If I kill an insect because I choose to protect my child from a mosquito or whatever, I will live with the kamma, but I won't pretend that there isn't any kamma, and I don't agree that so-called conventional killing has no consequences for kamma. Re. abortion, I don't know the kammic bottom line on killing a developing organism that is part of oneself. I agree to some extent with those who draw a line between early abortions and later ones when the fetus is viable. There is a line somewhere when a fetus becomes a separate being, but you would probably consider all of that conceptual in absolute terms, and thus having no consequences for Buddhism in any case. I don't agree with that. I take the Buddha's prohibitions against certain activities literally, while, at the same time, understanding that there is a momentary level of direct truth that is the key to true understanding. I believe that both levels of the "two truths" are intact, not just one or the other. > I think a doctor who is required to perform abortions is in the same boat as the blind monk (in the suttas) who walked on caterpillars. > > Why was that monk not blamed by the Buddha? Was it because he did not intentionally kill anything? I don't think so. He intentionally walked even though there was a caterpillar plague and walking would, in his case, inevitably mean killing. So it was the same thing. I'm not sure if you can draw that conclusion. The fact that the monk was blind has something to do with the story, and it is his blindness that made it impossible for him to navigate without killing the caterpillars. There is usually a practical understanding in Buddhism that there are certain extreme conditions that cannot be met. One can drink alcohol as part of a medicinal potion, but not for recreation. One can't kill intentionally but one can be forgiven for killing when it is unavoidable. Could the monk live without walking anywhere? What was the alternative? In Jainism those who are orthodox wear a net over their face so they won't accidentally inhale small insects and kill them. Buddhism rejects this kind of extreme. > The monk was not blamed because he had right understanding. He knew in ultimate reality there were no caterpillars, no monks, and no physical activities. There were only dhammas, rising and falling by conditions, beyond anyone's control. If this explanation was true, then you would be asserting that someone with right view can kill another person without any blame or kamma. I don't believe this is the case. What is good for the caterpillar is good for any being. It's just a matter of degree. > In explanations of satipatthana it is always wrong view or right view that is blamed or praised, it is never a permanent, controlling, being. And yet definite conventional actions are praised and blamed by the Buddha, and I believe that this aspect of Dhamma is meant to be taken seriously, as I believe does Rob K. I think you are wrong on this one. There is no controlling person, but actions still have consequences. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = #125095 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jun 20, 2012 5:15 pm Subject: Pilgrimage in India, Ch 2, 7. nilovg Dear friends, Different realities should be known one at a time. What is heard is only sound, or audible object. When sound appears, it should be understood as it is: only sound, a kind of rúpa. Sound is only sound, there is no drum, no trompet in the sound. Sound may be sweet or harsh, but paying attention to its quality or defining it is not hearing but it is another moment of consciousness. When audible object appears we should not imagine it to be a neutral sound, sounds have different qualities. But at the moment of just hearing we do not pay attention to its particular quality. Gradually paññå will know precisely what object appears at a particular moment. At first we know in theory that thinking about sound is not the same as hearing and we believe that we have understood. But we can find out that, instead of the direct understanding of the characteristics of realities appearing one at a time, we are merely thinking of them and that we take thinking for awareness. Nåma and rúpa are not just words, they are realities that can be directly known when they appear. Through mindfulness of different characteristics we can prove that the Middle Way leads to detachment from the concept of self and eventually from all realities. There is no self who could try to be detached, it is paññå that brings about detachment. It is a blessing that the Buddha accumulated renunciation which reached its culmination at the moment he attained Buddhahood. When he realized all phenomena as they are there was complete detachment from them. From then on he taught the Middle Way. ****** Nina. #125096 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Jun 20, 2012 5:42 pm Subject: Re: Problems in life. sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: >There is no controlling person, but actions still have consequences. ... S: Yes, an intention to harm and act of harming others has consequences. No doubt. It is understanding now that can know what kind of cittas are arising. Metta Sarah ===== #125097 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jun 20, 2012 6:05 pm Subject: Is the Dhamma in the books.....or now? sarahprocter... Dear Friends, Here's another extract from the discussing at KK in 2011 that is relevant to many of our discussions. **** Maeve was saying that from the previous discussion, it seems that it's necessary to know what is in the book. KS: If I ask about whether it's in the book or now, what is better? Which book, which page, which line? Or now it's appearing? Didn't the Buddha know about realities right now? So it's the same when one knows the reality right now is what he experienced and became enlightened about. Phil asked a question about concepts about realities. KS: We don't mind what page, what line and what book at all. It must be there in many, many places. If that person just wants to know if it's in the book, does he really want to understand reality right now and what is true is in the book - the truth of reality. Maeve: It seems sometimes the understanding in the book is before the understanding right now. KS: Like the words come first before there can be understanding of seeing right now. That's why the Buddha taught and he had to use words to represent realities. M: So sometimes the words can condition understanding, but not always? KS: Not always. Depending on the listener's accumulations. M: So the question "is it from the book?" goes back to that idea of truthfulness about the level of understanding that is arising at this moment? KS: Many people quote books - no understanding. M: I mean truthfulness about one's.... KS: The word is truthfulness, but depending on the one who reads with or without understanding. Otherwise there will not be meditation centers if there is understanding. They study a lot, but they don't understand reality right now - that's why there are meditation centers. They don't understand now that reality is conditioned to arise and pass away instantly. If there is no understanding of reality right now, it's impossible to know the arising and passing away of anything. Jon: They don't understand that patipatti means the understanding of the presently arisen dhamma. KS: Because patipatti is not "to do", not "to go" to any place. It's the moment of understanding the characteristic of a reality. The intellectual understanding is enough to condition that moment not to turn away from the reality which appears. Sacca ~naana is the understanding which is confident in reality right now as the object of understanding only. What else apart this reality can be the object of understanding? And only that which appears.... ***** Metta Sarah ====== #125098 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jun 20, 2012 6:27 pm Subject: Broken heart? 10. A Happy Ending sarahprocter... Dear Lukas & all, Continuing with the extracts from the old article on Attachment to another person. ***** I then said that one can’t help thinking of happiness and security in terms of material conditions. Sujin: "What’s more important in life: material conditions or right understanding? Right understanding is so difficult to grow. So people have their own way of living while developing right understanding. Depending on the degree of right understanding one will see the danger of putting happiness or security in terms of anything else." I mentioned a mutual friend who was getting married soon. Sujin: "It’s her way. One has to take responsibility for one’s own life. Who can take responsibility for the other? It is conditioned already. Stop the growth of strong attachment with mettaa. When it’s kusala, it’s so different from wanting the other to be so attached and being so attached. It’s kindness to others if we don’t cling to them or encourage them to be attached to us." HAPPY ENDING? I said that it did make some sense that if we are genuinely concerned about the other person we will not want to encourage the attachment, knowing how much it hurts. I asked about when we are the object of attachment. Sujin: "When one knows one is the object of attachment, one cannot stop being the object of attachment for the others. There are ways with kusala citta to stop the other’s attachment growing. When one is sincere with kusala citta, the other will understand, not wanting to increase the attachment. The other can see it is sincere, kusala citta. It’s less dangerous than both having akusala citta. One day they will realise what is kusala citta... THE HAPPY ENDING." I said that living apart without any attachment wouldn’t sell at the movies as the happy ending! Sujin: "But we can know it’s a happy ending. One must be very sincere, secure, steadfast, resolute and decisive." ***** Metta Sarah ==== #125099 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jun 20, 2012 7:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Audio 2012 "Do you really know breath?" nilovg Dear Rob E, Op 19-jun-2012, om 19:35 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > If the breath rupa is conditioned by citta, does that mean that it > only arises when there is awareness for that citta? Or does any > citta give rise to the breath rupa? > ------- N: Every citta from birth to death, otherwise we would die. an exception is the attainment of higher stages of jhaana when breathing stops. ------ > R: Is there any way to describe what the characteristic of that > rupa is? For instance, hardness is obvious, and so is 'visible > object' at least to an extent. But it is hard to understand what > the special breath rupa is like without any description of its > physical characteristic. > ------ N: We are speaking about bhaavanaa, mental development. It has to be known whether the citta is kusala or akusala. When akusala citta rooted in lobha conditions breath, this is coarse. When kusala citta conditions it it is more subtle. Still, it is hard to describe its characteristic. Only when sati and pa~n~naa arises when it appears it can be known. It depends on a person's accumulations whether breath appears or not. When we were discussing breath with Kh Sujin she would ask us: does it appear? This is the only way to know. It will not appear to everybody. A most difficult subject. When reading to Lodewijk I just came across an interesting passage: Mahaa-niddesa, Sutta on old Age (not in English), it is said that life is dependent on in-breath and out-breath, on the four Great elements, on heat, on the food we eat, on vi~n~naa.na, consciousness. It is said that avijjaa (ignorance), sa"nkhaara (formations, kusala and akusala cetanaa), tanhaa (craving), upadaana (clinging) and bhaava (kamma-process becoming) condition in- and out-breathing. N: Our life goes on in accordance with the Dependent Origination. ----------- > > > N: Another matter is: can one select the object of awareness that > is the > > present reality presenting itself? > > R: I know the answer to that is that one cannot select the object > of awareness that is presented at any moment. Still, there are > those monks who were skilled in following breath and developing > jhana, and I guess for them they would have many such occasions. > ------ N: Yes, when there are accumulations for this subject of bhaavanaa, certainly. ----- > R: For myself, of course there is no skill in that way, but if the > breath rupa arises, it is just good to know how it would be > identified, as opposed to the passage of air and other rupas that > are not conditioned by citta. Any passage that describes the > characteristic of this rupa would 'close the loop' for me on this. :-) > ------ N: Generally there are akusala cittas rooted in lobha more often than kusala cittas. Bhaavanaa is not easy at all. ------ Nina. #125100 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jun 20, 2012 7:35 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Q. Pilgrimage in India, Ch 2, 6. nilovg Dear Phil, Op 19-jun-2012, om 17:02 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > I remember hearing, or reading, "we *like* to recognize a tree." > There is the simile of the bird landing on the branch and so so so > soon its shadow to get at how quickly a sense door process is > followed by a mind door process. Is there a smile that captures how > quickly there is attachment? Of course I remember that the first > javana cittas are rooted in lobha.. -------- N: I can only think of the sutta on lobha as teacher one always follows, and lobha as pupil or co-resident, who is always there. And indeed, it follows us like a shadow. ----- Nina. #125101 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jun 20, 2012 7:56 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Problems in life. nilovg Dear Rob E, Op 20-jun-2012, om 8:26 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > N: Awareness and right understanding of whatever dhamma arises lead > > to more siila, higher siila, in action, speech and thought. No > > conflict between conventional actions and understanding of > realities. > > Well, this makes sense to me - if there are kusala cittas arising, > the cetana will lead to right action and to kusala action. That is > very different than the idea that there is no relationship between > kusala cittas and conventional actions. ------- N: I remember that in another post you asked for a sutta explanation of conventional truth and ultimate truth. I cannot trace exactly your post now. The sutta about the two kinds of truths recently quoted by Rob K comes to my mind. I think of the sutta about the world: there are six worlds. I find it enough that the suttas point to the understanding of the reality now. There is a sutta about a dream: one sees a lake etc. but on waking it is all gone, does not exist. ------- Nina. #125102 From: "philip" Date: Wed Jun 20, 2012 8:21 pm Subject: Doubt after each moment ( was[dsg] Re: Q. Pilgrimage in India, Ch 2, 6. philofillet Dear Nina Thanks for the below. Today I heard the very good talk in which Lodewijk with typical modesty says that after all these years he does not understand sati, what is sati etc. At one point someone says that there can be sati, but then doubt, one doubts what one has experienced. Then A. Sujin says there is doubt after each monent, after each door. What did she mean? Is there doubt with every akusala citta, since there is subtle akusala of subtle attachment with every object, so doubt too? Doubt feels like something that needs a topic to think about, not something that arises after each monent of experiencing a sense door object. I don't understand doubt, or saddha either, in Dhamma terms, I understand only the conventional meanings. For me doybt is, for example, doubting there is a result of bad deeds, that kind of big dangerpus doubt. Thanks, only when you have time. Phil ---Is there a smile that captures how > > quickly there is attachment? Of course I remember that the first > > javana cittas are rooted in lobha.. > -------- > N: I can only think of the sutta on lobha as teacher one always > follows, and lobha as pupil or co-resident, who is always there. And > indeed, it follows us like a shadow. > ----- > Nina. > > > > > #125103 From: "ptaus1" Date: Wed Jun 20, 2012 8:53 pm Subject: Re: Dhs ptaus1 Hi all, Continuing Dhs maatika triplet 7: Pali: (ka) piitisahagataa dhammaa. (kha) sukhasahagataa dhammaa. (ga) upekkhaasahagataa dhammaa. Khine: (i) Dhamma which arise together with Delightful Satisfaction (ii) Dhamma which arise together with happiness (iii) Dhamma which arise together with Equanimity pt: Do I understand correctly that: (i) is referring to piiti cetasika? (ii) is referring to vedana cetasika? (iii) is referring to vedana cetasika? Or is it tatramajjhattata cetasika? Best wishes pt #125104 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jun 21, 2012 12:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhs nilovg Dear pt, Op 20-jun-2012, om 12:53 heeft ptaus1 het volgende geschreven: > > Continuing Dhs maatika triplet 7: > > Pali: > (ka) piitisahagataa dhammaa. > (kha) sukhasahagataa dhammaa. > (ga) upekkhaasahagataa dhammaa. > > Khine: > (i) Dhamma which arise together with Delightful Satisfaction > (ii) Dhamma which arise together with happiness > (iii) Dhamma which arise together with Equanimity > > pt: Do I understand correctly that: > (i) is referring to piiti cetasika? > ------ N: yes, it can be translated as rapture, enthusiasm, zest. ------ > (ii) is referring to vedana cetasika? > (iii) is referring to vedana cetasika? Or is it tatramajjhattata > cetasika? > ------- N: to happy feeling and to indifferent feeling. In order to understand this triplet, we need Expositor I, p. 56. N: In order to understand this, we need to go back to the previous triplet: dhamma with applied thinking, with sustained thinking and dhamma with neither. This refers to stages of jhaana. In the fivefold system jhaana: in the second stage vitakka, applied thinking, is abandoned, in the third stage, sustained thinking (vicaara), and in the third stage both have been abandoned. Now back to the piiti triplet: with the cittas of the sense sphere (kaamaavacara cittas) piiti and sukha always go together. This is not so with the jhaanacittas: at the fourth stage piiti is abandoned, but there is still sukha, happy feeling. At the fifth stage also sukha is abandoned but instead there is indifferent feeling, upekkhaa. This shows that the higher stages of jhaana become progressively more and more subtle. ----- Nina. #125105 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jun 21, 2012 12:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Problems in life. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and Robert) - In a message dated 6/20/2012 5:56:29 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Dear Rob E, Op 20-jun-2012, om 8:26 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > N: Awareness and right understanding of whatever dhamma arises lead > > to more siila, higher siila, in action, speech and thought. No > > conflict between conventional actions and understanding of > realities. > > Well, this makes sense to me - if there are kusala cittas arising, > the cetana will lead to right action and to kusala action. That is > very different than the idea that there is no relationship between > kusala cittas and conventional actions. ------- N: I remember that in another post you asked for a sutta explanation of conventional truth and ultimate truth. I cannot trace exactly your post now. The sutta about the two kinds of truths recently quoted by Rob K comes to my mind. I think of the sutta about the world: there are six worlds. I find it enough that the suttas point to the understanding of the reality now. There is a sutta about a dream: one sees a lake etc. but on waking it is all gone, does not exist. ----------------------------------------------------- HCW: Yes, I think it may be the Potaliya Sutta that you have in mind. ------------------------------------------------------- ------- Nina. ============================ With metta, Howard Like a Dream /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) #125106 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Jun 21, 2012 5:02 am Subject: Re: Problems in life. epsteinrob Hi Rob K, Ken H., and Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > ...I think that blind monk had no intention to kill at all, just like us if we accidentally step on an ant. Right understanding should lead to less deliberate killing I think. > robert I think this is the main point in terms of a connection between dhammas and actions 'in the world,' [or the rupas involved,] that when there is kusala there will also be right action, and as you say above, when there is right understanding, there will be a consequent 'less deliberate killing.' So I also think Ken H. is wrong when he says that the monk knew he would be killing the insects underfoot and therefore he was killing them intentionally by walking, but because there was right understanding the killing didn't matter, and had no akusala. This idea that if you have right understanding it is okay to kill or do other bad things is very strange in my view. It contradicts the meaning of kusala, which is not only wholesome but moral as well. I think the view that there 'will be less intentional killing' when there is right understanding is correct, and I believe that Nina also asserted this in her last post when she said 'there is no contradiction' between paramatha dhammas and conventional actions. You don't see kusala dhammas accompanying acts of lying or violence. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - #125107 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Jun 21, 2012 5:08 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Audio 2012 "Do you really know breath?" epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > N: We are speaking about bhaavanaa, mental development. It has to be > known whether the citta is kusala or akusala. When akusala citta > rooted in lobha conditions breath, this is coarse. When kusala citta > conditions it it is more subtle. ... > When reading to Lodewijk I just came across an interesting passage: > Mahaa-niddesa, Sutta on old Age (not in English), it is said that > life is dependent on in-breath and out-breath, on the four Great > elements, on heat, on the food we eat, on vi~n~naa.na, consciousness. > It is said that avijjaa (ignorance), sa"nkhaara (formations, kusala > and akusala cetanaa), tanhaa (craving), upadaana (clinging) and > bhaava (kamma-process becoming) condition in- and out-breathing. > N: Our life goes on in accordance with the Dependent Origination. > ----------- This is a very interesting passage - thanks for quoting that. I can see that many factors condition the breathing, and so many breaths will arise with ignorance, formations, craving, clinging and kamma as conditioning factors, so one can see how many akusala influences there are on the breath in normal life. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - #125108 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Jun 21, 2012 6:46 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Problems in life. epsteinrob Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Like a Dream > /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) Very nice - thanks, Howard. Strangely this is reminiscent of the idea of maya in Hinduism. Okay, I'll back up and duck again. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - #125109 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Jun 21, 2012 6:43 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Problems in life. epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob E, > Op 20-jun-2012, om 8:26 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > > > N: Awareness and right understanding of whatever dhamma arises lead > > > to more siila, higher siila, in action, speech and thought. No > > > conflict between conventional actions and understanding of > > realities. > > > > Well, this makes sense to me - if there are kusala cittas arising, > > the cetana will lead to right action and to kusala action. That is > > very different than the idea that there is no relationship between > > kusala cittas and conventional actions. > ------- > N: I remember that in another post you asked for a sutta explanation > of conventional truth and ultimate truth. I cannot trace exactly your > post now. The sutta about the two kinds of truths recently quoted by > Rob K comes to my mind. > I think of the sutta about the world: there are six worlds. I find it > enough that the suttas point to the understanding of the reality now. > There is a sutta about a dream: one sees a lake etc. but on waking it > is all gone, does not exist. It may be that the way we see things does not exist and is like a dream, but the underlying kusala and akusala cittas are still rising and falling away and causing other kinds of cittas to arise. Some of these are rupas and can be pleasant or unpleasant. It just seems like the experience takes place even if our concepts are wrong, and better not to 'experience' murder because of the akusala cittas behind it. Something like that. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - #125110 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jun 21, 2012 8:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Problems in life. upasaka_howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 6/20/2012 4:46:40 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, epsteinrob@... writes: Hi Howard. --- In _dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com) , upasaka@... wrote: > > Like a Dream > /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) Very nice - thanks, Howard. Strangely this is reminiscent of the idea of maya in Hinduism. Okay, I'll back up and duck again. ----------------------------------------------------------- HCW: LOL! Look out!!! [ : > / My perspective: When there is an actual truth, it shouldn't be surprising, I think, that different traditions, though varying in depth, correctness of insight, and manner of description, should nonetheless have glimpses of that truth. ------------------------------------------------------------ Best, Rob E. ============================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #125111 From: Vince Date: Thu Jun 21, 2012 9:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Is the Dhamma in the books.....or now? cerovzt Dear Sarah you wrote: > KS: Because patipatti is not "to do", not "to go" to any place. It's the moment of > understanding the characteristic of a reality. The intellectual understanding is enough > to condition that moment not to turn away from the reality which appears. Sacca ~naana > is the understanding which is confident in reality right now as the object of > understanding only. What else apart this reality can be the object of understanding? And > only that which appears.... I believe this is important. I remember a conversation with Nina about the exact meaning of "understanding" in Thai language to clarify what Sujin can means. Nina wrote me: > N: In Thai: kaw cai: enters the heart. I like this . Kh Sujin would > explain that there are many levels of understanding: intellectual > understanding and this can condition direct understanding. One listen > with understanding and in this way it can develop. in Western languages we lack of a similar notion to mean a progressive flow of knowledge until the end. While in Thai it comes from "enter to the heart" (to the deepest), the etymology of the word "understanding" in western languages is quite different. I have read that in latinized languages it comes from "intendere" which means "to tend" in the sense of managing. In English or German it comes from "thunnuz" which also means "to tend" but in the sense of thickness. It seems we grow lacking of some word able to mean that some stream of knowledge can go from the surface until the deepest. best Vince, #125112 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Thu Jun 21, 2012 11:56 am Subject: Re: Problems in life. rjkjp1 Hi rob let's hope Kenh expands more so we can all learn more about these ideas. robert --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Rob K, Ken H., and Nina. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > > ...I think that blind monk had no intention to kill at all, just like us if we accidentally step on an ant. Right understanding should lead to less deliberate killing I think. > > > robert > > I think this is the main point in terms of a connection between dhammas and actions 'in the world,' [or the rupas involved,] that when there is kusala there will also be right action, and as you say above, when there is right understanding, there will be a consequent 'less deliberate killing.' > > So I also think Ken H. is wrong when he says that the monk knew he #125113 From: "ptaus1" Date: Thu Jun 21, 2012 1:32 pm Subject: Re: Dhs ptaus1 Hi Nina, > N: In order to understand this, we need to go back to the previous > triplet: dhamma with applied thinking, with sustained thinking and > dhamma with neither. This refers to stages of jhaana. Ah yes, it makes sense when referenced to jhana. Thanks. Best wishes pt #125114 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Jun 21, 2012 3:24 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Problems in life. epsteinrob Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > ... (From the Potaliya Sutta) > > Very nice - thanks, Howard. Strangely this is reminiscent of the idea of > maya in Hinduism. Okay, I'll back up and duck again. > ----------------------------------------------------------- > HCW: > LOL! Look out!!! [ : > / > My perspective: When there is an actual truth, it shouldn't be > surprising, I think, that different traditions, though varying in depth, > correctness of insight, and manner of description, should nonetheless have glimpses > of that truth. > ------------------------------------------------------------ Well I agree with you! None the less, I will stay low behind the bushes... Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - #125115 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Jun 21, 2012 3:27 pm Subject: Re: Problems in life. epsteinrob Hi Rob K. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > > Hi rob > let's hope Kenh expands more so we can all learn more about these ideas. > robert Yeah, it's kind of an important area of inquiry - I think that looking into it and exchanging these views is good. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Rob K, Ken H., and Nina. > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > > > > ...I think that blind monk had no intention to kill at all, just like us if we accidentally step on an ant. Right understanding should lead to less deliberate killing I think. > > > > > robert > > > > I think this is the main point in terms of a connection between dhammas and actions 'in the world,' [or the rupas involved,] that when there is kusala there will also be right action, and as you say above, when there is right understanding, there will be a consequent 'less deliberate killing.' ------------ #125116 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jun 21, 2012 5:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Problems in life. nilovg Hi Howard, Thank you, I was wondering about this already for a long time. Nina. Op 20-jun-2012, om 16:51 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > HCW: > Yes, I think it may be the Potaliya Sutta that you have in mind. #125117 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jun 21, 2012 5:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Is the Dhamma in the books.....or now? nilovg Dear Vince, Another expression was: it has to go into the very bones, and I find this also good. More important than words is understanding of the reality right now. THis has to go into the very bones. Nina. Op 21-jun-2012, om 1:06 heeft Vince het volgende geschreven: > It seems we grow lacking of some word able to mean that some stream > of knowledge can go > from the surface until the deepest. #125118 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jun 21, 2012 5:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Problems in life. nilovg Dear Rob E, Op 21-jun-2012, om 7:27 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > Yeah, it's kind of an important area of inquiry - I think that > looking into it and exchanging these views is good. ----- N: Yes. I think that understanding and awareness of paramattha dhammas must never be an excuse to engage in akusala, thinking, well it is only a conditioned naama. I am sure Ken H does not mean this. Words can be easily misunderstood. I would say, on the contrary: through right understanding one sees more the danger of all kinds of akusala, even the subtle ones. ---------- Nina. #125119 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jun 21, 2012 5:25 pm Subject: Pilgrimage in India, Ch 3, 1. nilovg Dear friends, Chapter 3. The long Way. Out of compassion the Buddha developed during his innumerable lives as a Bodhisatta the wisdom that would enable him to become a Sammåsambuddha. A Sammåsambuddha is a person who discovers the truth without the help of a teacher and who is able to teach the truth to others as well. We read in the commentary to the “Khuddakapåtha”, the “Paramatthajotikå”, on the “Three Refuges”, 14: “... and this is said ‘Buddha’: in what sense buddha? He is the discoverer (bujjhitå) of the Truths, thus he is enlightened (buddha). He is the enlightener (bodhetå) of the generation, thus he is enlightened. He is enlightened by omniscience, enlightened by seeing all, enlightened without being led by others....” He could not have become a Sammåsambuddha without the right conditions for this. In his many lives as a Bodhisatta he developed sati and paññå because he had to accumulate paññå to a greater extent than anybody else. When the Bodhisatta at the feet of the Buddha Dípankara made his resolve to become a future Buddha he must have listened to the teaching of Dhamma and developed sati. He listened also to the teachings of other Buddhas who came after the Buddha Dípankara. In the “Sublime Story” (Mahåpadåna Sutta, Dialogues of the Buddha II, 14) we read that the Buddha spoke about six previous Buddhas, about their families, their span of life and the pair of disciples who were their attendants. In the “Discourse on Ghatikåra”(Middle Length Sayings II, 81) we read that the Buddha Kassapa taught him Dhamma when he, in his life as Jotipåla, visited him together with his friend the potter Ghatikåra. The Bodhisatta was in that life ordained as a monk and he must have developed mindfulness of nåma and rúpa. He did not attain enlightenment then, but he developed sati and paññå for many more lives, out of compassion for other beings and also for us. His enlightenment is the condition for us to be able to develop right understanding at this moment. ****** Nina. #125120 From: "Ken H" Date: Thu Jun 21, 2012 6:01 pm Subject: Re: Problems in life. kenhowardau Hi Robert E and Robert K, I am away again for a few days but this time with a new laptop, so there should be no excuses. But a longish reply to Robert E has just gone west due to my technological incompetence. I am in no mood to type it again. I will move on to this next message instead. ------- > RK: Hi rob > let's hope Kenh expands more so we can all learn more about these ideas. ------- KH: Sarcasm will not help my mood. :-) ------------- >> RK: ...I think that blind monk had no intention to kill at all, just like us if we accidentally step on an ant. ------------- KH: Of course the monk had no intention to kill, but so what? There must be more to the story than that. I can accidentally step on insects every day and no one will write a sutta about me. The monk had right understanding of nama and rupa. That's why we read about him in the suttas. When there is right understanding of nama and rupa there is no thought whatsoever of a sentient being performing kusala or akusala. That would be out of the question. And that's what all this ongoing disagreement has been about. Even though Nina and Sarah have said some things about the heart (for example) and about sense rupas being located all over the body, I have no argument with them. I believe they are saying those things just to give a better understanding of the dhammas we are studying. My argument is with Robert K for his insistence that people - not just dhammas) - are reborn, or that people - not just dhammas – perform kusala and akusala actions. Or that concepts are made of lots and lots of kalapas of rupas (as if kalapas were molecules and rupas were atoms!). Or maybe it is Robert K who has an argument with me – for taking anatta too seriously. ----------- <. . .> >>>RK: Right understanding should lead to less deliberate killing I think. > >RE: I think this is the main point in terms of a connection between dhammas and actions 'in the world,' [or the rupas involved,] that when there is kusala there will also be right action, and as you say above, when there is right understanding, there will be a consequent 'less deliberate killing.' ------------ KH: When there is right understanding there is no one who is killed and no one who kills. That's what the monk knew. And so of course we will say the conventionally known monk did not purposely tread on caterpillars. (Even though it seems obvious he should have known that was going to happen!) There really was no sentient (permanent) monk. That was just a conventional designation for the five khandhas. (In this case five khandhas totally devoid of akusala kamma.) So the conventional story has to be about an innocent monk doesn't it? Better still an innocent monk who seemed to all but the most enlightened (including some of his fellow monks) to be guilty. Ken H #125121 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jun 21, 2012 6:15 pm Subject: Broken heart? 10. Oily Soot sarahprocter... Dear Lukas & friends, (This will be the last extract for a few days - we're traveling to Australia tomorrow). OILY SOOT? In Sri Lanka, earlier this year [1979], Khun Sujin also referred to "the game that ta.nhaa always wins." Because of a lack of understanding we follow the game of ta.nhaa wherever it goes. With awareness, she stressed, "one lets go of desire for other objects. Even a little attachment hinders the progress of right understanding." Attachment is a conditioned reality with stories proliferating all the time on account of such feelings. "The growth of vipassanaa must begin with detachment and go the way of detachment because attachment is very subtle and always wins when there is no understanding." We read about Lady Sumanaa, the youngest daughter of Anaathapi.n.dika (Commentary to Dhammapada, 'Buddhist Legends', Book I, 13, translated by E.W. Burlingame, Harvard Oriental Series) who had reached the second stage of enlightenment. Yet still she died of grief because of her failure to obtain a husband, so we can understand how dangerous the attachment is. Although almost every object is an object of attachment when there is no development of understanding. Specific mention was repeatedly made in Sri Lanka of the danger of strong attachment for what is taken for another being. However, we should also understand these comments in the context of satipa.t.thaana. There are many other examples of followers of the Buddha who attained stages of enlightenment even though they were householders, often married with large families. At any time, there are realities which can be known. This should not stop us from seeing the danger of particular kinds of attachment, however, and a commentary note to the 'Kusala Muula' or 'The Three Roots of Action' (Gradual Sayings, Book of the Threes, 68, 'Those of Other Views', PTS), states that as lust has very deep roots in human nature, it is as hard to remove as oily soot, and a particular attachment might follow a person even through two or three lives. Lust is said to be less reprehensible than anger or hatred but harder to remove. In the sutta itself we read: "Malice is much to be blamed, but it is quick to change. Delusion is much to be blamed and it is slow to change. But, sirs, what is the reason, what is the cause why lust that has not arisen arises, or why lust that has arisen is liable to more-becoming and growth? " 'It is the feature of beauty (in a thing),' must be the reply. In him who gives not systematic attention to the feature of beauty, lust that has not arisen arises, and lust that has arisen is liable to more-becoming and growth. This, sirs, is the reason, this is the cause...." ***** Metta Sarah ====== #125122 From: "sarah" Date: Thu Jun 21, 2012 6:54 pm Subject: Re: The Complete English Translation of the A. N. by Bhikkhu Bodhi sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > S: Any group or community needs rules of behaviour (even DSG!). Why? Because we're not arahats. In the beginning the Sangha didn't need any rules, but as problems arose, rules were laid down. > > > > Now to your question. Just because in absolute terms there are only dhammas, paramattha dhammas, doesn't mean that we don't use concepts, or that we don't refer to 'conventional actions', to selves, people and things. It means that the path is just the understanding of the realities, no matter what community, what rules, what terms or ideas are used. > > > > This is why the path just depends on the right understanding at this moment, no matter one is a bhikkhu or lay-person, here or there, old or young and so on. > > > > Pls let me know if this still doesn't answer the question. ... >R: I think that it basically does answer the question. I guess my follow-up question, to make it a little clearer, is whether the rules of conventional behavior, such as those in the Vinaya, are part of the path, supporting of the path, or unrelated to the path at all. .... S: The path is just the development of satipatthana regardless of the lifestyle. As discussed, as understanding develops, "seeing the danger in the smallest faults", adhi sila, higher sila will also be developed - fewer and fewer conditions to break the precepts for lay-people or the Patimokkha rules for monks. There will be a better understanding of the danger of causing harm and bringing disrepute to the Sangha. One will understand the purpose of the rules and the monk's life is. There is no problem at all in talking in terms of conventional behavior or referring to conventional realities. The problem is when you (or others) assert that such conventional realities can *break down into a series of rupas* or something along those lines. A chariot never 'breaks down' into khandhas. I think that's one of the points that Ken and others have been stressing. ... >If they are unrelated to the path, but are just rules for monastic organization and conventionally getting along, then that is easy to reconcile. If they are part of the path or supportive of the path, then there is a relationship between conventional behavior and understanding of dhammas, and that is what I would like to clarify. ... S: The rules are for the harmony and well-being of the Sangha, to be followed whilst developing satipatthana. If we consider the precept of abstention from killing, we can consider whether there is any intention to harm now or not. If we see the danger in even small thoughts of harming when they arise along with an understanding of any conditioned realities appearing now, there will be less and less inclination to harm or deliberately kill even insects. Whatever we read in the Tipitaka, including the Vinaya, can be considered and reflected on at this moment. It all comes down to the cittas arising now, not just book study. Metta Sarah p.s there will be delays in all replies after the few I'm writing now. ==== #125123 From: "Lukas" Date: Thu Jun 21, 2012 7:03 pm Subject: Re: Broken heart? 10. Oily Soot szmicio Dear Sarah, > We read about Lady Sumanaa, the youngest daughter > of Anaathapi.n.dika (Commentary to Dhammapada, 'Buddhist Legends', Book I, 13, > translated by E.W. Burlingame, Harvard Oriental Series) who had reached the > second stage of enlightenment. Yet still she died of grief because of her > failure to obtain a husband, so we can understand how dangerous the attachment > is. L: Yes, Sumana is good example. She was one of the 4 children of Anathapindika, other children were sotapanna, but she were so skillful that she could reach sakadagami. She was unhappy, looking of her two sisters that had so happy marriadge, and she started to gieve and have sorrow. She stop to eat even, so how strong grieve it must be? She died after some time. This is a good example, that we cannot ran away from accumulated tendencies. Even anagami cannot change. It must be so natural. Best wishes Lukas #125124 From: "sarah" Date: Thu Jun 21, 2012 7:04 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Cetasika in daily life -project -viriya 1 - welfare for the householders sarahprocter... Dear Dieter, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dieter Moeller" wrote: > D: you are right 'sense media' refers to the pairs of ayatana .. 5th in place . > When we are talking e.g. about vinnana khandha (3rd place) we speak of eye consciousness ,ear consciousness etc. > Citta , Cetasika (and Rupa) provide the' picture'.. . the sense media ,isn't it? ... S: Whatever we're talking about, it comes down to cittas, cetasikas and rupas. The ayatanas refer to the meeting of various cittas, cetasikas and rupas at this moment. For example, the 'miracle' of seeing cannot occur without the coming together of eye-sense, visible object, the seeing citta and associated cetasikas. .. > > > > S:For example, heat is a rupa. It shares all the characteristics of rupa with all other rupa khandha realities. Each one is different - it arises and falls away never to reappear. All day we cling to that reality, that khandha which has gone. We cling to nothing in effect. > Heat is also an ayatana - an outer ayatana or what I think you refer to as "sense media". > The ayatanas stress the coming together or meeting of realities. In order for heat rupa to be experienced, there has to be the "meeting" of body sense, heat, body consciousness, contact and other associated mental factors. No self, no being involved at all - just conditioned dhammas. The "miracle" of conditioned dhammas coming together at this moment. > So the characteristic of heat, the reality of heat is just heat whether we refer to it as a khandha, an ayatana or a dhatu. However, the Buddha used different ways of description and explanation because he knew that just one kind of description was not enough for most listeners to understand realities as anatta. > > D: I need to see that in practise , is the text below in line with your thinking? > Maha Satipatthana Sutta:[3] "Furthermore, the monk remains focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the sixfold internal & external sense media. And how does he remain focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the sixfold internal & external sense media? There is the case where he discerns the eye, he discerns forms, he discerns the fetter that arises dependent on both. He discerns how there is the arising of an unarisen fetter. And he discerns how there is the abandoning of a fetter once it has arisen. And he discerns how there is no future arising of a fetter that has been abandoned. (The same formula is repeated for the remaining sense media: ear, nose, tongue, body, & intellect.) .... S: Yes, there is the 'meeting' of the various dhammas. At moments of satipatthana, there is the awareness and understanding of one dhamma, one reality which appears, such as greed, seeing, visible object.....any reality. The 12 ayatanas (six pairs) include all dhammas. .... > D: Sarah, you sidestepped the next sentence : > "If not, what I suppose , to talk of arising and falling khandhas equally mean the dhammas which are grouped under them." > > In other words , if there the distinction between realities and concepts is only done within Abhidhamma and no such seperation in the Sutta Pitaka , > the sayings of the Sutta Pitaka can not be used to argue that khandha isn't a concept in Abhidhamma , can it ? ... S: As Nina said, both the Sutta Pitaka and Abhidhamma refer to dhammas which can be known now. Khandha in the suttas or the Abhidhamma is the same - it refers to any conditioned dhamma which arises and falls away. Metta Sarah ===== #125125 From: "sarah" Date: Thu Jun 21, 2012 7:14 pm Subject: Re: Broken heart? 