400 From: amara chay   
Date: Fri Jun 2, 2000 3:48am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] It's quite all right.. :-))

 
  >Wow !!!  :-))
>
>Please allow me to share with you some things (lessons ?) I have
>gathered from my own suffering and my own mistakes.. They are like
>little attitudes or vows to help increase my inner strength.. I share
>because I hope that you can add or subtract some from your own set of
>attitudes and vows so that it works best for you.. Whatever works for
>me might not work for others.. Eucalyptus is healthy and stable diet
>for Koala bears but poison to us.. Interesting, isn't it ??.. If
>certain attitudes seem to be worthless, meaningless and useless to
>you, please simply ignore them as such.. :-))
>
>Please share your lessons with me and others, because we don't have
>time to make all mistakes ourselves.. hehehe..


Theresa,

What I study are according to the Buddha's teachings in the Tipitaka, in 
fact nothing else really interests me.  I am not an easy person to convince, 
only what is unquestionable teachings, like those in the Abhidhamma, can 
persuade me to even consider trying them out.  If I do not fully comprehend 
something, I never ever, as you wrote:


Every time I hear or read something on Dhamma from anyone but don't
understand or am confused, I simply sit down, cross my legs, and put
what I heard to work.. After a while, I know for certain and by
experience whether or not what I heard works for me, or whether or
not the topic is simply over my head, or whether or not it's useful
to me.. (end quote.)


In fact I agree with what the Buddha taught, never to believe in even his 
own teachings until you have carefully considered it first.  Everything in 
Buddhism is voluntary, even when you take the precepts (five silas, for 
example) there are no 'thou shalt nots' but 'I undertake to try not to...', 
and I am only willing to listen to the teachings of such a supreme person as 
teaches us incredible things 2500 + years ago that are being, even with 
computers and such, 'scientifically proven' today just as he described it 
(for example the existence of other planets which shook the astrological 
world a few years ago, when the western world, following there blind faith 
in the Bible, did not believe could exist since the earth was said to be the 
center of the universe and unique).  There are so much that he taught that 
have not yet been scientifically discovered, but nothing has ever been 
conclusively proven wrong.

Now those is the teachings I would like to try out, especially when the 
necessary 'lab instuments' are what everyone possesses, and can 'study' at 
any time, anywhere.  I do not need any object other than what is present at 
the immediate moment, I do not even have to assume any positions physically 
('sit down', or 'cross my legs') for sati to arise, when there are 
conditions for it to.  And the more I study, the more I am amazed at the 
Buddha's omniscience, especially since he has taught me so much, especially 
about myself.  He taught me to see, gradually, that there is in fact no me, 
though most of the time I forget that, but more profound and clear istants 
of sati have apeared when I realize they are distinct instants of realities 
of seeing, thinking, hearing, etc. that belong to no one, uncontrolable 
realities with infinite combinations of characteristics, always changing, 
irrecuperable once they are gone.  This makes me study even more, whatever 
appears before me, ever deeper if possible, as well as study the Tripitaka 
even more because that seems to condition more moments of sati.

Of course my accumulations of lobha makes me enjoy lots of other things 
besides, and I like very much reading letters from friends, which also 
provide me with instants of sati, which, when conditions (paccaya) are 
right, nothing can stop from arising, not even being seated (but not cross 
legged!) in front of the computer!

Amara




 
401 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Fri Jun 2, 2000 0:04pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: About Concentration

 
  Dear Theresa,
Ų	My understanding of Buddhism, and hence my whole
perspective on life, is quite different from the
early years. After learning 
 a little about the nature of the mind I realized
 how powerful ignorance and desire were. I became
frightened by them - . I WANTED TO STOP THEM.  I
tried to suppress . Tried to keep mindfulness going
continuously. It was because I didn't understand
 anatta. Later, I understood that they can't be
quickly got  rid of.  That when desire arises it is by
 conditions - that the uncontrollabilty of it
 demonstrates the truth of anatta.   Now my focus
is always to understand conditions. To let go of
trying to control. To see that there is nobody at
 all doing anything. 
 Before, secretly, unknowingly I was trying to get
 something for myself, trying to be better a better
person,
trying to have less dosa, less lobha, more sila. But
done
with a subtle sense of self. It is not the way.

 I found it very hard to let go of the idea of
control. It is really a complete upturning of the old
 way of viewing the world. It took time, study and
reflection. It seemed so fearful to let go. It helped
to take refuge in the Buddha, the Dhamma and the
sangha. I
reflected on the past monks , the ancient ones who
recorded the teachings so faithfully. Gradually
understanding grew.
Now it seems strange to think of anything as
controllable.

 This intellectual acceptance and
understanding of anatta is  only the 
beginning of the path - but once we truly see it
then our impatience and desire for results fades.
Because we know that only by the right conditions can
understanding grow. Many never even reach this
intellectual stage - they are trying very hard but
going in the wrong direction.


Even when we begin to see things as they happen it is
mostly thinking about them (a sort of thinking in the
present moment) rather than direct experience. Do we
accept this or do we want more? The right reflection
helps to let go the idea of a self who is having
understanding. Then there are more conditions for
direct experience (of the true kind) But even right
reflection can get in the way –if there is clinging to
it . One can stop at that level , content  because
life is now better understood. In the Ogha sutta the
Buddha crossed the flood by not stuggling and not
tarrying.

Now some comments on Dhamma. Some of this I have said
before so please excuse the repetition.
Ų	Whatever we are doing at any moment there are only
namas and rupas arising and passing away – as we learn
from the Tipitaka. It is true that much of our lives
are spent lost in stories about life. Concepts of
friends, things, cars, houses, work, and on and on.
None of these are real in the deepest sense – they are
pannati, concept. If they are not real then why do we
think of them? Why do two people looking in the same
direction see the same object? 
Ų	Some concepts can be classified as samutti-sacca,
conventional truth: as the ancient commentaries
explain they are the shadows of realities. When we are
thinking about something there are processes of
thinking arising and passing away rapidly that have a
concept as object. The  concept is not real – it is
not nama or rupa, but the thinking processes are nama
they are actually different cittas and cetasikas doing
their intricate work conditioned by different paccaya
(conditions) – no self at all.  These cittas and
cetasikas are nama –they are dhammas and can be
objects for sati. Thus there is really no moment that
is excluded as a potential object for the development
of satipatthana. This doesn’t mean that we can or
should know each moment. It is beyond control,
conditions have their own agendas and act entirely
according to their function and characteristic.