10. Oily Soot sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > This is a good example, that we cannot ran away from accumulated tendencies. Even anagami cannot change. It must be so natural. ... S: Yes....many people would like to change their characters or tendencies, but it's impossible. The tendency that is conditioned at this moment has been conditioned already. The only way is understanding. I thought all your comments on Practice in #125063 were excellent. I was going to write about some lovely discussions I had with Jessica and her friends at the beach and lunch on Sunday, but no time. One of the friends had some mental disturbances and has to take drugs for this. She'd become very distressed after her mother had died a few years ago and had been to meditation retreats where she was encouraged to 'observe' 'do metta meditation' and so on.... made things worse. She hears voices. I talked rather a lot about this moment and understanding thinking, letting go of the past and so on. When it's not seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting or touching now, it's thinking - thinking about voices, thinking about observing, thinking about having different tendencies and so on. Jessica is keen to study and understand the Dhsg and Abhidhamma more. Again, all back to this moment. No time to add more! Metta Sarah p.s re your off-list note and 'broken heart' - just understand dhammas now and see the value of considering the other's welfare rather than your own. The citta is 'light' and 'calm' when it's kusala. The problems all come down to attachment - attachment to oneself. ===== #125126 From: "sarah" Date: Thu Jun 21, 2012 7:19 pm Subject: Re: Broken heart? 7. The 'situation' - the story sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > I ment by this answer, that even there is sadness, or anger or whatever, this is exactly how it is. This is a Truth. ... S: And not just sadness or anger. Any conditioned dhamma - even seeing now, visible object now - is dukkha. This is the practice - understanding and being detached from whatever appears. Dukkha, the 1st NT is the arising and falling away of all conditioned dhammas. Just remembered, the other day with Jessica's friends, we talked a lot about living in dream worlds most the time. Just as what we dream about at night is not real, so now, the imagined voices, the ideas, the problems are just dreams. The friend had been told to 'control' herself. But all these dhammas are conditioned - habits, tendencies, sense experiences. She had been told to 'practice more', but the dhammas are anatta - they are for understanding, not for trying to control. Metta Sarah ===== #125127 From: "sarah" Date: Thu Jun 21, 2012 7:24 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Hello dear friends! sarahprocter... Dear Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > I received a letter from his father. I had heard that he read out (at a memorial ceremony) a part of a poem I had written for his son, and when I opened the letter I assumed it would be full of tender recollection of his son and regret for their troubled relationship. Instead, the feeling was that it was a relief for him and his wife that their troub led son was gone and they wouldn't have to worry about him anymore. I was quite impressed by that. As the father wrote in the letter, "you never know." Nobody is locked into feelings, you never know how we or others will respond to tragedies, and other situations. The parents of a suicide are not necessarily doomed to grieve intensely, there can be relief instead, there is no telling, anatta. ... S: Yes, interesting. As he says "you never know". So nice that he wrote. Perhaps you'll see them in the summer to talk more. Someone close to me told me recently she was relieved, even glad, when her husband suddenly died many years ago after a difficult relationship. I'd had no idea and had been so concerned for her. We never know. Anatta, as you say. We imagine all sorts of things all the time, but can only ever know our own cittas at such times - always lost in stories about other people. Metta Sarah ===== #125128 From: "sarah" Date: Thu Jun 21, 2012 7:27 pm Subject: Re: Some way to study dhs and atth sarahprocter... Dear Lukas & Jessica, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > L: I also recommend you to read Dhatukatha. This is so good to study in daily life. See Atthasalini, four oceans. In the beginning discourse. > > Dhatukatha. Acharn Sujin mentioned about viriyakatha, that the talk (katha) on viriya can be a condition to have more effort, though to be aware. Dhatu katha, I found it so deep and so powerful when minds ponders over the realities, after short reminder of dhatu katha. > > All just elements. ... S: Maybe you can add more and give some examples from the text. Perhaps you can encourage Jessica to discuss her study projects more. As you say "all just elements". Metta Sarah ====== #125129 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jun 21, 2012 7:44 pm Subject: Awareness and Thinking, no 3. nilovg Dear friends, Kh Santi: How can we exert effort for satipatthaana? Kh S: When there are no conditions for satipatthaana it does not arise. More understanding is the condition for it. If it does not arise there is not yet enough understanding. Kh Santi: If for someone satipatthana often arises he has a lot of effort or energy, and if it does not often arise, there is not much effort for that person. Kh S: Does satipatthana arise because it is accumulated as sankhaarakkhandha( the khandha of formations, including sati, pa~n~naa and all wholesome qualities) or does it arise because of a self? At this moment of listening there are sati and pa~n~naa, and are these sankhaarakkhandha? Kh Santi: Also striving and intention are sankhaarakkhandha. Kh Sujin: The aim of the development of satipatthaana is detachment. The idea of wanting, of self, is very deeply rooted. In order to abandon the idea of self there must be pa~n~naa of the level of sacca ~naa.na. (N: Sacca ~naa.na is the understanding which is confident in reality right now as the object of understanding. As we have seen, there must be three rounds of understanding the noble Truths: sacca ~naa.na, understanding of what has to be known and what the Path is; kicca ~naa.na, understanding of the task, that is, satipa.t.thaana; kata ~naa.na: understanding of what has been realized, the realisation of the truth.) Kh S: It is necessary to understand the second noble Truth, the origin of dukkha that is lobha. If one takes striving for self one believes that “we” are striving. One does not see the Truth of the origin of dukkha which is lobha. How then could one abandon lobha? ******* Nina. #125130 From: "Lukas" Date: Thu Jun 21, 2012 7:51 pm Subject: Re: Broken heart? 10. Oily Soot szmicio Dear Sarah, Jessica, > S:One of the friends had some mental disturbances and has to take drugs for this. She'd become very distressed after her mother had died a few years ago and had been to meditation retreats where she was encouraged to 'observe' 'do metta meditation' and so on.... made things worse. L: Yes, I did the some few years ago. I wanted to observe, to decrease my misery. But I just only increased it. So many wrong ideas, so much wrong view accumulated. This really block all kinds of panna. And this is so harmful and so hard to eradicate later. When I am here I see people sitting and meditating, so much effort, closed eyes, streight posture and looking for what? This is painful. > She hears voices. I talked rather a lot about this moment and understanding thinking, letting go of the past and so on. L: That is good. At least some kind of misery involved. >S: When it's not seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting or touching now, it's thinking - thinking about voices, thinking about observing, thinking about having different tendencies and so on. L: Many times a day, it's not like that, if not all the time. This all also must be natural. So I would say, know more on intellectual level, consider and study dhamma now and lead ur life. For me a lot of people told me, that if I am in love, no practice anymore, no studying realities. But even so much misery involved, so much attachement, it's all still so natural. I would repeat my anagarika friend's words on people that slander u, when they found out u drink. Strong attachement, thinking stories, no observing, no studying realities? SO WHAT?...so what? Best wishes Lukas #125131 From: "Lukas" Date: Thu Jun 21, 2012 8:10 pm Subject: Re: Broken heart? 7. The 'situation' - the story szmicio Dear Sarah, Jessica > Just remembered, the other day with Jessica's friends, we talked a lot about living in dream worlds most the time. Just as what we dream about at night is not real, so now, the imagined voices, the ideas, the problems are just dreams. L: And I think it is like that all the day. But there is ditthi (wrong view) and ignorance that covers up everything all the time. And they also must be known. I think of Acharn Sujin words, as I remember them: "Be aware of what ignorance ignores" - I think she ment that. >S: The friend had been told to 'control' herself. L: I remember the passage from Milindha pa~n~nha, that also must be checked in life, investigated how much we really know. This was a question if all this 5 senses that are produced by kamma, if they are conditioned by one kamma or different kammas. Venerable Nagasena answers: By different kammas, and give a simile of planting a seeds. It's like planting different seeds, what we get later will be the same plant or different plants? Different was the answer of a king, they cannot be other than different cause different seeds give different plants. This is exactly with these 5 senses. Eye, visible object, ear, sound...,body and tangible objects. They are not ours, they are just different moments, conditioned by different kammas from a past. My question here is why Ven. Nagasena and King Milinda are talking only of 5 senses? >S: The friend had been told to 'control' herself. But all these dhammas are conditioned - habits, tendencies, sense experiences. She had been told to 'practice more', but the dhammas are anatta - they are for understanding, not for trying to control. L: As Bhante Dhammadharo mentions, this is understanding that nothing is under control. This is the way of correct understanding. Best wishes Lukas #125132 From: "Lukas" Date: Thu Jun 21, 2012 8:30 pm Subject: Out of our hands? ( was Re: To Phil. Dhamma recording szmicio Hi Phil, > > Ph: How do yoy feel about the expression "out of your hands?". ... > ..Anyways, how do you feel about the idea "out of your hands?" >Does it sound right to you? L: Out of what hands?? There are only different ayatanas, no hands. >And alcohol. I had a drink two days in a row last week, and enjoyed it? Where is this leading? Why are there not conditions for believing tgat having a drink is very harmful? L This is dangerous to u and me, not for others. This is not alcohol itself that is dangerous. I would say we are dangerous for ourselves. >In the case of opiates, the defilent is VERY strong, I was always a regulsr but controllled drinker, I dislike hangovers so never have more than one drink. ( That is the defilement speaking, see?) L: And who else can speak? vaci sankharas that are conditioned only by ignorance? kilesa vatta? defilements that speaks? defilements speak. >The understanding that understands those weak friends for what they >are ( self seeking control) is already stronger and of course the understanding that arises in an effective but unpredictable and uncontrollable way(anatta) to remind us in a timely way why it would be foolish and harmful to drink is an even stronger friend, and the even deeper understanding at the kevel of satipatthana that is aware with detachment and understanding of arisen sense door objects is even more powerful, though it so very rare for us. L: friends, bad company is vipaka. In reality we cannot choose our friends. They are just vipaka. this is a correct way of understanding. >It is also unpredictable and uncontollable whether you will listen to the voice of tge defilement that says "only 1% of addicts survive, what use is it to get professional treatment?" L: The worst voice is like that: 'why u dont take anything now? Why u prolonging ur suffering only, and u know u will take in future. So why u suffer' - the worst voice. Basicly I am really scared to go back to old environment, really scared, especially knowing myself, and how this all things always end. But still not enoght panna to stop this. The point is what I wanted to show. Thinking in a right way, is the best way to do. This is how the Lord preached, and this is how we live. Try to understand correctly. Best wishes Lukas #125133 From: Lukas Date: Thu Jun 21, 2012 10:38 pm Subject: Re: Some way to study dhs and atth szmicio Dear Jessica and Sarah, ... >S: Maybe you can add more and give some examples from the text. Perhaps you can encourage Jessica to discuss her >study projects more. L: Dhatukatha follows the Dhammasangani, the first book of Abhidhamma and Vibhanga the second book of Abhidhamma. In Dhammasangani the Lord explains all realies that may come. There he classifies them on many different ways such as: kusala dhammaa, akusala dhammaa, avyakata dhamma. This group is a triplet. All dhammas can be classified like that. sukhaya vedanaya sampayutta dhamma, dukkhaya vedanaya sampayutta dhamma, adukkhamasukkhya vedanaya sampayutta dhamma. another triplet on realities. so all this dhammas that are associated with pleasant feeling, unpleasant feeling and neither pleasant of unpleasant. There are also couplets like, hetu dhamma, na hetu dhamma. This all realities that are a root, or that are not root. And in Vibhanga we can consider more. Ruupa now like visible object? hetu or na hetu? Dhatukatha follows, and considers any reality as just elements, that are not self. There are also other 4 books. As I remember this is puggalapa~n~nati,concepts of persons, katha vathu, points of controversy(only matika, the introduction made by buddha himself), yamaka, and patthana, the great book on conditions. Just check it cause I am not sure. How i find it? This all are different vibhangas(classifications), to help to consider realities. Check atthasalini, 4 oceans, ocean of methods. This is how Theravada works. This is called vibhajjavada or something like that, the teachings of classifictions. Check also a concept on saavaka, the hearers. Theravada is purely based on that, listening and considering Dhamma. That's what I can say after few years of practicing theravada, I feel that way. And if Abhidhamma is true work of Buddha? That only u can say. If u read that, and this really brings understanding, then u will how powerful it is. Maybe anyone wants to correct me? Or add something, welcome. Best wishes Lukas #125134 From: "philip" Date: Thu Jun 21, 2012 11:25 pm Subject: Re: Some way to study dhs and atth philofillet Hello Lukas What a wonderful survey of Abhidhamma, my worries about you backslidubg into drugs are fading you are a true follower of the Buddha, like Jessica, and of course others. I am not like that now, Dhs and Atth sit on my bookshelf and I read pip psychology instead. But that's ok, it has come to be and can't be changed there is no impulse to be a devoted folloeer of the Buddha now, but in a sense by not getting upset about it, it shows there is an appreciation of anattaness and unpredictability of dhammas. Thanks for your post on "not in your gands", back in a few days, there is a lot of confidence that you will rise above this challenge, your kusala chanda feels so string, even through the computer screen. I have bwver ysed the Pali word people use to rejoice in others' kusala, anumoddha or something like that, but I rejoice in your kusala now!!! phil #125135 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Fri Jun 22, 2012 12:03 am Subject: Re: Problems in life. rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Robert E and Robert K, > > > KH: When there is right understanding there is no one who is killed and no one who kills. That's what the monk knew. And so of course we will say the conventionally known monk did not purposely tread on caterpillars. (Even though it seems obvious he should have known that was going to happen!) ++++++++++ Dear Kenh thanks for the further explanations. Could you say even more... In the earlier case of the Buddhist abortion doctor you suggested he should be confident in his understanding of kamma and vipaka: assuming this doctor had right understanding he would know there were no beings in the ultimate sense and his operations , as there is no being being killed, and no one doimng any killing, would be blameness. Is that right? robert > #125136 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jun 22, 2012 12:37 am Subject: Re: Doubt after each moment. nilovg Dear Phil, Op 20-jun-2012, om 12:21 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > > Then A. Sujin says there is doubt after each monent, after each > door. What did she mean? Is there doubt with every akusala citta, > since there is subtle akusala of subtle attachment with every > object, so doubt too? > ------ N: It is likely to arise often so long as one is not a sotaapanna. When one learns to be aware of naama and ruupa that appears now there may still be doubt: is it visible object that appears now or is it seeing, is it naama or ruupa? Or: is the citta at this moment kusala or akusala? ------- > Ph: Doubt feels like something that needs a topic to think about, > not something that arises after each moment of experiencing a sense > door object. > ----- N: It can arise through six doors, not only through the mind-door. Sometimes it is a topic one thinks about: is it possible to attain enlightenment, to really eradicate defilements for good? ------ > Ph: I don't understand doubt, or saddha either, in Dhamma terms, I > understand only the conventional meanings. For me doubt is, for > example, doubting there is a result of bad deeds, that kind of big > dangerous doubt. > ------- N: doubt arises with a citta, akusala citta, namely one type of moha- muula-citta that is vicikicchaa-sampayutta, accompanied by doubt. It is one moment of citta. It is difficult to know its characteristic, only when it is object of sati and pa~n~naa it can be realised as it is. Meanwhile we may doubt about doubt. The same for saddhaa. It arises with every kusala citta and its characteristic is purifying. When we hear the word confidence we may confuse it with rapture or happiness, but that is not its characteristic. We may be carried away by the word confidence and take it for self. Only when there is sati and pa~n~naa its characteristic can be known more precisely. ------- Nina. #125137 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Jun 22, 2012 4:40 am Subject: Re: Problems in life. epsteinrob Hi Ken H., and Rob K. Sorry, long post. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > KH: When there is right understanding there is no one who is killed and no one who kills. For the cetana that intends to kill, and the rupas of killing to arise there has to be akusala. It's not a question of whether there is ultimately a being or not. Akusala and right understanding cannot arise together. There cannot be intentional killing with right understanding. You are saying that there is no intentional killing in the case of the caterpillars because there is right understanding that there are no beings to kill or be killed. So right understanding turns the worst kamma of killing into kusala? Monks are not allowed to eat meat that was killed for them, because the intention of those who killed the animals was to give them as food for the monks. So they cannot partake of that killing, even though they may have right understanding. Or are you saying that if the monks involved had right understanding -- no beings -- they can eat the meat? Or if those preparing the food have right understanding, they can kill the animals for the monks? Take a professional butcher, who kills chickens and prepares them for sale - that is his job. If he is a Buddhist and has right understanding, he can kill as many chickens as he likes and sell them because he knows they are not beings? If that is the case then there is no kind of killing, including killing of humans, that would not be fine for Buddhists as long as they have right understanding. Is it possible to kill people and have the cittas at that time be kusala? My take on the caterpillar story is that if the monk could have avoided stepping on the caterpillars he would have done so, but since he was blind he could not. No intention to kill - whatever caterpillars are killed it is by accident. Even though he could guess that they may be killed if he walks through that area without being able to see, it is not intentional. To the extent he could avoid killing them he would. And if he could see and didn't bother to avoid stepping on them, the kamma would be there, even if he had right understanding. That is my understanding. That's what the monk knew. And so of course we will say the conventionally known monk did not purposely tread on caterpillars. (Even though it seems obvious he should have known that was going to happen!) Knowing something is going to happen is not the same as doing it purposely. I know that if I walk across a lawn I may step on some insects and they may die, but I'm not killing them intentionally. Buddhism does not require that I avoid walking on the grass. Buddhism is reasonable, but it does not allow purposeful killing when it can be avoided. There is a gigantic difference in my view between walking across the lawn and accidentally stepping on an insect I cannot see, and seeing an insect and purposely stepping on it. Likewise, if a dog attacked me and in defending myself from being bitten the dog was killed, that's okay - no intention to kill. But if I stop the dog from harming me and then when it is wounded I purposely kill it, that is kamma. Likewise with a professional butcher - that is not right livelihood for a Buddhist no matter how right his understanding is. For a non-Buddhist it's fine. > ++++++++++ > Dear Kenh > thanks for the further explanations. Could you say even more... > In the earlier case of the Buddhist abortion doctor you suggested he should be confident in his understanding of kamma and vipaka: assuming this doctor had right understanding he would know there were no beings in the ultimate sense and his operations , as there is no being being killed, and no one doing any killing, would be blameness. Is that right? ------------------------ #125138 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Jun 22, 2012 4:49 am Subject: Re: Problems in life. epsteinrob Hi Ken H. and Rob K. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > >>>RK: Right understanding should lead to less > deliberate killing I think. > > > > >RE: I think this is the main point in terms of a connection between dhammas and > actions 'in the world,' [or the rupas involved,] that when there is kusala there > will also be right action, and as you say above, when there is right > understanding, there will be a consequent 'less deliberate killing.' > ------------ > > KH: When there is right understanding there is no one who is killed and no one who kills. But there is still killing - the rupas which arise and end those cittas, leaving to the final death citta for that 'being.' The being may just be five kandhas but the rupas and namas of the killing do take place, both from the 'killer's' kandhas and the experience of the 'killed's' kandhas. So you are saying that with right understanding the namas and rupas of killing have no kamma, and that killing may still take place, but without any akusala. I don't think the Buddha ever said or implied anything like that. > That's what the monk knew. And so of course we will say the conventionally known monk did not purposely tread on caterpillars. (Even though it seems obvious he should have known that was going to happen!) There really was no sentient (permanent) monk. That was just a conventional designation for the five khandhas. (In this case five khandhas totally devoid of akusala kamma.) So the conventional story has to be about an innocent monk doesn't it? Better still an innocent monk who seemed to all but the most enlightened (including some of his fellow monks) to be guilty. I think the point of the story that without the akusala cetana and the intention to kill a being, there was no kamma for the monk. Because he was blind, he could not be responsible for that which he could not see and did not intend. Accidental or circumstantial killing does not have the same kamma as purposeful or willful killing. What's important about the story is that kamma follows the cetana, not necessarily the act, if the act is accidental or unavoidable. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - #125139 From: "Ken H" Date: Fri Jun 22, 2012 9:21 am Subject: Re: Problems in life. kenhowardau Hi Robert K, ----- <. . .> RK: In the earlier case of the Buddhist abortion doctor you suggested he should be confident in his understanding of kamma and vipaka: assuming this doctor had right understanding he would know there were no beings in the ultimate sense and his operations , as there is no being being killed, and no one doimng any killing, would be blameness. Is that right? ----- KH: No, it is not right because there are really no doctors and no surgical orperations – no permanent entities of any kind. In the earlier case (whenever that was) I was suggesting there should be right understanding of conditioned dhammas. That's the only way to answer questions of "Is this concept kusala? Is that concept akusala?" or "You are saving this woman's life, so is abortion kusala?" "You are killing an unborn child, so is abortion akusala?" or, "You are just performing your legal duties as a doctor, so is abortion only mildly akusala?" Ken H #125140 From: Vince Date: Fri Jun 22, 2012 12:06 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Doubt after each moment. cerovzt Phil wrote: >> Ph: I don't understand doubt, or saddha either, in Dhamma terms I like this from the Maha-satipatthana Sutta: "When doubt or wavering of the mind is present in him, he knows 'There is doubt in me'; or when doubt is not present in him, he knows 'There is no doubt in me'. Besides, he knows that the doubt which has not yet arisen comes to arise; and he knows that the doubt that has arisen comes to be discarded; and he knows that the discarded doubt will not arise in the future." best, Vince, #125141 From: "Ken H" Date: Fri Jun 22, 2012 5:48 pm Subject: Re: Problems in life. kenhowardau Hi Robert E, ------ <. . . > > RE:You are saying that there is no intentional killing in the case of the caterpillars because there is right understanding that there are no beings to kill or be killed. So right understanding turns the worst kamma of killing into kusala? ------- KH: Do you mean past akusala kamma would suddenly be seen as not akusala? I don't know if there's any logic in that, but it is not what I was saying. Suppose you are in a room that has no other living beings in it: in a conventional way you rightly understand there is no one there to be killed, don't you? Can you kill anyone at that time? Of course you can't; the room is empty. Isn't it the same when right understanding arises at any other time? In other words, when there is (satipatthana) there cannot be an intention to kill, can there? ------- <.. . > > RE: Monks are not allowed to eat meat that was killed for them, because the intention of those who killed the animals was to give them as food for the monks. So they cannot partake of that killing, even though they may have right understanding. Or are you saying that if the monks involved had right understanding -- no beings -- they can eat the meat? ------- KH: I think it's just a training rule. In those circumstances monks are forbidden to eat meat regardless of what their [kusala or akusala] intentions might be. ------------ > RE: Or if those preparing the food have right understanding, they can kill the animals for the monks? ------------ KH: As I have just said, when there is right understanding there can't be any killing. ---------------- > RE: Take a professional butcher, who kills chickens and prepares them for sale - that is his job. If he is a Buddhist and has right understanding, he can kill as many chickens as he likes and sell them because he knows they are not beings? ----------------- KH: If he has right understanding there can't be any killing. Even if the conventional stories told by witnesses were of deliberate killing, in reality there can't have been any such thing. Therefore, even if the blind monk's companions thought, "We told him there were caterpillars on the path and yet he still went on his routine walk and squashed some of them: surely he must be guilty of killing!" in fact they were wrong. ----------- > RE: If that is the case then there is no kind of killing, including killing of humans, that would not be fine for Buddhists as long as they have right understanding. Is it possible to kill people and have the cittas at that time be kusala? ----------- KH: No it is not possible. Just as it is not possible to kill people in an empty room. ------------------ > RE: My take on the caterpillar story is that if the monk could have avoided stepping on the caterpillars he would have done so, but since he was blind he could not. No intention to kill - whatever caterpillars are killed it is by accident. ------------------- KH: Does that mean blind people can drive cars down busy streets and kill human pedestrians with impunity? -------------------------------- > RE: Even though he could guess that they may be killed if he walks through that area without being able to see, it is not intentional. To the extent he could avoid killing them he would. And if he could see and didn't bother to avoid stepping on them, the kamma would be there, even if he had right understanding. That is my understanding. --------------------------------- KH: Perhaps you will agree now that my explanation was better. Ken H #125142 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Fri Jun 22, 2012 6:53 pm Subject: Re: Problems in life. rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > > > KH: Do you mean past akusala kamma would suddenly be seen as not akusala? I don't know if there's any logic in that, but it is not what I was saying. > > Suppose you are in a room that has no other living beings in it: in a conventional way you rightly understand there is no one there to be killed, don't you? Can you kill anyone at that time? Of course you can't; the room is empty. > > Isn't it the same when right understanding arises at any other time? In other words, when there is (satipatthana) there cannot be an intention to kill, can there? > ++++++++++++ Dear kenh correct me if i am wrong, but there are never any beings in the ultimate sense , whether one knows it or not, right? So how can there ever be killing. or if there is sometimes killing could you give an example of the actual killing process. robert #125143 From: "philip" Date: Fri Jun 22, 2012 6:56 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Doubt after each moment. philofillet Hello Vince Thanks, but I doubt (there it is again, in the conventional sense) that we can approach suttas such as MN 10 without indulging in speculation based on the conventional meaning of the English terms, or even the Pali terms, tackled without rigour. We need to study the paramattha dhamma as taught in Abhidhamma to have a beginning of right understanding, in my opinion. But thanks anyways.. Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Vince wrote: > > Phil wrote: > > >> Ph: I don't understand doubt, or saddha either, in Dhamma terms > > I like this from the Maha-satipatthana Sutta: > > "When doubt or wavering of the mind is present in him, he knows .... #125144 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jun 22, 2012 7:05 pm Subject: Pilgrimage in India, Ch 3, 2. nilovg Dear friends, As we read in the “Paramatthajotikå”, “He is enlightened by seeing all...”. The paññå he had developed for countless aeons reached its fulfilment at the moment of enlightenment. He had seen the conditions for all realities of life and he had realized these realities as the are: impermanent, dukkha and anattå (non-self). After having understood conditioned realities as they are, paññå could experience the unconditioned reality: nibbåna. The Buddha had discovered the “four noble Truths”: the Truth of dukkha, of the origin of dukkha, of the cessation of dukkha and of the Path leading to the cessation of dukkha. All conditioned realities are dukkha (suffering), since they arise and fall away. What arises and falls away cannot be happiness, it is dukkha. Birth is dukkha and our whole life is dukkha, because there is the arising and falling away of nåma and rúpa continuously. What we take for “our body” and “our mind” are rúpas and nåmas that do not stay and are therefore dukkha, not worth clinging to. Since there is birth, there have to be old age, sickness and death. The origin of dukkha is craving. Because of craving there is the arising of nåma and rúpa at birth and our lives have to go on and on. So long as there is craving the cycle of birth and death will continue and there is no end to dukkha. The Buddha taught the Path leading to the end of dukkha. The third Truth is the cessation of dukkha, which is nibbåna. The fourth Truth is the Way leading to the cessation of dukkha, which is the eightfold Path. ******** Nina. #125145 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jun 22, 2012 7:07 pm Subject: Awareness and Thinking, no 4. nilovg Dear friends, Kh Sujin: Someone may ask what to do so that satipatthaana arises. One should listen in order to understand what satipatthaana is and of what it is aware. If one has listened sufficiently and understood what one heard sati can be aware immediately. One should not do anything special. If there is right understanding sati can arise naturally and it goes together with detachment from the idea that it is self who is aware. Otherwise there is all the time an idea of self who has to do something. The development is deep and difficult, because it has to go together with detachment. Pa~n~naa must see the Truth of the origin of dukkha, lobha, so that there will be detachment. Otherwise it cannot let go of lobha. Kh Santi: When there is avarice one thinks of oneself and other kinds of kusala cannot be developed. He should have the intention to be generous. Kh S: It happened that an avaricious person became a sotaapanna. In his case pa~n~naa could be developed to the stage of attaining enlightenment. When avarice arises do not think that one has to do first this or that instead of being aware of the characteristics of realities. When a reality appears such as avarice one should know in what way to detach from the idea of self. If one does not know the way and performs daana without being aware of realities, it is not possible to detach from the idea of self. Whatever arises, be it avarice or generosity, should be known as only a dhamma. One day there will not be the idea of self who thinks or acts. One may want to strive for daana, and even be very generous, but one may be striving with the idea of self, and then there is no way to be free from the cycle of birth and death. There will be detachment from the idea of self who is avaricious if there can be awareness of avarice when it arises as sankhaarakkhandha that has been accumulated. That characteristic can be known by right understanding as only a dhamma. ********** Nina. #125146 From: "philip" Date: Fri Jun 22, 2012 8:57 pm Subject: Re: Doubt after each moment. philofillet Dear Nina > > Ph: Doubt feels like something that needs a topic to think about, > > not something that arises after each moment of experiencing a sense > > door object. > > > ----- > N: It can arise through six doors, not only through the mind-door. Ph: Could you explain a little more about doubt that is *not* through the mind-door? I have trouble understanding that. Thanks. Phil > Sometimes it is a topic one thinks about: is it possible to attain > enlightenment, to really eradicate defilements for good? > ------ #125147 From: "philip" Date: Fri Jun 22, 2012 9:07 pm Subject: Out of our hands? ( was Re: To Phil. Dhamma recording philofillet Dear Lukas > > L: Out of what hands?? There are only different ayatanas, no hands. Ph: It is just an idiom, if we say "it is out of our hands" it means "it is beyond our control." Of course we understand that there is no control over dhammas, but it is possible that the illusion of control over dhammas could be helpful in avoiding drugs. Possible, but very unlikely. The only hope is that understanding arises, as you say so well. I believe understanding is arising for you and will arise for you, I have confidence in your connection to Dhamma. Even at the most simple and baseic level, the thought of you drinking and doing drugs in a way that shows disrespect to the Lord Buddha is hard to believe, at least from what I sense from your posts now. On the other hand, I have lost my sense of devotion to the Lord Buddha, so I am very vulnerable. You have that protective devotion to Buddha, and, deeper and more valuable, you have a diligent attitude to developing understanding of present dhammas, I think you are almost beyond danger, just keep in touch with DSG at all times, with your Dhamma friends here. As for me, I think I will be all right too, I don't like the physical effect of drinking anymore, even one beer interferes with the pleasant sensations I get from "meditation/yoga. As for marijuana which I love Love LOVE I don't want to smoke it when I got to Canada because I am afraid it will damage too many brain cells, I am doing what I can to slow down the onset of Alzheimer's! So I think I'll be all right too. But who knows, Montreal is a crazy sexy city in summer and I have a lot of crazy sexy friends there. Nothing anyone here can say will protect me, because I have lost the protection of believing that Dhamma is an invaluable treasure. I suspect that belief will return, but there is no telling when, beyond control, anatta. Phil Phil > > >And alcohol. I had a drink two days in a row last week, and enjoyed it? Where is this leading? Why are there not conditions for believing tgat having a drink is very harmful? > > L This is dangerous to u and me, not for others. This is not alcohol itself that is dangerous. I would say we are dangerous for ourselves. > > >In the case of opiates, the defilent is VERY strong, I was always a regulsr but controllled drinker, I dislike hangovers so never have more than one drink. ( That is the defilement speaking, see?) > > L: And who else can speak? vaci sankharas that are conditioned only by ignorance? > kilesa vatta? defilements that speaks? defilements speak. > > >The understanding that understands those weak friends for what they >are ( self seeking control) is already stronger and of course the understanding that arises in an effective but unpredictable and uncontrollable way(anatta) to remind us in a timely way why it would be foolish and harmful to drink is an even stronger friend, and the even deeper understanding at the kevel of satipatthana that is aware with detachment and understanding of arisen sense door objects is even more powerful, though it so very rare for us. > > L: friends, bad company is vipaka. In reality we cannot choose our friends. They are just vipaka. this is a correct way of understanding. > > > >It is also unpredictable and uncontollable whether you will listen to the voice of tge defilement that says "only 1% of addicts survive, what use is it to get professional treatment?" > > L: The worst voice is like that: 'why u dont take anything now? Why u prolonging ur suffering only, and u know u will take in future. So why u suffer' - the worst voice. > > Basicly I am really scared to go back to old environment, really scared, especially knowing myself, and how this all things always end. But still not enoght panna to stop this. > The point is what I wanted to show. Thinking in a right way, is the best way to do. This is how the Lord preached, and this is how we live. Try to understand correctly. > > Best wishes > Lukas > #125148 From: "philip" Date: Fri Jun 22, 2012 9:25 pm Subject: spd 32 "While walking, we should know that we are walking" correctly understood philofillet Dear Group Here is today's passage from Survey of Paramattha Dhammas by Sujin Boriharnwanaket: "As regards the wording, "while walking, we should know that we are walking", in reality it is not 'I' or self who is walking, but only rupa. WHen sati is aware of the characteristics of rupas of the body that appear while walking, there is mindfulness of the body. (kaayaanupassanaa satipatthana.) However, people cannot force sati to be aware all the time of rupas appearing through the bodysense. Sati is anatta and it depends on conditions whether it will arise and be aware of a characteristic of nama or rupa. It can be aware of any characteristic of nama or rupa that arises and appears natural, just as it is." (381) (end of passage) phil #125149 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Fri Jun 22, 2012 10:31 pm Subject: Re: Problems in life. rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi My argument is with Robert K for his insistence that people - not just dhammas) - are reborn, or that people - not just dhammas – perform kusala and akusala actions. Or that concepts are made of lots and lots of kalapas of rupas (as if kalapas were molecules and rupas were atoms!). > > +++++++++++ Dear Kenh perhaps you could quote me directly. But anyway lets look at what Nina writes in her profound book on physical phenomena: "Rupas do not arise singly, they arise in units or groups. What we take for our body is composed of many groups or units, consisting each of different kinds of rupa, and the rupas in such a group arise together and fall away together. " "The unborn being in the womb, for example, needs the right temperature in order to grow. Throughout life the element of heat produces rupas. Nutrition is another factor which produces rupas. When food has been taken by a living being it is assimilated into the body and then nutrition can produce rupas. Some of the groups of rupa of our body are produced by kamma, some by citta, some by temperature and some by nutrition. The four factors which produce the rupas of our body support and consolidate each other and keep this shortlived body going. "" Do you feel I say something different from Nina? #125150 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jun 22, 2012 11:50 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Problems in life. upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and RobE and RobK) - In a message dated 6/22/2012 3:49:16 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Robert E, ------ <. . . > > RE:You are saying that there is no intentional killing in the case of the caterpillars because there is right understanding that there are no beings to kill or be killed. So right understanding turns the worst kamma of killing into kusala? ------- KH: Do you mean past akusala kamma would suddenly be seen as not akusala? I don't know if there's any logic in that, but it is not what I was saying. Suppose you are in a room that has no other living beings in it: in a conventional way you rightly understand there is no one there to be killed, don't you? Can you kill anyone at that time? Of course you can't; the room is empty. Isn't it the same when right understanding arises at any other time? In other words, when there is (satipatthana) there cannot be an intention to kill, can there? ================================ HCW: The Buddha addressed this very issue when discussing a (materialist, I believe) sect at his time that said that because a human body consists of mere particles separated by space, there is no fault in running them through with a sword. The Buddha roundly condemned this view. A good source for finding false views including "justifications" for murder is DN 2, the Samaññaphala Sutta. Several false teachers are mentioned there. A good example is the following: _______________________________ "Another time I approached Pakudha Kaccayana and, on arrival, exchanged courteous greetings with him. After an exchange of friendly greetings and courtesies, I sat to one side. As I was sitting there I asked him: 'Venerable Kaccayana, there are these common craftsmen... They live off the fruits of their crafts, visible in the here and now... Is it possible, venerable sir, to point out a similar fruit of the contemplative life, visible in the here and now?' "When this was said, Pakudha Kaccayana said to me, 'Great king, there are these seven substances — unmade, irreducible, uncreated, without a creator, barren, stable as a mountain-peak, standing firm like a pillar — that do not alter, do not change, do not interfere with one another, are incapable of causing one another pleasure, pain, or both pleasure and pain. Which seven? The earth-substance, the liquid-substance, the fire-substance, the wind-substance, pleasure, pain, and the soul as the seventh. These are the seven substances — unmade, irreducible, uncreated, without a creator, barren, stable as a mountain-peak, standing firm like a pillar — that do not alter, do not change, do not interfere with one another, and are incapable of causing one another pleasure, pain, or both pleasure and pain. "'And among them there is no killer nor one who causes killing, no hearer nor one who causes hearing, no cognizer nor one who causes cognition. When one cuts off [another person's] head, there is no one taking anyone's life. It is simply between the seven substances that the sword passes.' __________________________________ HCW: The foregoing position and similar ones described in the same sutta, for example those of Purana Kassapa, are responded to in detail by the Buddha elsewhere, for example in MN 60, Apannaka Sutta: A Safe Bet. ------------------------------------------------------------- With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #125151 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jun 23, 2012 12:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Doubt after each moment. nilovg Dear Phil, Op 22-jun-2012, om 12:57 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > Ph: Could you explain a little more about doubt that is *not* > through the mind-door? I have trouble understanding that. ------- N: Its manifestation is "uncertainty of grasp". When sati and pa~n~naa arise there is understanding of the characteristic of visibla object as just visible object, a kind of ruupa. There can be certainty of grasp on account of all the sense objects. When doubt arises this is not so. At this moment it seems that we can see