Ų	No moment is excluded as a potential object for
insight. Thus even when we are reading say a novel
there are still moments when sati can arise and
directly experience a reality as it is: as merely as
dhamma . If it is truly a moment of sati at the level
of satipathhana then there is no “me” having this
sati. No me making it happen, no subtle idea of
control, of “bringing” sati up. 

Ų	But especially when we study the Tipitika conditions
can quite naturally arise  for direct insight.
Sometimes people wonder how it is that so many monks ,
nuns, laypeople and devas could become enlightened
just while listening to a Dhamma talk from the Buddha
or one f his followers.
Ų	 Firstly it is because they have  fulfilled the
parami and developed the necessary supporting
conditions over many aeons. They did not rush blindly
following any teacher or just doing some special
technique – they developed understanding and other
wholesome qualities whenever the opportunity arose,
while working, while thinking, while playing.
Sometimes under ideal conditions of solitude and quiet
other times admist pain, fear and illness- they must
have been so brave not to stop half way, content with
some minor achievemnt.  Sometimes they went off
course, they did evil, or briefly followed a misguided
teaching, maybe even an imitaion Buddhist practise but
they had developed the parami of sacca, truth to such
an extent that they could not be fool themselves by
overestimating any state. They soon saw that any
unusual experience or calm state was no indication of
insight. Especially they listened , studied and
applied the teachings that they received during Buddha
sasana after Buddha sasana. 
Ų	Further than this the Dhamma itself is the
foundation for insight. Thus hearing the Dhamma, for
those developed ones, is an immediate condition for
direct insight into namas and rupas and they are able
to progress through the stages of insight so rapidly.
A similar process can happen with us . We are not as
wise as those at the Buddha’s time but we have an
interest in the Dhamma . This is not accidental. It is
because of past interest and past insight. When we
study the Tipitika we may come to realize that every
word was perfectly spoken by the Buddha. It was a
condition for insight at the time he spoke it and it
is a condition now. 

The words are only concepts but they point directly to
dhammas, realities. They can and do, even now, lead to
direct experience of realities. If there are not
enough supporting conditions then insight at the level
of satipatthana cannot yet occur. But by studying the
Tipitaka, considering it, applying it and testing it,
even at the very moment of study, then gradually the
necessary supports will develop. If the conditions are
fulfilled then insight must arise -no self or God who
could stop it. 

Where we are on the path can be seen not by how calm
we are, not by having unusual experiences in
meditation but right at this moment. Now, do we
believe in a world? A world of people, cars,
computers, houses, our children, our life, or do we
see that there are only different experiences of
color, sound, taste touch, smell ,and mind objects.
Maybe we can see how little we know yet.
Ų	

The more we develop insight ourselves the clearer we
are able to judge the words of others. Later dhammas,
realities, themselves become our teachers.
Robert



 
402 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Fri Jun 2, 2000 0:31pm
Subject: stages of vipassana

 
  Dear theresa,
part of this essay is a reply to you and I also
included some paragraphs from an essay I will put on
the web one day so it got a little long.
 
Do we find ourselves trying to have awareness? It is
natural – and at those moments of trying there are
namas and rupas appearing – they can be studied. Only
by this way can the distinction between satipatthana
and imitation awareness be known. Without a firm
theoretical understanding vipassana cannot arise, and
yet without some direct experience it is very
difficult to gain firm theoretical understanding. It
seems a catch –22 bind but we should expect it to be
this way. The path is different from anything we have
ever done . In many lives lobha has been our friend.
In this life it benefited us in manifold ways. Like a
good parent it forced us to study hard . . It helped
us to find good jobs, learn new languages and make
money. It found our girlfriends and wives .  It was
even a supporting condition for kusala kamma. (we were
good because we wanted the results of goodness) But it
cannot understand dhammas correctly as they really
are. A pity really. The path would be so straight-
forward. We could just follow a course, like at
university, put in lots of effort, learn  the theory,
do all the practical steps and after 5 or 10 years get
enlightened.
We know it isn’t like that and that is why
understanding of anatta must be  firm. Then true
satipatthana can arise.


People, including myself, confuse right concentration
and wrong concentration, they mix vipassana and
samatha, they mistake concentration for sati and
intellectual understanding for something deeper. They
look for calmness as evidence of progress, or strange
experiences, or the praise of their teachers (who may
themselves be confused). The result is not a true
insight into dhammas. 

When some people talk abut the direct experience of
rise and fall, or the experience of anatta, or dukkha
or anicca they mean an understanding of the way the 6
doorways alternate. Thus they carefully observe the
change that is always taking place.  As they become
more calm and concentrated they can stay more or less
in the present and so see this change much more than
in normal life. 
 Others take a much more conservative approach. They
would say that this is still involved at the level of
thinking. Even though there may not be thinking in
words –they would say the processes are still not
clearly seen. Thus for the latter the direct
experience of anicca, dukkha  and annatta is something
far more profound. 

Any words we use to describe the nature of realities
–impermanent, momentary, temporary, instant by
instant- cannot convey the rapidity of the arising and
passing away. No one can slow this process down (or
speed it up)- it happens continuously whether we are
in the human realm, or apaya or animal or even Gods.
But panna (wisdom), if it develops, can distinguish
the characteristics and functions of dhammas and so
penetrate their ephemeral nature. Thus, no way for
“anyone” , no matter how calm, no matter how carefully
they observe (even if they observe without the feeling
of “I observe”) to directly experience this. And yet
developed panna understands and experiences for a
series or a few series of processes, the difference
between the mind door and the sense door. It might
sound disheartening, such a difficult task but it is
better not to underestimate the profundity and
pitfalls of the path. Otherwise we might be content
with counterfeits that promise quick results.




 We need to understand that vipassana in its initial
stages (when I say  "initial" it may take many lives
to get even this far) aims at eliminating wrong view,
miccha ditthi- especially the idea of a self who can
control anything. In reality every moment is
conditioned. And conditions arise because of other
conditions, not because of our wishes.
 
If there is not clear understanding, at first in
theory, of what panna (wisdom) and sati(awareness)
are, there is a tendency to try to manufacture them.
Then there is no understanding of the fleeting,
conditioned nature of sankharakkhanda (the aggregate
of mental formations). It is easy to confuse sati and
samadhi. If we don’t understand the difference we will
try and mix them – no real result.

 Sati at the level of satipatthana is associated with
panna, wisdom. It directly experiences a
characteristic of some reality but without the idea of
a self making this happen. Sati is a conditioned,
momentary reality that cannot be made to happen at
will. If we try to concentrate on one particular
reality we may be blind to sankharakkhanda (the
aggregate of formations). Is it really sati or is it
lobha concentrating on the body? I could give some
instructions to my 8 year old son to watch sensations
in his body, or tastes or whatever. No doubt he could
follow but surely he would still have the deeprooted
idea that "he" was doing it.
When sati arise it arises with alobha(detachment) thus
if we try very hard to have sati we are sure to be
going wrong. 

What really stops true sati is miccha-ditthi (wrong
view)- especially the refined miccha ditthi that
thinks there is a self, that believes "we" can
control.   By clearing away wrong view the conditions
are being laid for direct understanding. 

One of the things that helped me so much was 
realizing that any reality arising at the 6 doors
could be an object for awareness. Then even when we
are talking to people, or reading there are
opportunities for sati to arise. Every day we see
"people" but if there is awareness we can also
understand color or seeing, directly. We still can
talk and live normally but be developing insight at
the same time. 
Metta - a type of samattha becomes easier too. Not
necessary to sit dowm and chant 'may all beings be
happY' etc. because while we are meeting with people
we can study the characteristic of metta. When dosa
(aversion)arises we can immediately be reminded to
develop metta. If we are developing satipatthana then
we are learning to distinguish reality from concept.
Thus if someone behaves badly  we can see it as merely
a brief phenomenon - we won't feel so upset. In fact,
no person , in the ultimate sense to be upset with.
Then it is easier to develop metta. 

It is easy to  confuse right concentration and wrong
concentration, to mix vipassana and samatha, to
mistake concentration for sati and intellectual
understanding for something deeper. Some people look 
for calmness as evidence of progress, or strange
experiences, or the praise of their teachers (who may
themselves be confused). The result is not true
insight into dhammas. If there is not clear
understanding, at first in theory, of what panna and
sati are there is a tendency to try to manufacture
them. Then there is no understanding of the fleeting,
conditioned nature of sankharakkahanda.
I make this rather long reply as I want to emphasize
that the development of vipassana needs knowledge of
just what it was what the Buddha taught. Otherwise we
might be making great progress- but in the wrong
direction. The Buddha called those who were
enlightened Bahusutta - one who has listened to the
teachings alot. The Tipitaka is the collection of the
Buddha's teaching - it is there to guide us. 

You think you have experienced stages of vipassana. I
have found from bitter experience that we can easily
think we know the characteristics of nama and rupa
through direct understanding, and then later we listen
more, discuss with khun Sujin and others like her, and
realize that it is still mostly thinking – not yet the
direct understanding. But this is the way it seems to
go- we think “yes this is it, this is the way, now I
see” Later we learn there was still clinging
somewhere, it is not the way we imagined it would be. 
 
 
I find khun Sujins way of discussing the Dhamma very
helpful– she explains that we must go gradually. We
cannot rush to the stage of arising and passing away,
advanced vipassana, without there having first been
clear understanding of the distincton between nama and
rupa – nama rupaparicheddha nana. And this first stage
of vipassana cannot just come about by developing calm
or samattha – it comes about because of developed
wisdom. Wisdom that has gradually accumulated by
studying the different characteristics of different
realities that arise at the 6 doors. These realities
are happening now – even when you are thinking you
would like to have more awareness. If we are not aware
now right now why assume there will be awareness at
later times? If we have some idea of a “mind” that
must be calm before there can be awareness then that
is Sakkya ditthi , wrong view of self.  There is no
“mind” to calm it is all just passing moments.

  Khun Sujin explained that the moment of vipassana
nana arises in a mind-door process. It is just like
the Abhidhamma says. Proceses of cittas go so fast-
seeing, hearing, but in between there were mind-door
processes. Seeing experiences visible object and after
the eye door process is finished there is a mind -door
process of cittas which experience the visible object
. Then there are processes which experience the
concept of shape. 
When it is the right time , when the conditions have
been accumulated then the difference is seen- panna
does its function. And at that moment there is
ekaggata cetasika , concentration, there is also sati.
There is true calm because there is detachment  of a
high level- detachment from the idea of self and
control. These conditions are so complex- no way to
arrange for it to happen that first we bring samadhi
then later we join it with sati  and panna – they act
according to their function and characteristic. The
first vipassana nana arises which clearly knows the
difference between rupa and nama. Then no more doubt.

 One does not need to go to a teacher to get
confirmation. Indeed how could a teacher know? It is
something that can be known only by ones own
experience. I give these details because they can help
us to realize that now we know very little, really.

 Have we experienced this stage yet? Is hardness
appearing now. Hardness is a rupa but the experience
of hardness is nama. That nama is a vipaka conditioned
from kamma in the past. It arises for the briefest
moment before falling away. If we try to focus on it
it has long gone. The characteristic of nama and rupa
are completely different- is the difference really
understood or is it mixed up. Do we clearly
distinguish the sensation (nama) from the rupa which
conditioned it? Still some doubt? Is there an idea –
hidden, but still present- that I can be aware, that
sati can be controlled, bought up, manufactured? 

It is good to remember that we are not trying to have
any experience. None at all. You might  say “I just
want to understand the present moment”. But how much
desire is in that “want”. Even it is very slight it
will block understanding. It is so hard to comprehend.
There is chanda that arises with kusal acitta and
thereis chanda that arise with akusla. What is the
diffrence between the 2? What is the difference
between chanda and lobha? When there is kusala,
particularly of satippathhana there is detachmentt at
that moment- then again the moments are short – hard
to be sure it was correct. At times we might feel
detached from objects but is this wisdom or is it
merely boredom? Do we want to be sure – lobha. If we
aren’t sure then we aren’t sure- it is the truth at
that moment. It has to be that way, wanting it to be
different is not going to help.