and hear at the same time. No certainty whether it is visible object that appears now or sound. There is also mental rigidity (see Expositor), not the wieldiness that goes together with understanding. We may be fixed on the conventional meaning of doubt, but it is not so that there must always be stories one thinks about. A similar example is the realisation of dhammas as being conditioned, the second stage of insight. People cannot imagine how this can be realized without thinking about it. No stories, it is just in the moment. The same for doubt, it is just in the moment. ------ Nina. #125152 From: Vince Date: Sat Jun 23, 2012 12:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Doubt after each moment. cerovzt Dear Philip you wrote: > Thanks, but I doubt (there it is again, in the conventional sense) that we can > approach suttas such as MN 10 without indulging in speculation based on the conventional > meaning of the English terms, or even the Pali terms, tackled without rigour. We need > to study the paramattha dhamma as taught in Abhidhamma to have > a beginning of right understanding, in my opinion. But thanks anyways.. yes, I think you are right. Although the first sense of the Sutta still is useful to look into the nature of the doubt. In example, about its impermanence. Even without knowing Abhidhamma still one can realize the nature of the doubt is the arising and vanishing. However, there is also a misunderstanding of that attention with sati. So I think it is related with what you cited in a later message: > "As regards the wording, "while walking, we should know that we are walking", in > reality it is not 'I' or self who is walking, but only rupa. WHen sati is aware of the > characteristics of rupas of the body that appear while walking, there is mindfulness of > the body. (kaayaanupassanaa satipatthana.) However, people cannot force sati to be aware > all the time of rupas appearing through the bodysense. Sati is anatta and it depends on > conditions whether it will arise and be aware of a characteristic of nama or rupa. It > can be aware of any characteristic of nama or rupa that arises and appears natural, just > as it is." (381) in daily life I think we are flooded by both types of confusion. We can be attached ignoring impermanence, and even being aware of that, still there is ignorance because we are ignoring the anatta nature of the experience. best, Vince. #125153 From: "Lukas" Date: Sat Jun 23, 2012 12:31 am Subject: Out of our hands? ( was Re: To Phil. Dhamma recording szmicio Hi Phil, Tomorrow, Saturday, I am coming back Poland by bus from London. I sall be home Sunday 6 p.m >Phil: As for me, I think I will be all right too, I don't like the physical effect of drinking anymore, even one beer interferes with the pleasant sensations I get from "meditation/yoga. As for marijuana which I love Love LOVE L: I have many friends in Poland, who are seriously addicted to marihuana. I recall two of them. They are both in tehirs erly twenties both with girls, in serious relationship. They dont do bad things, they are very peaceful and very caring of anothers and very tollerant. I think this is mostly because of marihuana or maybe that those with tendencies to marihuana have tendency usualy to be a good person. They somke like 6 years. And they tottaly lost their control over smoking. They cry how to leave it and they cant. They spend so much nmoney for that. Also phisically they have a big holes in their memory etc.. I think marihuana, thought it's not typical drug may be very dangerous. I myself could not study dhammas when on hi. >Phil: I don't want to smoke it when I got to Canada because I am afraid it will damage too many brain cells, I am doing what I can to slow down the onset of Alzheimer's! L: Do u have Alzheimer? > So I think I'll be all right too. But who knows, Montreal is a crazy sexy city in summer and I have a lot of crazy sexy friends there. Nothing anyone here can say will protect me, because I have lost the protection of believing that Dhamma is an invaluable treasure. I suspect that belief will return, but there is no telling when, beyond control, anatta. L: I think it will come back when u stay with Dhamma. For me Dhamma is the most important thing that happen to me. I am also happy that i had a lot of misery in life. This keep me coming back constantly to Dhamma when I am in trouble. Best wishes Lukas #125154 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jun 23, 2012 12:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Out of our hands? ( was Re: To Phil. Dhamma recording nilovg Dear Phil, Op 22-jun-2012, om 13:07 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > . Nothing anyone here can say will protect me, because I have lost > the protection of believing that Dhamma is an invaluable treasure. > I suspect that belief will return, but there is no telling when, > beyond control, anatta. ------ N:It depends on the development of understanding. When this is firm enough there will be more confidence. Confidence is not merely a feeling of devotion. The more you can prove for yourself the truth of the teaching, the more confidence can grow, by conditions. Nina. #125155 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jun 23, 2012 1:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Out of our hands? ( was Re: To Phil. Dhamma recording upasaka_howard Hi, Nina & Phil - In a message dated 6/22/2012 10:59:39 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Dear Phil, Op 22-jun-2012, om 13:07 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > . Nothing anyone here can say will protect me, because I have lost > the protection of believing that Dhamma is an invaluable treasure. > I suspect that belief will return, but there is no telling when, > beyond control, anatta. ------ N:It depends on the development of understanding. When this is firm enough there will be more confidence. Confidence is not merely a feeling of devotion. The more you can prove for yourself the truth of the teaching, the more confidence can grow, by conditions. Nina. ============================ Exactly, Nina!! When one sees for himself/herself the correctness even of one aspect of the Dhamma, one's trust will grow. I remember years ago when I had a colon resection done for what turned out to be (only) an extreme case of diverticulitis. The prior colonoscopy that led to almost immediate surgery suggested the strong possibility of it being colon cancer. Moreover, the surgeon in seeing the diseased tissue - even holding the mass in his hands, was certain (in the very midst of the surgery) that it was malignant. After the surgery, I had to wait 6 days for the results of the biopsy to be returned, and meanwhile the doctors started discussing treatment options. At this time, I recalled the core Dhamma teaching that the primary cause of suffering is tanha, and I vowed then and there NOT to wish for the results to be that the tissue was benign - NOT to "hope"!! That Dhamma recollection and that strong and very serious vow had the effect that throughout the 6-day waiting period, I was at peace, and I was able to calm my wife and sons, who, naturally, were distraught. After 6 days, my gastroenterologist bounced into the room grinning ear to ear, and informed me that there was no cancer at all! My amazingly unemotional reaction, were it to be put into words, was "Oh, it's that way and not the other." I learned *first-hand* from this the truth of tanha --> dukkha and that *not* craving is a fundamental source of mental peace. From that point on, my confidence in the Dhamma as a whole became radically stronger, grounded and *real*. When you know for yourself what is conducive to peace, you *truly* know and do not just believe. This is what builds saddha. The teachings need to be known, recalled, and acted upon. With metta, Howard "Abandon what is unskillful, monks. It is possible to abandon what is unskillful. If it were not possible to abandon what is unskillful, I would not say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' But because it is possible to abandon what is unskillful, I say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' If this abandoning of what is unskillful were conducive to harm and pain, I would not say to you, Abandon what is unskillful.' But because this abandoning of what is unskillful is conducive to benefit and pleasure, I say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' "Develop what is skillful, monks. It is possible to develop what is skillful. If it were not possible to develop what is skillful, I would not say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' But because it is possible to develop what is skillful, I say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' If this development of what is skillful were conducive to harm and pain, I would not say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' But because this development of what is skillful is conducive to benefit and pleasure, I say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.'" — _AN 2.19_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an02/an02.019.than.html) #125156 From: "Yawares Sastri" Date: Sat Jun 23, 2012 1:51 am Subject: Animals Love Monks yawares1 Dear Members, I have funny/cute pictures/articles about monks/animals to share with you all.[From Dhamma Wheel] http://www.croatiantimes.com/image/17765/news/Around_the_World/2012-06-21/27881/\ Monk-ey_Business http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=12859 Hope you all smile when seeing these pictures. yawares #125157 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Sat Jun 23, 2012 2:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cetasika in daily life -project -viriya 1 - welfare for the householders moellerdieter Dear Nina and Sarah , sorry for being late in answering, the issue is a bit complicated partly due to different perspectives and so is the editing. you wrote: (DHowever due to the deep(er) exploration of the Dhamma we find this > distinction in Abhidhamma , so that one may wonder why for this > issue your perspective is not mine ( 'Suttanist) and my perspective > is not yours ('Abhidhammika') :-) --------- N: I am disinclined to see the teaching expounded in the Suttanta and in the Abhidhamma as different. Also in the suttas we find many passages on paramattha dhammas, and also when the Buddha spoke by way of sammutti sacca this was in order to explain paramattha dhammas. --------- D: my proposition was that the Buddha did not distinguish reality and concept , so that in the suttas khandhas are treated like the dhammas, whereas in Abhidhamma in a deeper exploration concept and reality is distinguished. our discussion orignated in Nyanatiloka's definition of khandha: "the fact ought to be emphasized here that these 5 groups, correctly speaking, merely form an abstract classification by the Buddha, but that they as such, i.e. as just these 5 complete groups, have no real existence, since only single representatives of these groups, mostly variable, can arise with any state of consciousness." Now Sarah disagrees with the Venerable , who-as I understand -specifies what in Abhidhamma is called a concept= abstract classification (of the realities) and claims they are realities like the dhammas they are heading. (D:the issue concerns how we distínguish realities and concepts and I believe this is important in Abhidhamma . .... S: and what the Abhidhamma stresses is the understanding of realities now, such as heat or hardness or thinking - whatever appears now. This is the only way that the confusion about realities and concepts will ever be resolved....>) D: if the different perspectives are mixed or neglected , the confusion will last again in order to keep the thread: D: I think there are texts in which the Buddha talked about arising and falling away of the khandhas , ... S: Yes, I've quoted many suttas in this regard. No question about it. This is why the Buddha taught about dhammas as khandhas - to stress the impermanence of each one. ... D:one question however is whether it doesn'tt concern the khandha breakdown ( of Dependent Origination ) i.e. temporarily at death or finally (nibbana). ... S: it's all about now, realities now. The Buddha taught us to understand what is real at this very moment. This is the only way that DO, death and so on can be understood. Dnew: repeating : how about Buddhagosa's interpretation of D.O. concerning 3 lives ? ... D The other is the consideration whether the Buddha distinguished at all between realities and concepts. .... S: Heat is a reality which can be directly known now. 'Butter-jar" is a concept which can only ever be thought about. All the teachings are for understanding, testing out at this moment. Dnew: taking jar for khandha ,e.g. the. vinnana jar inlucing eye consciousness, ear consciousness etc. , the jar indeed is a concept, isn't it? N:Heard in a Thai recording and I thought of you: Understanding D.O. is not different from vipassanaa ~naa.na. Without satipa.t.thaana we just think of the story of D.O., of the concept of it. We do not understand characteristics. We listen and consider and we begin to understand why ignorance is a condition for sa"nkhaara. Kamma conditions vi~n~naa.na, the rebirth- consciousness. It is the fruit of past kamma, and we can see how the results are so different when looking at humans and animals. Naama is different from ruupa, we can understand more and more and in detail the characteristics of naama and ruupa. Even when listening to Dhamma now we can begin to understand D.O. If there would not have been rebirth-consciousness there would not be any reality now. There are aayatanas, we can understand D.O. through the six doorways. The second vipassanaa ~naa.na is direct understanding of conditions. There is no self who can do this or that. Whatever arises, sati included, does so because of the appropriate conditions. Nobody can force the arising of any reality. ------- N: I find it very good how Kh Sujin stresses that only by knowing characteristics of naama and ruupa, by satipa.t.thaana, we can understand D.O. There is so little use of just thinking stories about D.O. , knowing the classifications and terms. Besides, there is always "me", "me", when we are doing so. No way to really grasp what D.O. is. The real purpose of the teaching of D.O. is teaching anattaa. But this is not a mere word. Characteristics of naama and ruupa should be understood, when they appear: now. That is the way to penetrate the meaning of anattaa. ------ D: I understand the purpose of the teaching of D.O. to show the orgination of the whole mass of suffering , a middle between a (lasting ) soul and a non-soul due as a process of conditioned and interrelated dhammas .It answers in detail why in brief the embedded khandhas and our attachment of it , are called suffering in brief and points to it's related roots. The very interesting elements of the chain are not only nama and rupa , but the sequence of .....contact (passa) - sensation/feeling (vedana )- urge /thirst (tanha ) - clinging/attachment (upadana) .. because it becomes clear why disenchantment and dispassion are so important to realize anatta /detachment and by that break this chain , which is keeping us wandering (kamma) in this round of birth and death (samsara). well, I don't necessarily expect that you agree with me .. ;-) with Metta Dieter #125158 From: "Ken H" Date: Sat Jun 23, 2012 8:16 am Subject: Re: Problems in life. kenhowardau Hi Robert K, ----- > RK: correct me if i am wrong, but there are never any beings in the ultimate sense , whether one knows it or not, right? ----- KH: That's right. ---------- > RK: So how can there ever be killing. or if there is sometimes killing could you give an example of the actual killing process. ---------- >KH: When an akusala cetana cetasika experiences the concept of volitional killing that cetana may be called `killing,' but that's the only way killing can ultimately exist, isn't it? (I.e., as a single, momentary dhamma.) When you say "the killing process" I think you are referring to the formula, 'the presence of a being that can be killed, an intention to kill and the resulting death of that being.' As for an example of that formula in practice, I always find other people's examples hard to follow, and I don't think anyone has ever followed my own attempts at giving one. Obviously the formula relates to the conditions that must be present for the [above mentioned] akusala cetana cetasika to arise. The 'being to be killed' must refer to some external khandhas, and the actual intended killing refers (I think) to the akusala strength of the citta which has to be great enough to accomplish the purpose (i.e., to condition the external death citta). It's messy, but that's the best I can do at the moment. Corrections welcome. Ken H #125159 From: "Ken H" Date: Sat Jun 23, 2012 10:46 am Subject: Re: Problems in life. kenhowardau Hi Howard, ----- <. . .> > HCW: The Buddha addressed this very issue when discussing a (materialist, I believe) sect at his time ------ KH: I don't believe it was the same issue at all. I was talking about two understandings. Firstly there was the understanding that a room that was empty must (obviously) contain no one who could be killed. And secondly there was the understanding that all dhammas were anatta and must, therefore, also contain no one who could be killed. Which of those two understandings was wrong in your opinion? Which would the Buddha have disapproved of? Ken H #125160 From: "marycarbone153" Date: Sat Jun 23, 2012 4:21 am Subject: losing marycarbone153 I am mostly calm and happy until I feel I must have a close relationship with other family members. I feel there are strong control issues and I start feeling hurt and unable to converse with them for fear I will hurt their feelings. When this happens I find myself feeling like a hungry ghost. I miss my happiness. We, my family suffers from mental illness such as depression, ocd, and holding on to hurts, lacking the ability to move forward. Just went through a visit and I am feeling sad and abused like a hungry ghost. I want my happiness back and would like to be strong enough to protect it and still protect myself and my family from pain. #125161 From: Larry Biddinger Date: Sat Jun 23, 2012 3:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] losing lbidd2 Hi Mary, When you are sad you are also standing or sitting or lying down, maybe walking or running. Whatever the posture, it isn't sad. Mary Carbone is a group effort, not "just sad". This is the meaning of emptiness. Good luck! Larry To DSG: Hi everyone, Just stopped in to see what's going on. Nice to see all your imaginary faces. I'm away for a week, but I'll check in next weekend for any corrections or explanations ;)) L. #125162 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jun 23, 2012 4:39 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] losing nilovg Dear Larry, Really, I am so glad to see your imaginary face :-)) I just quoted some time ago a conversation I had with you re Visuddhimagga. Unforgettable those times. And I liked to read early morning first thing your two liners. Always good reminders. Looking forward to more of those! Nina. Op 23-jun-2012, om 5:37 heeft Larry Biddinger het volgende geschreven: > To DSG: Hi everyone, > > Just stopped in to see what's going on. Nice to see all your imaginary > faces. I'm away for a week, but I'll check in next weekend for any > corrections or explanations ;)) L. #125163 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Jun 23, 2012 5:08 pm Subject: Re: Problems in life. epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > RE:You are saying that there is no intentional killing in the case of the > caterpillars because there is right understanding that there are no beings to > kill or be killed. So right understanding turns the worst kamma of killing into > kusala? > ------- > > KH: Do you mean past akusala kamma would suddenly be seen as not akusala? I don't know if there's any logic in that, but it is not what I was saying. I mean that kamma is not currently created by killing if it is accompanied by right understanding, and so it will not lead to future vipaka. I am not talking about the past, but the kamma generated by the current act. > Suppose you are in a room that has no other living beings in it: in a conventional way you rightly understand there is no one there to be killed, don't you? Can you kill anyone at that time? Of course you can't; the room is empty. That is not my understanding of what is meant by 'no being' when murder is committed. You seem to think that 'killing a being' is a complete hallucination and that nothing actually takes place. Therefore you are saying that any kamma created by killing is based on the mental factors, since there is no real killing. But killing is not just hallucinatory as I understand it, according to Abhidhamma. There are real things that take place even in terms of paramatha dhammas. Rupas of killing are created, and for the 'killed' arises the death citta and begins a new birth citta. I think your understanding of 'beings' and 'concepts' is dismissing the reality of the namas and rupas that are involved in these acts. The definition of kamma patha of killing is that a being has to be killed in order for it to be kamma patha. Since there is ultimately no being what does this mean? It means the namas and rupas involved in killing a being have to arise. So there is a reality to killing, beyond the concept. > Isn't it the same when right understanding arises at any other time? In other words, when there is (satipatthana) there cannot be an intention to kill, can there? When there is no intention to kill, then no killing takes place - no problem with that. Both the intention to kill and the act of intentional or wanton killing [kamma patha] have kammic consequences. And there is no intention or intentional act when there is right understanding. But this has nothing to do with the reality of killing when it does take place, which we still disagree about. You think that right understanding reveals that nothing takes place in killing, since there is no being. "Is no being" does not mean that nothing takes place. There are real namas and rupas involved in killing. > ------- > <.. . > > > RE: Monks are not allowed to eat meat that was killed for them, because the > intention of those who killed the animals was to give them as food for the > monks. So they cannot partake of that killing, even though they may have right > understanding. Or are you saying that if the monks involved had right > understanding -- no beings -- they can eat the meat? > ------- > > KH: I think it's just a training rule. In those circumstances monks are forbidden to eat meat regardless of what their [kusala or akusala] intentions might be. They are only forbidden to eat meat that was specially killed for them. Meat from animals that would have been killed anyway is not forbidden. It's not a matter of training, but of kamma, according to the Buddha. You are not allowed to create the kamma of killing yourself, nor cause someone else to take on the kamma of killing on your behalf. That's the point of the rule. > ------------ > > RE: Or if those preparing the > food have right understanding, they can kill the animals for the monks? > ------------ > > KH: As I have just said, when there is right understanding there can't be any killing. You mean there is no dead animal, since there is no being, and no killing actually takes place? I'm sorry but this is really against what the Buddha taught about non-harmfulness. There is no implication of any kind that the Buddha's real teaching is that non-harmfulness is revealed in the midst of hallucinatory slaughter by realizing that there are no beings being killed because they don't exist. To me this is really extreme, and away from the teaching. The teaching is not