It is a long path to really untangle the confusing
thing we call life. We might succeed in convincing
ourselves that we have plumbed the depths of insight
even until the very day we die. But such  success has
no value in samsara. Conditions will inexorably carry
on

Can we respect the Buddha’s teaching by learning how
to follow it correctly, confident that at some time in
the future, even if an aeon from now, it will bring
its supreme results?

Robert




 
404 From: amara chay   
Date: Fri Jun 2, 2000 4:33pm
Subject: new article coming

 
  Dear all,

At <http://www.dhammastudy.com/> we are preparing another article translated 
from the radio program broadcasted on the last anniversary of the king, 
about viriya (perseverance, effort), in a very broad if not too detailed a 
scope.  Apparently someone from the court asked her to make a speech on the 
subject and specified the items they wanted to include so some parts of the 
speech is more of a classification of names and mumbers, still it makes many 
interesting points.

My usual corrigendum for my last posting (I just got up when I wrote it): 
when I wrote (for example the existence of other planets which shook the 
astrological world a few years ago, when the western world, following there 
blind faith in the Bible, did not believe could exist since the earth was 
said to be the center of the universe and unique)
I meant the 'astronomical' world and 'other planetary systems', of course.  
Sorry, Theresa, if I caused more confusion there!=^_^=

Your friend in the dhamma,
Amara

 
405 From: Theresa   
Date: Sat Jun 3, 2000 0:19am
Subject: Re: About Concentration

 
  Hello Robert,

<< -----
Ų	My understanding of Buddhism, and hence my whole perspective
on life, is quite different from the early years. ... Gradually
understanding grew. Now it seems strange to think of anything as
controllable. ... This intellectual acceptance and understanding of
anatta is  only the beginning of the path - but once we truly see it
then our impatience and desire for results fades. Because we know
that only by the right conditions can understanding grow. ...
Even when we begin to see things as they happen it is mostly thinking
about them (a sort of thinking in the present moment) rather than
direct experience. Do we accept this or do we want more? The right
reflection helps to let go the idea of a self who is having
understanding. Then there are more conditions for direct experience
(of the true kind) But even right reflection can get in the way
–if
there is clinging to it . One can stop at that level , content
because life is now better understood.
-------- >>

I agree.. :-))

You wrote : <<Then there are more conditions for direct experience
(of the true kind) But even right reflection can get in the way
–if
there is clinging to it .>>

This can NOT happen when, in the moment of Mindfulness, we see things
exactly as they are.. Buddha gave us guidelines to help us; when we
use them, there is NO chance for clinging to whatever we see in the
current moment of Mindfulness.. The guidelines are : the 7 factors of
enlightenment, the 5 aggregates, the 4 foundations of mindfulness,
etc..

Ex: When you see hot/cold (the Rupa aggregate; sorry, I don't know
the pali term) with Mindfulness, there is the hot/cold (Insight) but
there is No Self.. When you see the Beginning, the lasting part and
the End of a physical pain (the Vedana aggregate and its 3 stages),
there is vedana (Insight), but there is No Self.. When you see
Concentration (a mental quality) in the current moment of
Mindfulness, there is Concentration (Insight), but there is No Self..
When you see the citta (the third foundation of Mindfulness), you see
Citta, but there is No Self.. etc. etc..

When this kind of Mindfulness and Insight continues continuously for
sometimes, Anatta will be evident from moment to moment, and then the
fear/Stress (Dukkha) is overwhelmed and oppressive ((this is another
Insight)).. When this Insight arises, Mindfulness drives, Insight
rises and falls, and Upekkha naturally kicks in.. Everything goes at
an extreme fast rate.. When it's fast, "No Self" is apparent, and
changes are the truths (the current fact), in each moment of
Mindfulness.. At this Insight level, "No Self", "Impermanence"
or "Dukkha" is the object of Mindfulness.. No reasoning.. No
reflection.. No thinking.. "No Self" *is*, from moment to moment, at
a high rate..

<< One can stop at that level , content  because life is now better
understood. >>

Here is what I heard from my initial teacher, Venerable Khippapanno
(Kim-Trieu).. Once a meditator crosses over to Magga/Phala, he/she
will never ever stop practicing.. This is why Buddha said that Ariyas
are his true followers/disciples (sorry, I forgot the term).. This is
why Ariyas have a countable number of lifetimes/rebirths..
Mindfulness becomes part of life.. Insight goes on.. Ariyas do not
make the mistakes like we, humans, do, because Mindfulness is Ariyas'
Sila.. Because they are continuously mindful, they will not make
mistakes, and so, their Silas are well-kept.. Continuous Mindfulness
are the "common trait" (wording?) of Ariyas..

One Venerable told me a conversation between a teacher and a
student..
T: After you keep yourself busy for some time and then you stop, what
happens to your mind ? What do you see then ?
S: It settles immediate.. It watches the breath..
T: When you intentionally want to think instead of being mindful,
what happens to your mind right after you stop thinking ? What do you
see then ?
S: It settles immediate.. It watches the breath..
T: Yes, your mind goes back to the breath and the body just like a
chicken goes back to its coop each night..

The above conversation is a welcome greeting of a teacher to a
student, who successfully entered Sotapanna.. The mind going back to
the breath/the body naturally is the sign that Mindfulness goes
on "naturally in the background", even when the new Ariya does not
exert much effort..

<< -----
Now some comments on Dhamma. Some of this I have said before so
please excuse the repetition.
-------- >>

Repitition is good.. That's our needed reminder to each other..

<< -----
Ų	Whatever we are doing at any moment there are only namas and
rupas arising and passing away – as we learn from the Tipitaka.
-------- >>

We can experience this arising and passing away continuously during
our normal life.. When we walk around, we see : "nama,rupa,nama,rupa,
etc." but there is nothing called "self" as one static entity..

<< -----
It is true that much of our lives are spent lost in stories about
life. Concepts ... If they are not real then why do we think of them?
Why do two people looking in the same direction see the same object?
-------- >>

Until we reach Arahantship, we will experience "concepts" and live
with them as if they are real.. Since we still have "self" in our
view, we try to keep Mindfulness continuous as much as possible, and
then, we will have moments of Mindfulness and Insight so that we can
see "No Self".. Now you see (self), now you don't (no self).. We will
weave in and out of the two views, self and no-self, throughout the
day.. With more practice and experience, the time we live with "No
Self" will increase gradually..

<< -----
Ų	...When we are thinking about something there are processes
of thinking arising and passing away rapidly that have a concept as
object. The  concept is not real ... but the thinking processes are
nama they are actually different cittas and cetasikas doing their
intricate work conditioned by different paccaya (conditions) – no
self at all.  These cittas and cetasikas are nama –they are
dhammas
and can be objects for sati. Thus there is really no moment that is
excluded as a potential object for the development of satipatthana.
This doesn't mean that we can or should know each moment. It is
beyond control, conditions have their own agendas and act entirely
according to their function and characteristic.
-------- >>

It is very helpful to me that you put the English words next to the
Pali terms.. My cheatsheet is growing !!!.. hehehehe.. (( I have a
cheatsheet placed next to my monitor for Buddhist terms.. ))

To help me with the task of being mindful of Citta and Cetasikas, my
teacher told me : "Whatever you have in the current moment, note it..
Simply note it.. Our feelings are Like or Dislike, comfortable or
uncomfortable.. We just note them.." (( My teacher uses the
word "Note" for "be mindful" or "aware"; "Like" and "comfortable" for
Lobha; "Dislike" and "uncomfortable" for Dosa.. ))

As you said, we can not see all mental activities.. However, we can
work with whatever we have or can see with Mindfulness.. Buddha gave
us Citta and Cetasikas as two guidelines; and so, we can eventually
see very clearly two seperate entities (terms?) working together..
Meaning, there is No "one mind" as "I", but there is Citta (knowing
at the sense door) and Cetasika (emotions/concepts/thoughts in regard
to the objects at the sense door).. This is "No Self" at another
level of Insight..

<< -----
Ų	No moment is excluded as a potential object for insight. Thus
even when we are reading say a novel there are still moments when
sati can arise and directly experience a reality as it is: as merely
as dhamma . If it is truly a moment of sati at the level of
satipathhana then there is no "me" having this sati. No me
making it
happen, no subtle idea of control, of "bringing" sati up.
-------- >>

Good Mindfulness !!  Sadhu ! Sadhu ! Sadhu !
When you have Sati going continuously like that, you see "no Self"
continuously, and you are "detached" in the moment Mindfulness, from
moment to moment.. :-))

<< -----
Ų	... Sometimes people...become enlightened just while
listening to a Dhamma talk from the Buddha or one f his followers ...
because they have  fulfilled the parami and developed the necessary
supporting conditions over many aeons....they developed understanding
and other wholesome qualities whenever the opportunity arose, while
working, while thinking, while playing. ... they must have been so
brave not to stop half way, content with some minor achievemnt. ...
Especially they listened , studied and applied the teachings that
they received during Buddha sasana after Buddha sasana.
-------- >>

I believe you describe a special group of people : the Ariyas.. :-))
When we meet them, we appreciate their special personality.. :-))

You wrote : << they developed understanding and other wholesome
qualities whenever the opportunity arose, while working, while
thinking, while playing. >>

Continuous Mindfulness "while working, while thinking, while playing"
is practicing General Meditation.. This is possible for us to do so
in this very lifetime.. May we try not to concern ourselves with any
concept, even the concept of "no self".. May we continuously be in a
mindful state so that Mindfulness can eventually go at a high rate
for us to see (insight) as much as we can of things happening in the
current moment..

<< -----
Ų	Further than this the Dhamma itself is the foundation for
insight. Thus hearing the Dhamma, for those developed ones, is an
immediate condition for direct insight into namas and rupas and they
are able to progress through the stages of insight so rapidly.
-------- >>

This is true..

I heard teachers mentioned that there are three types of meditators,
but I can only recall two : meditators by Faith, and meditators by
Wisdom.. Buddha was a meditator by wisdom.. He would not rely on
Faith but tested everything out himself.. A small hint from teachers
will help some fast-walking wisdom meditators to gain many level of
Insights, because they are born with less attachment than others..

<< -----
... by studying the Tipitaka, considering it, applying it and testing
it, even at the very moment of study, then gradually the necessary
supports will develop.
-------- >>

APPLYING and TESTING are very very important..

Have you thought that Testing Buddha's teaching on us will never harm
us, because we ("Self") is only an illusion ??.. We can't harm an
illusion.. hehehe.. Ah, but if we are sure that we HAVE a "Self" to
care for, we now want to protect to go down to lower realms in the
next rebirths or we want to add more paramitta (terms? spelling?) for
a better rebirths next time around.. hehehe..

I guess, for "Self-less" or whatever it is, the only harm could be is
that we have a stronger image of "self".. Other than that, I can't
see no harm in Mindfulness, in Sitting, in Walking, in Living with
Mindfulness.. :-))

<< -----
Where we are on the path can be seen not by how calm we are, not by
having unusual experiences in meditation but right at this
moment. ... Maybe we can see how little we know yet.
------- >>

Bingo !!.. It's wonderful to see everything as things, and there are
many things to see and know.. hehehehe.. By the way, we can achieve
the same view (term?) when we have see everything happening in the
mind as things, and there are many things to see and know there,
too.. Right there, Piti arises in General Meditation.. :-))

<< -----
Ų	The more we develop insight ourselves the clearer we are able
to judge the words of others. Later dhammas, realities, themselves
become our teachers.
------- >>

Sadhu! Sadhu! Sadhu!
Did Buddha say that Dhamma is our teacher ??  :-))

A mindful person lives like everybody else, but each living moment
gives him/her Dhamma to learn from.. All of us, non-Arahants, are
learners, because we still learn from Dhamma (our body and mind)..
hehehe..

You wrote : << The more we develop insight ourselves the clearer we
are able to judge the words of others. >>

The more Insight we gain, the more understanding (empathy ??) and
patience we have for others, and the more Metta we pass to others..
Instead of judging, we pass Metta and do as much Kurana as we can..
We let go (forget?) whatever deeds we did for the benefits of
others.. We feel happy that things work out for others, for us, for
everyone.. We become cheerful and innocent like children, because we
have less fear and less worries..  Such blessing !!

Theresa.