to kill, and that when there is no intention to kill, you won't kill another 'being,' not that since that being doesn't exist, you're not really killing anything. As I said before, this would leave open the possibility of rampant killing with no kamma, since no beings exist. That's not how it works according to the Buddha at all, in my view. > ---------------- > > RE: Take a professional butcher, who kills chickens and prepares them for sale - > that is his job. If he is a Buddhist and has right understanding, he can kill > as many chickens as he likes and sell them because he knows they are not beings? > ----------------- > > KH: If he has right understanding there can't be any killing. Even if the conventional stories told by witnesses were of deliberate killing, in reality there can't have been any such thing. Therefore, even if the blind monk's companions thought, "We told him there were caterpillars on the path and yet he still went on his routine walk and squashed some of them: surely he must be guilty of killing!" in fact they were wrong. It's not because 'no caterpillars were killed' because caterpillars are a hallucination. The point of the story was whether there was kamma for the monk or not. The Buddha is very concerned with kamma. There was no kamma for the monk because he couldn't see, and thus could not avoid killing the caterpillars. Therefore the intention to kill isn't there - it's accidental. Why else would it be the story of a blind monk? > ----------- > > RE: If that is the case then there is no kind of killing, including killing of > humans, that would not be fine for Buddhists as long as they have right > understanding. Is it possible to kill people and have the cittas at that time > be kusala? > ----------- > > KH: No it is not possible. Just as it is not possible to kill people in an empty room. So you are saying that people who would otherwise be killed will pop into nonexistence and thus be revealed to not be killed, if the killer has right understanding. You are denying the reality of the namas and rupas of killing that cause kamma for the killer. It's not a hallucination. > ------------------ > > RE: My take on the caterpillar story is that if the monk could have avoided stepping > on the caterpillars he would have done so, but since he was blind he could not. > No intention to kill - whatever caterpillars are killed it is by accident. > ------------------- > > KH: Does that mean blind people can drive cars down busy streets and kill human pedestrians with impunity? No, because of the impunity. If the blind man could avoid killing the caterpillars then he would be obligated to do so. If it was unavoidable then no. If a car is out of control and the person in the car can't avoid killing someone, no kamma. But if he's texting and not paying attention he's responsible. Courts, like the Buddha, are very concerned with different levels of intention. They work hard to make intelligent distinctions as to what is callous disregard, what is accident, what is irresponsible etc. Kamma works pretty similarly. For instance, kamma patha, completing the act, causes the most serious negative vipaka in future lives. It's not because it's a more serious hallucination, but because of the level of intention -- real -- and the actual rupas that are produced -- actual paramatha dhammas. > -------------------------------- > > RE: Even though he could guess that they may be killed if he walks through that area > without being able to see, it is not intentional. To the extent he could avoid > killing them he would. And if he could see and didn't bother to avoid stepping > on them, the kamma would be there, even if he had right understanding. That is > my understanding. > --------------------------------- > > KH: Perhaps you will agree now that my explanation was better. Why would I? Your explanation ignores the Buddha's teaching on kamma. Buddha never said even in a dream that right understanding will exempt you from kamma because you will see that no killing can possibly take place, since there are no beings. I don't think you correctly understand what it means that there are no beings. It doesn't mean that organisms and actions don't exist - just that they are not embodied by a controlling entity. There still are actions that have consequences and in the Buddha's own definition of the kamma patha of murder, a being must be killed. So I think your understanding directly contradicts the Buddha's teaching on kamma. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - #125164 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jun 23, 2012 5:34 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] losing nilovg Dear Mary, Op 22-jun-2012, om 20:21 heeft marycarbone153 het volgende geschreven: > Just went through a visit and I am feeling sad and abused like a > hungry ghost. I want my happiness back and would like to be strong > enough to protect it and still protect myself and my family from pain. ------ N: We can learn from such experiences. You are unhappy and you wish to be happy, but this cannot occur on command. Exactly this is what the Buddha taught us: thoughts, feelings, material phenomena, they all arise because of the appropriate conditions and they do not belong to a self, they are anattaa, non-self. They are impermanent, as soon as they arise, they fall away again. We keep on thinking about them, worrying about them and they seem to last but this is not so. We can prove this: you feel unhappy, but there is also hearing or seeing and at those moments there is no opportunity for unhappiness. There is only one experience at a time, it arises and then falls away. After seeing there may be unhappiness again, and then seeing again, no unhappiness. We read in the suttas that one may wish the body to be in this or that way, feelings in this or that way, consciousness in this or that way, but that this not happen when one wishes for it. It all depends on conditions and these conditions are also beyond control. By listening and study of the Buddha's teachings there will be more understanding of our life, and it is this understanding that can heal you and others. Thus, instead of wishing for the impossible, it is best to develop more understanding. ------ Nina. #125165 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jun 23, 2012 5:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Out of our hands? ( was Re: To Phil. Dhamma recording nilovg Hi Howard, Op 22-jun-2012, om 17:40 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > ============================ > Exactly, Nina!! When one sees for himself/herself the correctness even > of one aspect of the Dhamma, one's trust will grow. > I remember years ago when I had a colon resection done for what turned > out to be (only) an extreme case of diverticulitis.... At this > time, I recalled the core Dhamma > teaching that the primary cause of suffering is tanha, and I vowed > then and > there NOT to wish for the results to be that the tissue was benign > - NOT to > "hope"!! ...My amazingly unemotional > reaction, were it to be put into words, was "Oh, it's that way and > not the > other." I learned *first-hand* from this the truth of tanha --> > dukkha and that > *not* craving is a fundamental source of mental peace. > From that point on, my confidence in the Dhamma as a whole became > radically stronger, grounded and *real*. When you know for yourself > what is > conducive to peace, you *truly* know and do not just believe. This > is what > builds saddha. The teachings need to be known, recalled, and acted > upon. > -------- > N: When you said to yourself: "Oh, it's that way and not the other.", you realized that whatever happens is conditioned. Nobody can change the result conditioned by kamma. But it can be hard to always apply this truth. It needs firm understanding of kamma and vipaaka. As you said: "The teachings need to be known, recalled, and acted upon." Nina. #125166 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jun 23, 2012 5:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cetasika in daily life -project -viriya 1 - welfare for the householders nilovg Dear Dieter, Op 22-jun-2012, om 18:19 heeft Dieter Moeller het volgende geschreven: > The very interesting elements of the chain are not only nama and > rupa , but the sequence of .....contact (passa) - sensation/feeling > (vedana )- urge /thirst (tanha ) - clinging/attachment (upadana) .. > because it becomes clear why disenchantment and dispassion are so > important to realize anatta /detachment and by that break this > chain , which is keeping us wandering (kamma) in this round of > birth and death (samsara). --------- N: I think that it is understanding, pa~n~naa, that leads to disenchantment. Only right understanding of conditioned phenomena can break the chain. Ignorance is the first link, and the opposite, pa~n~naa, can eradicate ignorance. When there is no more ignorance but understanding, there are no more conditions for rebirth. ------ Nina. #125167 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jun 23, 2012 6:05 pm Subject: Pilgrimage in India, Ch 3, 3. nilovg Dear friends, We read in the “Kindred Sayings” (V, Book XII, Kindred Sayings about the Truths, Ch III, § 1, Knowledge) that the Buddha, while he was staying among the Vajjians at Kotigåma, said to the monks that it is through not understanding the four noble Truths that “we have run on, wandered on, this long, long road, both you and I”. He then said: “But now, monks, the Ariyan truth of dukkha is understood, is penetrated, likewise the Ariyan truth of the arising, the ceasing of dukkha ... is penetrated. Uprooted is the craving to exist, destroyed is the channel to becoming, there is no more coming to be.” We then read the verse: “Who have not really seen the fourfold Ariyan truth A long, long road must wander on through many births. Clear gone is that which leads to birth when these are seen; Torn up the root of dukkha. There is no more becoming.” The Buddha had as a Bodhisatta wandered a long, long road in order to fulfill all the perfections necessary for the attainment of Buddhahood. He had been mindful and developed wisdom in many lives. What was the object of mindfulness? Seeing, colour, hearing, sound, feeling, thinking and all the other realities appearing at the present moment through one of the six doors. After he had been mindful of these realities over and over again and developed right understanding of them he attained enlightenment. For us too the object of mindfulness is seeing, colour, hearing, sound and all the other realities appearing one at a time through the six doors. Only thus paññå can gradually develop. There can be mindfulness of nåma and rúpa which appear now, such as visible object or seeing which appear now. Some people wonder why we have to know realities such as seeing or hearing. They think that the Buddha’s teaching is too common, too ordinary; they believe that the truth must be outside daily life. It does not appeal to them to be mindful of seeing or hearing. All realities which appear now must be known, no matter whether it is seeing, colour or unpleasant feeling about what we see. This is the only way to know ourselves. Speculation about the truth does not lead anywhere. The truth can only be known through mindfulness of what appears now. ****** Nina. #125168 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jun 23, 2012 6:08 pm Subject: Awareness and Thinking, no 5. nilovg Dear friends, Kh Sujin: The development of pa~n~naa is a long process, ciira kala bhaavanaa. From the beginning there should be right understanding that this moment is dhamma. This understanding must be firm and then it can condition awareness of the characteristics of naama and ruupa. Realities arise and fall away very rapidly but one should not worry about being too late to be aware of them. When sati of the level of satipa.t.thaana arises a characteristic of a reality appears naturally, just like now. There may be understanding stemming from listening, but it takes a long time until sati begins to be aware. When one begins to listen sati may not arise, but one has to continue to listen and then understanding will grow. Understanding can be accumulated from life to life, and we do not know how many lives it takes before there can be direct awareness and understanding of realities. When sati and pa~n~naa arise there is no lobha that desires to understand, there is detachment. Even when pa~n~naa does not yet clearly know characteristics, one knows the right way. There is only one way: when sati is aware of realities then pa~n~naa can grow. Even when pa~n~naa is weak, one should be aware again and again in accordance with conditions. Everybody likes kusala and hopes for more sati of the level of satipa.t.thaana, but the idea of self should be got rid of and this takes patience and courage. Are we ready to develop satipa.t.thaana in order to get rid of the idea of self? Awareness of characteristics of reality should be very natural and if it is not natural, it does not work. The development of pa~n~naa is a difficult task but when one listens and has more understanding sati can begin to be aware. It is all a matter of detachment, not a matter of clinging. Listening to the Dhamma is light, pleasant, it is not heavy. When one has desire and does not get what one wants, life becomes heavy. When there is very little sati we cannot cause it to arise often, such is life. When we are now seeing normally, what appears through the eyes is a dhamma, a reality that is able to appear. Pa~n~naa is not self, it is sa”nkhaarakkhandha, the khandha of formations. The Buddha spoke about the khandhas in order to remind us that there is no self. Question: how can there be wise attention, yoniso manasikaara? Kh S: You do not have to do anything, this is the task of dhammas. If you listen all the time you will understand the meaning of anattaa, but we keep on forgetting this. ------- Nina. #125169 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Sat Jun 23, 2012 6:21 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cetasika in daily life -project -viriya 1 - welfare for the householders moellerdieter Dear Nina, you wrote: (The very interesting elements of the chain are not only nama and > rupa , but the sequence of .....contact (passa) - sensation/feeling > (vedana )- urge /thirst (tanha ) - clinging/attachment (upadana) .. > because it becomes clear why disenchantment and dispassion are so > important to realize anatta /detachment and by that break this > chain , which is keeping us wandering (kamma) in this round of > birth and death (samsara). --------- N: I think that it is understanding, pa~n~naa, that leads to disenchantment. Only right understanding of conditioned phenomena can break the chain.Ignorance is the first link, and the opposite, pa~n~naa, can eradicate ignorance. When there is no more ignorance but understanding, there are no more conditions for rebirth. D: yes , the conditions acc. to SN 12,23 snip "...concentration is the supporting condition for the knowledge and vision of things as they really are, the knowledge and vision of things as they really are is the supporting condition for disenchantment, disenchantment is the supporting condition for dispassion, dispassion is the supporting condition for emancipation, and emancipation is the supporting condition for the knowledge of the destruction (of the cankers)." knowledge and vision of things as they really are ..in other words panna and consequently eradiction of ignorance with Metta Dieter #125170 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jun 23, 2012 10:58 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Out of our hands? ( was Re: To Phil. Dhamma recording upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 6/23/2012 3:52:31 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: N: When you said to yourself: "Oh, it's that way and not the other.", you realized that whatever happens is conditioned. Nobody can change the result conditioned by kamma. ------------------------------------------------------------ HCW: No, Nina, what it reflected was an equanimity arising from refusing to hope - such hoping providing no help but, on the contrary, only being a source of distress. But with regard to the idea that the results of kamma cannot be changed, this is not so. Further conditions, including further kamma, CAN modify the not-yet-arising results of kamma. The Buddha certainly taught this. [In my case, had I not had the colon resection, I would have died. Had I hoped for the finding to not be cancer, obsessing on the matter, I would have suffered. My own volitions had consequences that affected the flow of events.] Beyond this matter of modification of kammic result by subsequent conditions including further kamma, if no element of randomness enters into the course of events, but only full determinism, then all religions are utterly pointless. Here is the situation: If at any moment "the die is cast," with all future events fully determined, then the view of fatalism is 100% correct!!! That is exactly what fatalism is about! There is a fundamental dichotomy of possibility with regard to the way things are: Either a) At every point in time, all that will occur from then on is entirely determined by prior conditions (of all sorts), or b) Elements of random occurrence enter essentially into the mix. No third scenario is possible. (I challenge anyone to justify an alternative to these two.) If case "b" is the way things are, as modern quantum theory asserts, then an element of freshness and freedom is introduced into the flow of events, for whenever there is a change in conditions, including random change, future events can be different. If, OTOH, case "a" is the way things are, then fatalism is the rule, and freedom is an illusion par excellence. ------------------------------------------------------------- But it can be hard to always apply this truth. It needs firm understanding of kamma and vipaaka. As you said: "The teachings need to be known, recalled, and acted upon." ============================= With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #125171 From: "philip" Date: Sat Jun 23, 2012 11:42 pm Subject: ps to lukas [dsg] Out of our hands? ( was Re: To Phil. Dhamma recording philofillet Dear Hiward > But with regard to the idea that the results of kamma cannot be > changed, this is not so. Further conditions, including further kamma, CAN modify > the not-yet-arising results of kamma. The Buddha certainly taught this. [In > my case, had I not had the colon resection, I would have died. Had I hoped > for the finding to not be cancer, obsessing on the matter, I would have > suffered. My own volitions had consequences that affected the flow of > events.] "Your own volitions?" Do you believe you have "your own volitions?" The point is that "your" volitions are impersonal dhammas that arise beyond your control, they are paramattha dhammas performing functions, conditioned by previously arisen dhammas. Fortunately in your case the functioning of the dhammas resulted in the medical procedure . Good for you. All the factors thst led to that decision are anatta. You were born in a situation that led you to be educated in a way that assisted in making that decision an obvious one. Moredhammas performing functions. It was a no-brainer. Lukas and I are talking about drug addiction, something you might not have much experience with. The dhammas involved are entirely diiferent from the ones that led "you" to select the surgery. In any case, nothing but the performing of impersonal dhammas arising beyond the control of anything but the cobditiining force of other impersonal dhammas. Out of "your" hands, obviously. That's pretty obvious. I just knew this would happen if I posted the words "out of your hands" , I thought it would be Rob E, but I knew one of you private enterprise/freedom of choice guys would respond...not interested in that usage of Dhamma, I've got pop psychology for empowerment... Phil p.s Lukas, I think I have said enough, I'm out of here for awhile. Don't worry, I don't have Alzheimers, not yet anyways Phil > Beyond this matter of modification of kammic result by subsequent > conditions including further kamma, if no element of randomness enters into the > course of events, but only full determinism, then all religions are > utterly pointless. Here is the situation: If at any moment "the die is cast," > with all future events fully determined, then the view of fatalism is 100% > correct!!! That is exactly what fatalism is about! There is a fundamental > dichotomy of possibility with regard to the way things are: Either a) At every > point in time, all that will occur from then on is entirely determined by > prior conditions (of all sorts), or b) Elements of random occurrence enter > essentially into the mix. No third scenario is possible. (I challenge anyone > to justify an alternative to these two.) > If case "b" is the way things are, as modern quantum theory asserts, > then an element of freshness and freedom is introduced into the flow of > events, for whenever there is a change in conditions, including random change, > future events can be different. If, OTOH, case "a" is the way things are, > then fatalism is the rule, and freedom is an illusion par excellence. > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > But it can be hard to always apply > this truth. It needs firm understanding of kamma and vipaaka. As you > said: "The teachings need to be known, recalled, and acted upon." > > ============================= > With metta, > Howard > > > Seamless Interdependence > > /A change in anything is a change in everything/ > > (Anonymous) > > > > > #125172 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jun 24, 2012 12:12 am Subject: Re: ps to lukas [dsg] Out of our hands? ( was Re: To Phil. Dhamma recording upasaka_howard Hi, Phil - In a message dated 6/23/2012 9:42:14 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, philco777@... writes: Dear Hiward > But with regard to the idea that the results of kamma cannot be > changed, this is not so. Further conditions, including further kamma, CAN modify > the not-yet-arising results of kamma. The Buddha certainly taught this. [In > my case, had I not had the colon resection, I would have died. Had I hoped > for the finding to not be cancer, obsessing on the matter, I would have > suffered. My own volitions had consequences that affected the flow of > events.] "Your own volitions?" Do you believe you have "your own volitions?" ----------------------------------------------------- HCW: I expected such a response. Do you not know what I mean by this, Phil? Do you not know the difference between phenomena in what we call your mind stream and those in others? I don't believe you don't understand this. The Buddha spoke of one being an heir to his/her kamma. Was he atta-bound, Phil? Is that way of speaking of his unsatisfactory to you? ----------------------------------------------------- The point is that "your" volitions are impersonal dhammas that arise beyond your control, they are paramattha dhammas performing functions, conditioned by previously arisen dhammas. ------------------------------------------------------ HCW: What do you mean by "control" other than volition and volitional actions that have consequences? If you mean these being fully determinative, then I agree - no "control". If, OTOH, you mean having effect, then I fully disagree with you. ------------------------------------------------------ Fortunately in your case the functioning of the dhammas resulted in the medical procedure . Good for you. All the factors thst led to that decision are anatta. -------------------------------------------------------- HCW: Great word, 'anatta'. But what exactly do you mean? Do you mean that the volition and actions leading to the surgery had no effect, I consider that to be nonsense. If, OTOH, you mean there is no entity, no fixed identity, and no controller to be found within any stream of namas and rupas, then I quite agree. ----------------------------------------------------------- You were born in a situation that led you to be educated in a way that assisted in making that decision an obvious one. Moredhammas performing functions. It was a no-brainer. Lukas and I are talking about drug addiction, something you might not have much experience with. ---------------------------------------------------------- HCW: Everyone has addictions of sorts, and I have been no exception. ---------------------------------------------------------- The dhammas involved are entirely diiferent from the ones that led "you" to select the surgery. In any case, nothing but the performing of impersonal dhammas arising beyond the control of anything but the cobditiining force of other impersonal dhammas. Out of " ;your" hands, obviously. That's pretty obvious. I just knew this would happen if I posted the words "out of your hands" , I thought it would be Rob E, but I knew one of you private enterprise/freedom of choice guys would respond...not interested in that usage of Dhamma, I've got pop psychology for empowerment... Phil p.s Lukas, I think I have said enough, I'm out of here for awhile. Don't worry, I don't have Alzheimers, not yet anyways Phil ================================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #125173 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sun Jun 24, 2012 12:51 am Subject: Out of our hands? ( was Re: To Phil. Dhamma recording ptaus1 Hi Howard, > H: Here is the situation: If at any moment "the die is cast," > with all future events fully determined, then the view of fatalism is 100% > correct!!! That is exactly what fatalism is about! There is a fundamental > dichotomy of possibility with regard to the way things are: Either a) At every > point in time, all that will occur from then on is entirely determined by > prior conditions (of all sorts), or b) Elements of random occurrence enter > essentially into the mix. No third scenario is possible. (I challenge anyone > to justify an alternative to these two.) pt: I like challenges :) I have two potential alternatives in fact: 1) a savaka is stuck in samsara and there's no way out regardless of how he fares, life and death, happiness and unhappiness, etc. In that way it can be said that it is all "predetermined" - until a buddha appears in the world that is. So, a buddha, or rather the dhamma that savakas hear from him, is what brings in that element "outside the box" and opens up a different possibility so to speak. Otherwise, a savaka, on his own, has no element of freedom, choice, power, etc, to find a way out of samsara. As in, that's the picture conditions paint without a buddha so to speak. 