 
406 From: Theresa   
Date: Sat Jun 3, 2000 0:32am
Subject: Level of Insights (was : stages of vipassana )

 
  Hello Robert,

I collected the names of the Insight levels from the Vietnamese 
translation of the book, "Practical Insight Meditation", by Venerable 
Mahasi Sayadaw of Myanmar.. 

(1)  Namarupa pariccheda nana
(2)  Paccaya pariggaha nana
(3)  Sammasana nana
(4)  Udayabbaya nana
(5)  Bhanga nana
(6)  Bhaya nana
(7)  Adinava nana
(8)  Nibbida nana
(9)  Muncitukamyata nana
(10) Patisankha nana
(11) Sankharaupekkha nana
(*)  Paccavekkhana nana
======
(12) Gotrabhu nana
(13) Magga nana  and Phala nana
======

When we practice Vipassana, Insight develops in that order.. 

I don't have the English translation for the above Pali terms.. If 
you want me translate the Vietnamese explanations to English, I will 
try my best.. I forwarn that my translation is the worst one could 
imagine.. hehehe... I don't know any pali terms I retyped above and 
have not memorized them yet.. :-)) 

With metta,

Theresa.

 
407 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Sat Jun 3, 2000 0:50am
Subject: sati

 
  Dear Theresa,


 You wrote that insight, panna, changes, but that
mindfulness doesn’t develop or change:
“Sati is Sati, and it is forever Sati.. We learn Sati,
practice it, 
and will practice the same thing as long as we
continue walking the 
Noble Path.. Sati will never "improve" or "change"
into anything more 
wonderful than it, Sati.. Mindfulness.. Pure
Awareness..” 

Yes, in one way this is true  – the reason we call it
sati is because it has special characteristics that
make it different from other dhammas. Indeed that is
the reason that any dhamma can be classified according
to its characteristics and functions. And I am sure
you are right that the change in panna, as it deepens,
is more radical and noticeable than sati. However, I
might have misunderstood but it seemed from the
context of your writing that you think each moment of
sati is exactly the same as the last and will be
exactly the same in the future. Anyway, this is a good
topic to discuss further. It is an area that is rather
difficult and I am just offering some reflections. 

Samma-sati, right awareness, is one of the factors of
the eightfold path. It is mindful of the object –
either a nama or a rupa. At the same time samma
–samadhi, right concentration, does its work of
focusing on the object and samma-sankapa, (translated
somewhat misleadingly as right thinking) touches the
object and samma-ditthi, right insight, understands
it. Samma-vayama, right effort, the energy for
understanding is also present. The Atthasalini,
commentary to the Dhammasangani, explains that usually
while developing the path the other path factors of
right livelihood, right action and right speech are
not present or at most one of them is present. But
that at the moment of experiencing nibbana all factors
are present.
I remember reading that as samma-ditthi, panna,
insight develops also samma-samadhi develops and at
the brief moment when enlightenment occurs
samma-samadhi has strength comparable to the level of
the first stage of jhana; a major development.
Accordingly, it seems likely that sati and the other
factors undergo some degree of development too,
although probably not as noticeably as samma-samadhi
and samma-ditthi.

We know that ekkaggata cetasika,
(samadhi)concentration arises together with kusala or
akusala cittas (unwholesome or wholesome
consciousness) It is affected , conditioned by the
other cetasikas and by the citta that arises at the
same time, therefore there must be some difference
between the ekkagata cetasikas.
 Even sanna cetasika, perception, which arises with
all cittas is  not always exactly the same. The
Atthasalini explains that the strength of its
qualities depend on whether the citta it is associated
with are associated with panna and also depend on the
strength of samadhi at different moments. Perhaps the
same applies to sati.

And when we consider the enormously complex interplay
of conditions that make up each moment it must be true
that not even the moments that just passed are exactly
the same as the moments that are appearing now. 
I am sure someone on the group can add more on this
point.

Thank you again for all your comments Theresa, which
surely condition energy to arise. It probably seems
that I am focussing on points where we differ but this
is partly because of other commitments. I just don't
have the time to go over all your points, so focus on
just a few. There are certainly many areas where I
really agree with you and appreciate your phrasing.
Especially I admire that you appreciate the importance
of understanding the present moment as anatta - it
really is the heart of the Dhamma.
Robert


 
408 From: Theresa   
Date: Sat Jun 3, 2000 2:41am
Subject: Re: stages of vipassana

 
  Hello Robert,

<< -----
Do we find ourselves trying to have awareness? It is natural –
-------- >>

There are meditators, who can see two separate entities :
citta/cetaseka on one side and Mindfulness on the other.. I vaguely
recall that one of my teachers or some books by Venerable Mahasi or
Venerable U Pandita mentioned about this fact.. Think of the surprise
when a novice meditator suddenly finds out that there are two of them
in one of them.. hehehe.. Teachers said that seeing one or two
entities does not make any difference in the task of walking the
Path, and all of us will arrive at Magga/Phala/Nibbana the same way..
The benefit of seeing two separate entities is that the person has an
extra to dissect his/her mind, and he/she can find their way through
the jungle of their mind with few hints from teachers and/or
teaching..

<< -----
... at those moments of trying there are namas and rupas appearing
–
they can be studied. Only by this way can the distinction between
satipatthana and imitation awareness be known. Without a firm
theoretical understanding vipassana cannot arise, and yet without
some direct experience it is very difficult to gain firm theoretical
understanding.
-------- >>

There are individuals who gain Insight before learning or hearing
about it from books, teachers or other people.. I have met three
Vipassana students with such luck; they have special personality
(kindness, patience, lesser greed, calm, less likely to loose temper,
and prefers to be alone)..

For example: the teacher (T) shows a student (S) how to sit, cross
legs, close eyes and observe the breath on time, and how to walk and
observe the step on time.. Then, T gives the length of time of
meditation session.. S knows nothing about Buddhism or Vipassana, and
knows only what T just taught.. S practices exactly as told.. When S
comes back to see the teacher, S uses layman terms to explain what
has happened during the sitting and walking sessions.. T would
say : "The Buddhist term for what you just described is <T gives the
name>.. T gives some more descriptions, and S compares them with S's
experience.. Everything matches perfectly.. :-))

<< -----
... They look for calmness as evidence of progress, or strange
experiences, or the praise of their teachers (who may themselves be
confused). The result is not a true insight into dhammas.
-------- >>

"Looking for calmness"
"looking for strange experiences"
"looking for the praise of their teachers"
These are good things to watch out for..
They are all expectations, thus greed (lobha)..
Lobha is a hindrance..

<< -----
When some people talk abut the direct experience of rise and fall, or
the experience of anatta, or dukkha or anicca they mean
annderstanding of the way the 6 doorways alternate. Thus they
carefully observe the change that is always taking place.  As they
become more calm and concentrated they can stay more or less in the
present and so see this change much more than in normal life.
------- >>

Thank you, Robert, for describing so well..
For me, I refer to what you described above as, (1) seeing
Consciousness, and (2) seeing the mind switches Consciousness..

You mentioned "changes"... Changes is crucial.. We must see changes,
continuous changes.. When Changes/Impermanence is continuous, "no
Self" is evident and "detachment" (Upekkha) arises in the mindful
moment..

Right Effort and Right View ask for <<carefully observation of the
change that is always taking place >>.. Sadhu!

You wrote : << As they become more calm and concentrated they can
stay more or less in the present and so see this change much more
than in normal life.>>

This is true.. The calmness you mentioned here is NOT the calmness
when we are in Jhana.. The calmness achieved with Vipassana is
related to the "balanced mind" (Upekkha of the Bojjangha; even-
mindedness, terms??).. We can experience "this Calmness" while the
body suffers severe pain, or the the mind is chaotic with rambling
thoughts moving through.. When this happens, Mindfulness goes on
continuously.. :-))

<< -----
Others take a much more conservative approach. They would say that
this is still involved at the level of thinking. Even though there
may not be thinking in words –they would say the processes are
still
not clearly seen. Thus for the latter the direct experience of
anicca, dukkha  and annatta is something far more profound.
-------- >>

When Mindfulness keeps up with the six sense doors, there is "no
self" and no attachment.. This experience is known only by the
meditator and no one else, and it is Mindfulness which gives him/her
a constant awareness of the changes, from moment to moment.. The
truth is the truth, like birth, aging, sickness and death..

If others to doubt the experience of the meditator of such mental
qualities, we know it's only doubt or fear or worries.. You mentioned
phrases like "still involved at the level of thinking" or "the
processes are still not clearly seen".. How do others know what the
meditator is experiencing from moment to moment ??.. Buddha gave all
of us the simple tool -- Mindfulness; this is like the knife of a
surgeon.. After a surgeon cuts open a body, internal organs and
everything else will be apparent.. Likewise, when Mindfulness cuts
through "self", its many formation will be apparent.. For other
people, who are not the surgeon for the meditator's mind and, worse,
were not there to experience the meditator's experience, to doubt the
meditator's experience, the meditator should hold the Noble Silence
and keep Mindfulness going..

I guess the difference in views/opinions arises because some
appreciates the gradual growth Insight, and some only accepts the
full-grown Insight and Nibbana and rejects anything else in between..

As I heard and understand, Buddha's Dhamma is the teaching, which
must be realized by the individual..

When we suffer, we know we suffer.. When the suffer ends, we know the
suffer ends.. There is no need for anyone to explain or approve for
this kind of direct experience.. Buddha taught us THE TRUTHS.. What
is there to ask or doubt ??.. TRUTHS ARE TRUTHS, and Truths never
changes regardless of situations, conditions, time, individuals,
etc..

<< -----
But panna (wisdom), if it develops, can distinguish the
characteristics and functions of dhammas and so penetrate their
ephemeral nature. ... And yet developed panna understands and
experiences for a series or a few series of processes, the difference
between the mind door and the sense door. It might sound
disheartening, such a difficult task but it is better not to
underestimate the profundity and pitfalls of the path. Otherwise we
might be content with counterfeits that promise quick results.
-------- >>

Buddha taught us to be mindful, taught us the Noble Path (which is
the Ariya's mental qualities), and reminded us that Dhamma (his
teaching, our body/mind) are our teachers..

Dhamma is whatever we have through Mindfulness..

As you reminded us many times, anything we see with Mindfulness and
even a mindful moment comes about because of Conditions (Kamma)..
Therefore, whatever we can see in the current moment of Mindfulness
is what we have, and nothing more.. Buddha taught us the way to turn
that Kamma/Sankhara into Dhamma with Mindfulness, Concentration and
Insight..

If we only see one series of processes, so be it.. If we see few
series of processes, so be it.. Whatever mind and body we have,
that's what we walk the Noble Path with.. If one is intelligent and
has a fast mind, he/she deals with his/her own sets of Kammas and
walks the Noble Path with that.. If one has an average intelligence
and a slower mind, he/she deals with his/her own sets of kammas and
walks the Noble Path with that.. The end result, Magga/Phala/Nibbana,
(ie, the third Noble Truth) is the product or the result of the Noble
Path (the fourth Noble Truth).. The speed of our mind (our
intelligence) is Dukkha and has its own set of Source of Dukkha.. A
person, who develops magical powers with his/her better intelligence
(kamma? terms?), walks the same Noble Path like all of us and will
reach the same Magga/Phala/Nibbana like all of us..

The "profundity and pitfalls of the path" and the "content with
counterfeits that promise quick results" are the claws of Dosa and
Lobha..

Because we have Faith in Buddha and His teaching, we meditate as
taught, and we observe our mind and body as taught, without expecting
or fearing anything.. Because we have Faith in Buddha and His
teaching, we accept that Mindfulness is a good tool, Insight will
show us the way, the Noble Path is the of-course course, and
Magga/Phala/Nibbana is the of-course end-result.. If we practice
exactly as Buddha taught and we have Faith in Him, what is there for
us to worry about the end result or wrong Path or wrong technique ??

<< -----
If there is not clear understanding, at first in theory, of what
panna (wisdom) and sati(awareness) are, there is a tendency to try to
manufacture them.
-------- >>

If teachers told us to follow the breath, notice the sensations, be
aware of our bodily movements, and so on so forth, we should do just
that.. Insight arises from there, from direct experience by
practicing the little tasks of Mindfulness..

We "manufacture experience" if and only if we have some expectation
to be fulfilled..

If we have no expectation or if we don't know what to expect, we will
not look for any kind of experience.. When we have no expectation, we
only know what we experience in the current moment with Mindfulness
and nothing more than that.. In this case, it's impossible for us to
manufacture things we have never heard of..