2) the alternatives you mention, as well as the one I mention, are all essentially a product of the capacity to think. There's also the capacity to understand, such as understanding conditionality in a moment of insight. I imagine such understanding would be nothing like either of the alternatives you and me mention, but I'd think it would probably answer your question on how things get to happen. Best wishes pt #125174 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jun 24, 2012 1:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Out of our hands? ( was Re: To Phil. Dhamma recording upasaka_howard Hi, pt - In a message dated 6/23/2012 10:55:06 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, ptaus1@... writes: Hi Howard, > H: Here is the situation: If at any moment "the die is cast," > with all future events fully determined, then the view of fatalism is 100% > correct!!! That is exactly what fatalism is about! There is a fundamental > dichotomy of possibility with regard to the way things are: Either a) At every > point in time, all that will occur from then on is entirely determined by > prior conditions (of all sorts), or b) Elements of random occurrence enter > essentially into the mix. No third scenario is possible. (I challenge anyone > to justify an alternative to these two.) pt: I like challenges :) -------------------------------------------------- HCW: --------------------------------------------------- I have two potential alternatives in fact: 1) a savaka is stuck in samsara and there's no way out regardless of how he fares, life and death, happiness and unhappiness, etc. In that way it can be said that it is all "predetermined" - until a buddha appears in the world that is. So, a buddha, or rather the dhamma that savakas hear from him, is what brings in that element "outside the box" and opens up a different possibility so to speak. Otherwise, a savaka, on his own, has no element of freedom, choice, power, etc, to find a way out of samsara. As in, that's the picture conditions paint without a buddha so to speak. -------------------------------------------------------- HCW: I don't think that this is an alternative to a and b. Is the asppearance of a buddha in the world fully determined or not? Is it not one more condition, and it occuring due to prior conditions? Is there any element of chance involved at all? If not, we are still well within the fatalistic "a" scenario. Otherwise, we are within the "b" scenario. --------------------------------------------------------- 2) the alternatives you mention, as well as the one I mention, are all essentially a product of the capacity to think. There's also the capacity to understand, such as understanding conditionality in a moment of insight. I imagine such understanding would be nothing like either of the alternatives you and me mention, but I'd think it would probably answer your question on how things get to happen. -------------------------------------------------------- HCW: I don't follow you. Is the capacity to think and to understand fully determined or not? If yes, one is still within "a", but otherwise within "b". ------------------------------------------------------- Best wishes pt ==================================== With metta, Howard P. S. I much appreciate your taking me seriously and discussing the issue rather than defending "a side" or "getting personal". It is a pleasure, pt! :-) Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #125175 From: "philip" Date: Sun Jun 24, 2012 4:20 am Subject: ps to lukas [dsg] Out of our hands? ( was Re: To Phil. Dhamma recording philofillet Dear Howard ( and Rob E) I should come clean, and be done with this. I simply dislike you and and Rob E on a personal level, for several reasons, utterly childish on my part. Your incorrect understanding on some points ("This is where I part ways with Abhidhamma" you once declared imperiously and rather abdurdly) and pet theories are par for the course on the internet, there must be something else? The fact that you have numerous lists where you are active ( including your closed membership Kalama group) but we who listen to A Sujin have only this list is another reason, but, bah, whatever, when yoy rejoined the group after delisting you wrote that you would be so quiet that any people who who were wrankled by you (me and ???) wouldn't even know you were there, but that hasn't happened, The wrankling goes on. In any case my connection to Dhamma is weak these days and yours -to your credit - is strong. So good for you and bad for me, carry on. But my volition is to put an end to any exposure to you guys, just not worth the irritation in my juvenile realm... Phil #125176 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jun 24, 2012 4:37 am Subject: Re: ps to lukas [dsg] Out of our hands? ( was Re: To Phil. Dhamma recording upasaka_howard Hi, Phil - In a message dated 6/23/2012 2:20:49 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, philco777@... writes: Dear Howard ( and Rob E) I should come clean, and be done with this. I simply dislike you and and Rob E on a personal level, for several reasons, utterly childish on my part. -------------------------------------------------------------- HCW: Quite ugly, Phil! What an unbelievable statement to make that you "simply dislike" me and Robert on a personal level. Your characterizing this as childish doesn't make it better. Have you learned *nothing* of what the Buddha taught about right speech and kindness? ------------------------------------------------------------ Your incorrect understanding on some points ("This is where I part ways with Abhidhamma" you once declared imperiously and rather abdurdly) and pet theories are par for the course on the internet, there must be something else? The fact that you have numerous lists where you are active ( including your closed membership Kalama group) -------------------------------------------------------------- HCW I am hardly active on any list but this. But keep it up, Phil, and you may succeed in reducing my activity here radically. I have rarely encountered a hater, Phil, and so you bring some freshness into my life! -------------------------------------------------------------- but we who listen to A Sujin have only this list is another reason -------------------------------------------------------------- HCW: You choose what you choose. Don't moan about it! ------------------------------------------------------------- , but, bah, whatever, when yoy rejoined the group after delisting you wrote that you would be so quiet that any people who who were wrankled by you (me and ???) wouldn't even know you were there, but that hasn't happened -------------------------------------------------------------- HCW: I've done relatively little posting, but, clearly for you, any posting by me is too much. In any case, I have no reason to apologize to anyone, least of all to someone as mean spirited as you. --------------------------------------------------------------- , The wrankling goes on. In any case my connection to Dhamma is weak these days and yours -to your credit - is strong. So good for you and bad for me, carry on. -------------------------------------------------------------- HCW: In how many directions are you going at the same time, Phil? Do you have multiple personality disorder? --------------------------------------------------------------- But my volition is to put an end to any exposure to you guys, just not worth the irritation in my juvenile realm... Phil ============================== Howard #125177 From: "marycarbone153" Date: Sun Jun 24, 2012 1:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] losing marycarbone153 Thank you for helping me understand. I'm walking, I'm breathing, I'm seeing, hearing, I'm peaceful. I am also stabbed by a thoughtless cut, I'm now wounded, bleeding, bacteria invades. What do I do for/to the injury? How do I keep more injuries from happening? --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Mary, > Op 22-jun-2012, om 20:21 heeft marycarbone153 het volgende geschreven: > > > Just went through a visit and I am feeling sad and abused like a > > hungry ghost. I want my happiness back and would like to be strong > > enough to protect it and still protect myself and my family from pain. > ------ > N: We can learn from such experiences. You are unhappy and you wish > to be happy, but this cannot occur on command. Exactly this is what > the Buddha taught us: thoughts, feelings, material phenomena, they > all arise because of the appropriate conditions and they do not > belong to a self, they are anattaa, non-self. <.....> #125178 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Jun 24, 2012 11:49 am Subject: ps to lukas [dsg] Out of our hands? ( was Re: To Phil. Dhamma recording epsteinrob Hi Phil. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > > Dear Howard ( and Rob E) > > I should come clean, and be done with this. I simply dislike you and and Rob E on a personal level, for several reasons, utterly childish on my part. Your incorrect understanding on some points ("This is where I part ways with Abhidhamma" you once declared imperiously and rather abdurdly) and pet theories are par for the course on the internet, there must be something else? The fact that you have numerous lists where you are active ( including your closed membership Kalama group) but we who listen to A Sujin have only this list is another reason, but, bah, whatever, when yoy rejoined the group after delisting you wrote that you would be so quiet that any people who who were wrankled by you (me and ???) wouldn't even know you were there, but that hasn't happened, The wrankling goes on. In any case my connection to Dhamma is weak these days and yours -to your credit - is strong. So good for you and bad for me, carry on. But my volition is to put an end to any exposure to you guys, just not worth the irritation in my juvenile realm... It would be nicer for you just to leave or skip our posts without comment if you want to limit your exposure. Your need to make disparaging comments both on the way in and on the way out is indeed overly personal and annoying. You refuse to stop making negative comments about other people here who you don't like, even when they are not talking to you at all and leaving you in peace, which adds up to a form of harassment. You know how to skip a post if it has a name on it you don't want to read, so just do it, and leave me alone. I don't want to hear about whether you like me or not, this isn't a soap opera. I can't speak for Howard, but I will ask you to stop commenting on me. I would like to participate here without being subject to your inappropriate personal negativity. Next time you want to 'come clean,' please keep it to yourself. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - #125179 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Jun 24, 2012 11:57 am Subject: ps to lukas [dsg] Out of our hands? ( was Re: To Phil. Dhamma recording epsteinrob Hi Phil. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > I just knew this would happen if I posted the words "out of your hands" , > I thought it would be Rob E, but I knew one of you private > enterprise/freedom of choice guys would respond...not interested in that usage of Dhamma, > I've got pop psychology for empowerment... Cut out the nasty personal comments, Phil. I am not a "freedom of choice" guy in any case, if you ever bothered to read a post you would know that. You are using this list to pick a few whipping boys and then harass them with your nasty gibes. Your prejudices and negative personal comments do not belong on this list. You should cut it out or really leave, and come back when you are capable of having a respectful conversation. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - #125180 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jun 24, 2012 5:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] losing nilovg Dear Mary, Op 23-jun-2012, om 17:05 heeft marycarbone153 het volgende geschreven: > I'm walking, I'm breathing, I'm seeing, hearing, I'm peaceful. I am > also stabbed by a thoughtless cut, I'm now wounded, bleeding, > bacteria invades. What do I do for/to the injury? How do I keep > more injuries from happening? ------ N: I sympathize, a very difficult situation. I hope you seek medical help. How to prevent this? The deepest cause is kamma that produces result, and in the sutta we read that deeds bring their appropriate results, whether we like it or not. At the same time perhaps you can avoid certain situations? ----- Nina. #125181 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jun 24, 2012 5:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Out of our hands? ( was Re: To Phil. Dhamma recording nilovg Hi Howard, Op 23-jun-2012, om 14:58 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > No, Nina, what it reflected was an equanimity arising from refusing to > hope - such hoping providing no help but, on the contrary, only > being a > source of distress. ------ N: All right, I got your point. Hoping is a form of lobha, and this brings sorrow. As to kamma and result, perhaps this is a topic for discussion later on? Nina. #125182 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jun 24, 2012 5:54 pm Subject: Pilgrimage in India, Ch 3, 4. nilovg Dear friends, During our pilgrimage we talked about the meaning of the word awareness or mindfulness. Someone thought that while there is seeing, there is always awareness, that is, awareness of what is seen. He thought that when there is hearing, there is always awareness, that is, awareness of what is heard. We should remember that the word awareness as it is used in common language means: experiencing an object. Awareness or sati of the eightfold Path has a very precise meaning: it is a sobhana cetasika (beautiful mental factor) which can arise only with sobhana cittas. When sati is mindful, non-forgetful, of a reality appearing through one of the six doors, the characterstic of that reality can be known. Seeing arises time and again but is that awareness of the eightfold Path? Seeing experiences an object, visible object, but is the experience of visible object the same as “awareness” or mindfulness of visible object? When there is seeing, that is, the experience of what is visible, there is also the reality of visible object, that which appears through the eyes. Visible object and the experience of visible object are two different kinds of realities and their different characteristics can be known when there is mindfulness of them. Sati or mindfulness is again another kind of reality, and it can be aware, for example, of visible object or of the experience of visible object. Sati cannot be mindful of both realities at the same time; it can be mindful of only one reality at a time. It depends on conditions of what reality there is mindfulness. Sati can be mindful of different characteristics appearing one at a time through the different doorways. When visible object appears sati can be mindful of visible object; visible object can be realized as just visible object, a reality that does not know anything. There is no thing or person in the visible object. When the experience of visible object, seeing, appears sati can be mindful of the experience of visible object, a reality different from visible object. When sound appears, sati, not self, can realize sound as only sound. When we think of the sound of a bird or the sound of a piano, the object has changed; it is not sound but a concept or idea we are thinking of. Paññå is able to know precisely the object that appears at the present moment. When sound appears, it can be known as it is: only sound, not “something” or “self”. There is no bird in the sound, no piano in the sound. When hearing appears, hearing can be realized as only hearing, no self who hears. If sati and paññå are not being developed hearing cannot be known as it is, as a reality that is non- self. Thus, we see that sati of the eightfold Path is completely different from “awareness” as it is understood in common language. Awareness in common language simply means experiencing or knowing an object without there being the development of the eightfold Path. -------- Nina. #125183 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jun 24, 2012 7:33 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and result. nilovg Hi Howard, Op 23-jun-2012, om 14:58 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > But with regard to the idea that the results of kamma cannot be > changed, this is not so. Further conditions, including further > kamma, CAN modify > the not-yet-arising results of kamma. The Buddha certainly taught > this. .... > Beyond this matter of modification of kammic result by subsequent > conditions including further kamma, if no element of randomness > enters into the > course of events, but only full determinism, then all religions are > utterly pointless. Here is the situation: If at any moment "the die > is cast," > with all future events fully determined, then the view of fatalism > is 100% > correct!!! That is exactly what fatalism is about! -------- N: It is a complex matter. As we learnt, for kamma to produce result there are other conditions. Dispeller of Delusion, Ch 16): the place where one lives, the time (like wartime). Upadhi: substratum, one may be born as a slave or as an ugly person, or as a handsome peron. Payoga: failure or success of means: having performed many evil deeds or many good deeds. These have influence on the ripening of kamma to produce vipaaka. I think you were suggesting this, and that is correct. But it is a condition of the past: what has been accumulated. I do not think that it is "in one's own hands'" to try to compensate for evil kamma and to avoid unhappy results. There are other texts explaining that one cannot escape from vipaaka: Dhammapada vs 127: The Expositor (p. 361) illustrates this with examples. A woman drowned a dog, and she could not escape from drowning in midocean. Moggallana who was an arahat could not escape an unhappy result form a former evil deed. When I think of cause and result, I do not believe this is fatalism. It is the dukkha of being in the cycle, and only when there is the end to rebirth there is after the final passing away no more result of kamma. ------ Nina. #125184 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jun 24, 2012 8:06 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] losing sarahprocter... Hi Larry & Mary, Just briefly - really great to see you here again, Larry! We often think of you. Mary, welcome to DSG.... hope the Dhamma can provide the solace and understanding needed. Can you tell us a little more about your interest in the Dhamma, where you live and so on? Metta Sarah p.s Mary, pls sign off with your name and make it clear who you are addressing, even if 'all'. >________________________________ > From: Larry Biddinger >When you are sad you are also standing or sitting or lying down, maybe >walking or running. Whatever the posture, it isn't sad. Mary Carbone is >a group effort, not "just sad". This is the meaning of emptiness. #125185 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jun 24, 2012 9:24 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Out of our hands? ( was Re: To Phil. Dhamma recording upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 6/24/2012 3:52:26 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, Op 23-jun-2012, om 14:58 heeft _upasaka@..._ (mailto:upasaka@...) het volgende geschreven: > No, Nina, what it reflected was an equanimity arising from refusing to > hope - such hoping providing no help but, on the contrary, only > being a > source of distress. ------ N: All right, I got your point. Hoping is a form of lobha, and this brings sorrow. As to kamma and result, perhaps this is a topic for discussion later on? ------------------------------------------------------------ HCW: Of course. Thank you, Nina! :-) ----------------------------------------------------------- Nina. ============================== With metta, Howard Admirable Friendship "If wanderers who are members of other sects should ask you, 'What, friend, are the prerequisites for the development of the _wings to self-awakening_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/glossary.html#bodhi-pakkhiya-dhamma) ?' you should answer, 'There is the case where a monk has admirable people as friends, companions, & colleagues. This is the first prerequisite for the development of the wings to self-awakening.'" — _AN 9.1_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.001.than.html) #125186 From: "Prasad Praturi" Date: Sun Jun 24, 2012 9:24 pm Subject: Re: Kamma and result. ppraturi Dear Nina, Howard --- > > But with regard to the idea that the results of kamma cannot be > > changed, this is not so. Further conditions, including further > > kamma, CAN modify > > the not-yet-arising results of kamma. The Buddha certainly taught > > this. .... > N: It is a complex matter. As we learnt, for kamma to produce result > there are other conditions. compensate > for evil kamma and to avoid unhappy results. There are other texts > explaining that one cannot escape from vipaaka: Dhammapada vs 127: > is found that place on earth, where abiding one may escape (the > consequences of) an evil deed.> > The Expositor (p. 361) illustrates this with examples. A woman > drowned a dog, and she could not escape from drowning in midocean. > Moggallana who was an arahat could not escape an unhappy result form > a former evil deed. > When I think of cause and result, > ------ > Nina. > P: Another example is Anglimala... After 999 kilings, he could become Arhath... due to the conditions.. Such as prescence of a Buddha and Buddha Sasana and his ability to realize ultimate reality... These conditions ( or states) inturn ...could be a result of his past accumulations... It is indeed a complex process.. Prasad > #125187 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jun 24, 2012 10:10 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and result. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 6/24/2012 5:33:44 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, Op 23-jun-2012, om 14:58 heeft _upasaka@..._ (mailto:upasaka@...) het volgende geschreven: > But with regard to the idea that the results of kamma cannot be > changed, this is not so. Further conditions, including further > kamma, CAN modify > the not-yet-arising results of kamma. The Buddha certainly taught > this. .... > Beyond this matter of modification of kammic result by subsequent > conditions including further kamma, if no element of randomness > enters into the > course of events, but only full determinism, then all religions are > utterly pointless. Here is the situation: If at any moment "the die > is cast," > with all future events fully determined, then the view of fatalism > is 100% > correct!!! That is exactly what fatalism is about! -------- N: It is a complex matter. As we learnt, for kamma to produce result there are other conditions. ---------------------------------------------------------- HCW: Yes. -------------------------------------------------------- Dispeller of Delusion, Ch 16): the place where one lives, the time (like wartime). Upadhi: substratum, one may be born as a slave or as an ugly person, or as a handsome peron. Payoga: failure or success of means: having performed many evil deeds or many good deeds. These have influence on the ripening of kamma to produce vipaaka. I think you were suggesting this, and that is correct. But it is a condition of the past: what has been accumulated. I do not think that it is "in one's own hands'" to try to compensate for evil kamma and to avoid unhappy results. ------------------------------------------------------------- HCW: I don't recall my having initiated the use of that phrase "in one's own hands". I don't like the phrase if it is to be taken in any way other than figuratively. What I *do* maintain with regard to the results of kamma is that "further conditions, including further kamma, CAN modify the not-yet-arising results of kamma." This seems to be what you write above also. The main issue that I was raising, however, is not specifically a matter of kamma and vipaka but is the matter of what constitutes "conditioning," particularly whether it is probabilistic influence or absolute determination. What I was asserting is that if at any point in time the entirety of all that has occurred, all prior mental and physical phenomena at all places and times, fully determines all that will transpire from then on, then this is a fatalism. Either some inherent elements of chance enter into the flow of events, making for a freshness and true novelty and a redirecting of the flow of events, or else lockstep determinism is the ironclad rule. I see no alternative to this duality. -------------------------------------------------------------- There are other texts explaining that one cannot escape from vipaaka: Dhammapada vs 127: ----------------------------------------------------------------- HCW: But, Nina, there are places on the suttas at which the Buddha taught that the results of kamma can be modified by further conditions, including further offsetting kamma. So, what should one do: pick and choose? Perhaps what is so is that vipaka cannot be fully nullified, yet can be modified, redirected, and weakened. (For example, subsequent kusala kamma offsetting prior evil action, whereby that prior evil action does not result in birth in a hell realm but instead in a birth in this realm but under very difficult circumstances.) ------------------------------------------------------------------- The Expositor (p. 361) illustrates this with examples. A woman drowned a dog, and she could not escape from drowning in midocean. Moggallana who was an arahat could not escape an unhappy result form a former evil deed. When I think of cause and result, I do not believe this is fatalism. It is the dukkha of being in the cycle, and only when there is the end to rebirth there is after the final passing away no more result of kamma. ----------------------------------------------------------------- HCW: I consider one form of fatalism to be the notion that the entirety of conditions prior to a given moment determines 100% what will transpire from that moment on. --------------------------------------------------------------- ------ Nina. ================================= With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #125188 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sun Jun 24, 2012 11:56 pm Subject: ps to lukas [dsg] Out of our hands? ( was Re: To Phil. Dhamma recording ptaus1 Hi Phil, > I should come clean,... But my volition is to put an end to any exposure to you guys, just not worth the irritation in my juvenile realm... pt: There are many beneficial ways to participate. There's a project I'm trying to get going, and it's possible you might be quite interested in it. Can I email you offlist with details? Best wishes pt #125189 From: "ptaus1" Date: Mon Jun 25, 2012 12:06 am Subject: [dsg] Out of our hands? ( was Re: To Phil. Dhamma recording ptaus1 Hi Howard, > 2) the alternatives you mention, as well as the one I mention, are all > essentially a product of the capacity to think. There's also the capacity to > understand, such as understanding conditionality in a moment of insight. I > imagine such understanding would be nothing like either of the alternatives > you and me mention, but I'd think it would probably answer your question on > how things get to happen. > -------------------------------------------------------- > HCW: > I don't follow you. Is the capacity to think and to understand fully > determined or not? If yes, one is still within "a", but otherwise within "b". > ------------------------------------------------------- I guess what I'm saying is that when speaking about conditionality, I don't think the texts address it in terms of fatalism/determinism nor randomness, but just in terms of understanding it now. I'd say that means that the notions of fatalism and randomness just don't apply really when it comes to conditionality. Why not? My guess is because they are thinking about the issue, rather than understanding the issue (as in panna arising right now). Perhaps a comparable situation is when one is trying to think do I exist or do I not exist, whereas understanding conditionality renders both notions inapplicable. I always found "Does not apply" expression in similar suttas quite brilliant. But then, I do love to think about these things... Best wishes pt #125190 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jun 25, 2012 3:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Out of our hands? ( was Re: To Phil. Dhamma recording upasaka_howard Hi, pt - In a message dated 6/24/2012 10:06:19 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, ptaus1@... writes: Hi Howard, > 2) the alternatives you mention, as well as the one I mention, are all > essentially a product of the capacity to think. There's also the capacity to > understand, such as understanding conditionality in a moment of insight. I > imagine such understanding would be nothing like either of the alternatives > you and me mention, but I'd think it would probably answer your question on > how things get to happen. > -------------------------------------------------------- > HCW: > I don't follow you. Is the capacity to think and to understand fully > determined or not? If yes, one is still within "a", but otherwise within "b". > ------------------------------------------------------- I guess what I'm saying is that when speaking about conditionality, I don't think the texts address it in terms of fatalism/determinism nor randomness, but just in terms of understanding it now. ---------------------------------------------------------- HCW: I think that is correct, pt. The Buddha wasn't a theoretician but a pragmatist who emphasized calming and clearing the mind, attending to what arises in the moment, developing insight into reality, and putting an end to suffering. --------------------------------------------------------- I'd say that means that the notions of fatalism and randomness just don't apply really when it comes to conditionality. Why not? My guess is because they are thinking about the issue, rather than understanding the issue (as in panna arising right now). -------------------------------------------------------- HCW: I do think it applies (one way or the other), but only wisdom will ultimately solve the issue in any useful way, not thinking. ------------------------------------------------------- Perhaps a comparable situation is when one is trying to think do I exist or do I not exist, whereas understanding conditionality renders both notions inapplicable. ----------------------------------------------------- HCW: "I exist" and "I do not exist" are both inapplicable because of the "I" presupposition, but conditionality is another matter, I believe. The nature of conditionality itself is just not known by us, and it is not discussed by the Buddha probably because arriving at a conceptual answer simply serves no useful purpose as regards awakening. ------------------------------------------------------- I always found "Does not apply" expression in similar suttas quite brilliant. But then, I do love to think about these things... ---------------------------------------------------- HCW: Yeah, I think too much also! Thinking, thinking, thinking - a sickness of ours maybe! ;-) ----------------------------------------------------- Best wishes pt ============================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #125191 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Mon Jun 25, 2012 3:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Out of our hands? ( was Re: To Phil. Dhamma recording moellerdieter Hi Howard and PT, you wrote: PT' always found "Does not apply" expression in similar suttas quite brilliant. But then, I do love to think about these things... ---------------------------------------------------- HCW: Yeah, I think too much also! Thinking, thinking, thinking - a sickness of ours maybe! ;-) D: maybe that can be cured : replacing thinking by contemplation ;-) with Metta Dieter #125192 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jun 25, 2012 4:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Out of our hands? ( was Re: To Phil. Dhamma recording upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter (and pt) - In a message dated 6/24/2012 1:48:29 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, moellerdieter@... writes: Hi Howard and PT, you wrote: PT' always found "Does not apply" expression in similar suttas quite brilliant. But then, I do love to think about these things... ---------------------------------------------------- HCW: Yeah, I think too much also! Thinking, thinking, thinking - a sickness of ours maybe! ;-) D: maybe that can be cured : replacing thinking by contemplation ;-) ----------------------------------------------------- HCW: LOL! Yeah, whatever THAT is! ;-)) ------------------------------------------------------- with Metta Dieter ============================ With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #125193 From: "Ken H" Date: Mon Jun 25, 2012 10:02 am Subject: Re: Problems in life. kenhowardau Hi Robert K, ----- >> KH: My argument is with Robert K for his insistence that people - not just dhammas) - are reborn, or that people - not just dhammas – perform kusala and akusala actions. Or that concepts are made of lots and lots of kalapas of rupas (as if kalapas were molecules and rupas were atoms!). >> > RK: Dear Kenh perhaps you could quote me directly. ----- KH: No, I don't keep files on people. But if I had to dig into the distant past I would refer to some posts where (if I remember correctly) you supported the introduction of Creationism and Intelligent Design Theory into school curriculums. You believed evolution theory contradicted the Dhamma. ----------------------- > RK: But anyway lets look at what Nina writes in her profound book on physical phenomena: "Rupas do not arise singly, they arise in units or groups. What we take for our body is composed of many groups or units, consisting each of different kinds of rupa, and the rupas in such a group arise together and fall away together. " ---------------------- KH: That's right: as in the Satipatthana Sutta, a monk who is mindful of the body knows there are really just the presently arisen paramattha dhammas. -------------------------------- > RK: "The unborn being in the womb, for example, needs the right temperature in order to grow. Throughout life the element of heat produces rupas. Nutrition is another factor which produces rupas. When food has been taken by a living being it is assimilated into the body and then nutrition can produce rupas. Some of the groups of rupa of our body are produced by kamma, some by citta, some by temperature and some by nutrition. The four factors which produce the rupas of our body support and consolidate each other and keep this shortlived body going."" > > Do you feel I say something different from Nina? ----------------- KH: Your words are sometimes the same, but Nina believes science and Dhamma are two different things and cannot contradict each other. Therefore, I take her descriptions to be saying, for example, that kalapas of rupas are being conditioned to arise now – at this very moment - rather than to be saying that kalapas (as distinct from molecules) are created by chemical reactions in the stomach. Ken H #125194 From: "ptaus1" Date: Mon Jun 25, 2012 10:49 am Subject: [dsg] Out of our hands? ( was Re: To Phil. Dhamma recording ptaus1 Hi Howard and Dieter, > PT: always found "Does not apply" expression in similar suttas quite > brilliant. But then, I do love to think about these things... > ---------------------------------------------------- > HCW: > Yeah, I think too much also! Thinking, thinking, thinking - a sickness > of ours maybe! ;-) > > D: maybe that can be cured : replacing thinking by contemplation ;-) > ----------------------------------------------------- > HCW: > LOL! Yeah, whatever THAT is! :) Good point. Of course, there's certainly something to be said about benefits of pariyatti, but in my case it's just overthinking things. Taking it too far, or, beyond the range - more of those expressions I really like from the texts. Best wishes, pt #125195 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Jun 25, 2012 11:34 am Subject: [dsg] Out of our hands? ( was Re: To Phil. Dhamma recording epsteinrob Hi pt. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > > Hi Howard and Dieter, > > > PT: always found "Does not apply" expression in similar suttas quite > > brilliant. But then, I do love to think about these things... > > ---------------------------------------------------- > > HCW: > > Yeah, I think too much also! Thinking, thinking, thinking - a sickness > > of ours maybe! ;-) > > > > D: maybe that can be cured : replacing thinking by contemplation ;-) > > ----------------------------------------------------- > > HCW: > > LOL! Yeah, whatever THAT is! > > > :) Good point. Of course, there's certainly something to be said about benefits of pariyatti, but in my case it's just overthinking things. Taking it too far, or, beyond the range - more of those expressions I really like from the texts. I think you have a point, and I think Dieter had a good point too - in my view, contemplation is taking an important concept and staying with it, turning it around, probing it, in order to understand what it represents, as opposed to just jabbering and making stuff up. In other words, the former I think can involve vittakha and vicara, or at least something like them, while the latter is just creating more proliferations. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - #125196 From: "ptaus1" Date: Mon Jun 25, 2012 1:16 pm Subject: [dsg] Out of our hands? ( was Re: To Phil. Dhamma recording ptaus1 Hi RobE, > I think you have a point, and I think Dieter had a good point too - in my view, contemplation is taking an important concept and staying with it, turning it around, probing it, in order to understand what it represents, as opposed to just jabbering and making stuff up. In other words, the former I think can involve vittakha and vicara, or at least something like them, while the latter is just creating more proliferations. Contemplation is one of those terms I find hard to pinpoint. Ideally speaking, it would be pariyatti imo, so strictly speaking a kusala citta with panna and a concept of a dhamma as object. Naturally, vitaka and vicara would be kusala then as well. But I can't really tell when's thinking about dhamma for example actually kusala, and my bet is on it being akusala most of the time, what would make vitaka and vicara akusala at the time as well. Best wishes pt #125197 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Jun 25, 2012 3:18 pm Subject: Larry back! jonoabb Hi Larry Great to see you back. Was wondering only the other day what you were up to these days (in Dhamma terms, I mean). Any reflections to share? Hoping you stick around for a while. Jon --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Larry Biddinger wrote: > > ... > To DSG: Hi everyone, > > Just stopped in to see what's going on. Nice to see all your imaginary > faces. I'm away for a week, but I'll check in next weekend for any > corrections or explanations ;)) L. > #125198 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Mon Jun 25, 2012 3:23 pm Subject: Kenh1 rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Robert K, > > ----- > >> KH: My argument is with Robert K for his insistence that people - not just > dhammas) - are reborn, or that people - not just dhammas – perform kusala and > akusala actions. Or that concepts are made of lots and lots of kalapas of rupas > (as if kalapas were molecules and rupas were atoms!). > >> > > > > RK: Dear Kenh > perhaps you could quote me directly. > ----- > > KH: No, I don't keep files on people. But if I had to dig into the distant past I would refer to some posts where (if I remember correctly) you supported the introduction of Creationism and Intelligent Design Theory into school curriculums. You believed evolution theory contradicted the Dhamma. ++++++++++++ Dear Kenh Don't you think it is fairer and easier to follow if you cite something directly. Regarding your statement that: >KH: My argument is with Robert K for his insistence that people - not just > dhammas) - are reborn, or that people - not just dhammas – perform kusala and > akusala actions."" this is an outright misrepresentation bordering on a lie. _______ But you made this silly paraphrase based on the fact (your remember rightly on this point) that I don't think all of current evoloutionary doctrine is in agreement with the Dhamma . I looked up the discussion we had: ROBERT: Richard Dawkins (Oxford prof., Fellow of the Royal society) Dawkins writes that > in a universe governed by materialistic evolution (as he claims our universe to > be) "some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and > you won't find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice." (1995, pp.132-133). > > And "the universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if > there is at bottom no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but > pointless indifference." (quoted in Easterbrook, 1997, p.892). > Biologists/scientists: George Gaylord Simpson: "Man is the result of a > purposeless and natural process that did not have him in mind." (1967, > pp.344-345). > > Jacques Monod: "Pure chance, absolutely free but blind, lies at the very root of > the stupendous edifice of evolution...." (Monod, 1972, p.110); and "Man at last > knows that he is alone in the unfeeling immensity of the universe, out of which > he emerged by chance." (p.167) > > As Futuyma explains: "By coupling undirected, purposeless variation to the > blind, uncaring process of natural selection, Darwin made theological or > spiritual explanations of the life processes superfluous. Darwin's theory of > evolution was a crucial plank in the platform of mechanism and materialism of > much of science, in short what has since been the stage of most Western > thought." (Futuyma, 1986, p.2). __________ You reply to this - mainly directed at my quotes from Richard dawkins, who you admire: . RK: > Dawkins ,when he writes about a world of senseless injustise(the human and animal realm) according to you has waht type of citta? > --------------------- > Kenh: If he writes the way he does in a genuine attempt at helping people, >then there >must be some kusala cittas involved. +++++++++++++ I stated in that thread that creationists have clear wrong view (belief in a creator GOd). My point is that the evoloution bioligists like Dawkins have a different extreme wrong view (they think it all happens due to chance- no kamma etc). Thus I could see any reason to preference either view . I do not see how Dawkins is having kusala citta when he writes: in a universe governed by materialistic evolution (as he claims our universe to > be) "some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and > you won't find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice." (1995, pp.132-133). robert #125199 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Jun 25, 2012 3:31 pm Subject: [dsg] Out of our hands? ( was Re: To Phil. Dhamma recording jonoabb Hi Rob E (and pt) Butting in if I may. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > > Hi RobE, > > > I think you have a point, and I think Dieter had a good point too - in my view, contemplation is taking an important concept and staying with it, turning it around, probing it, in order to understand what it represents, as opposed to just jabbering and making stuff up. In other words, the former I think can involve vittakha and vicara, or at least something like them, while the latter is just creating more proliferations. > > > pt: Contemplation is one of those terms I find hard to pinpoint. Ideally speaking, it would be pariyatti imo, so strictly speaking a kusala citta with panna and a concept of a dhamma as object. Naturally, vitaka and vicara would be kusala then as well. But I can't really tell when's thinking about dhamma for example actually kusala, and my bet is on it being akusala most of the time, what would make vitaka and vicara akusala at the time as well. > =============== J: I agree with pt here. For thinking about a concept to be kusala (including "turning it around, probing it, in order to understand what it represents"), there must probably be some level of understanding (unless it's thinking in connection with dana or sila). And of course the object must be one that can usefully be reflected on. What kind of objects would you see as being 'important objects' in this context? Jon