<< -----
Sati at the level of satipatthana is associated with panna,
wisdom. ... Sati is a conditioned, momentary reality that cannot be
made to happen at will. If we try to concentrate on one particular
reality we may be blind to sankharakkhanda (the aggregate of
formations). Is it really sati or is it lobha concentrating on the
body? I could give some instructions to my 8 year old son to watch
sensations in his body, or tastes or whatever. No doubt he could
follow but surely he would still have the deeprooted idea that "he"
was doing it.
-------- >>

Wonderful description !!

If your son has a deeprooted idea that "he" was watching his
sensations, he has "self" but it is all right.. Reason ??.. because
Insight is developed in strike.. Whenever he has Insight at some
level, he will understand "selfless" with that level of
understanding.. As long as he gains Insight, he is walking the Noble
Path at different level, and for this, we should cheer him on.. Even
when he is a novice with "I" apparent everywhere, we should cheer him
on and encourage him to sit and live with that "self" until Insight
comes in according to his own kammas.. You never know, but your 8-
year old son might experience Aggregate, one by one, and then explain
each one of them to you with his kid terminology.. :-))

<< -----
When sati arise it arises with alobha(detachment) thus if we try very
hard to have sati we are sure to be going wrong.
-------- >>

This can only happens if and only if Concentration is missing.. When
there is Sati and Concentration, and we do exactly as taught, Insight
will be developed.. When Insight is present, there is No Detachment..
In Vipassana, as I learned, Sati is pure awareness.. Just know.. What
is there to push for.. We simply aware.. Aware, Aware, Aware...

Q: Aware of what ??..
A: Whatever our mind gives to us, whatever is most prominent to us,
then we aware of that..

<< ------
One of the things that helped me so much was realizing that any
reality arising at the 6 doors could be an object for awareness. Then
even when we are talking to people, or reading there are
opportunities for sati to arise. Every day we see "people" but if
there is awareness we can also understand color or seeing, directly.
We still can talk and live normally but be developing insight at the
same time. Metta - a type of samattha becomes easier too. Not
necessary to sit dowm and chant 'may all beings be happY' etc.
because while we are meeting with people we can study the
characteristic of metta. When dosa (aversion)arises we can
immediately be reminded to develop metta. If we are developing
satipatthana then we are learning to distinguish reality from
concept. Thus if someone behaves badly  we can see it as merely
a brief phenomenon - we won't feel so upset. In fact, no person , in
the ultimate sense to be upset with. Then it is easier to develop
metta.
--------- >>

Wonderful speech !!  You speak my mind.. That's how we can LIVE WITH
MEDITATION.. That's how Mindfulness and Buddha's Dhamma give us the
shelter of the active Noble Path while we live.. Eventually, Living
is meditating.. Sadhu ! Sadhu ! Sadhu !

<< -----
I find khun Sujins way of discussing the Dhamma very helpful– she
explains that we must go gradually. We cannot rush to the stage of
arising and passing away, advanced vipassana, without there having
first been clear understanding of the distincton between nama and
rupa – nama rupaparicheddha nana.
-------- >>

I heard or read somewhere that after a person reaches Magga/Phala as
a Sotapanna, he/she will see body and mind separately, and that's why
the number of rebirths is reduced to seven.. The first thing
Sotapannas experience when they sit down to meditation is the nama
rupaparicheddha nana, and this never fails..

<< -----
There is no "mind" to calm it is all just passing moments.
-------- >>

Calmness is the goal of Vipassana meditation.. As I recall, teachers
don't teach students to find calmness.. I have heard teachers asking
students to follow the breath, the sensations, the thoughts (without
making distinctions to them), and none of these means calmness..

<< -----
...Khun Sujin explained that the moment of vipassana nana arises in a
mind-door process. It is just like the Abhidhamma says. Proceses of
cittas go so fast-seeing, hearing, but in between there were mind-door
processes. Seeing experiences visible object and after the eye door
process is finished there is a mind -door process of cittas which
experience the visible object. Then there are processes which
experience the concept of shape. When it is the right time , when the
conditions have been accumulated then the difference is seen- panna
does its function. And at that moment there is ekaggata cetasika ,
concentration, there is also sati. There is true calm because there
is detachment  of a high level- detachment from the idea of self and
control. These conditions are so complex- no way to arrange for it to
happen ... they act according to their function and characteristic.
The first vipassana nana arises which clearly knows the difference
between rupa and nama. Then no more doubt.
-------- >>

I agree fully.. Your description is very vivid.. That's the way
things happen..

You wrote : <<These conditions are so complex- no way to arrange for
it to happen ... >>

I would like to add that there is no time to arrange either.. Blip..
gone.. blip.. gone.. blip.. gone.. Therefore, no way and no time to
arrange, but experience/insight happens according to kammas.. :-))

<< -----
Have we experienced this stage yet? Is hardness appearing now.
Hardness is a rupa but the experience of hardness is nama. That nama
is a vipaka conditioned from kamma in the past. It arises for the
briefest moment before falling away. If we try to focus on it it has
long gone. The characteristic of nama and rupa are completely
different- is the difference really understood or is it mixed up. Do
we clearly distinguish the sensation (nama) from the rupa which
conditioned it? Still some doubt? Is there an idea – hidden, but
still present- that I can be aware, that sati can be controlled,
bought up, manufactured?
-------- >>

Yup, that's Buddha's teaching.. And that's all to it.. :-))
Have you noticed that you made no reference to "Self" in the right-
above paragraph ??.. When we can keep that up, Insight is with us,
and there is "no self" during that time... :-))

<< -----
It is good to remember that we are not trying to have any experience.
None at all..."want"... comprehend... What is the difference
?.. hard
to be sure it was correct. ... might feel detached.. is this wisdom
or is it merely boredom? ... Do we want to be sure – lobha.
-------- >>

You named a lot of "thoughts", which we could be mindful of..
Wonderful reminders !!.. :-))

<< -----
If we aren't sure then we aren't sure- it is the truth at
that
moment. It has to be that way, wanting it to be different is not
going to help.
-------- >>

<< wanting it to be different is not going to help >> is a very good
reminder for us.. Patience and Mindfulness.. That should do it.. :-))

<< ------
It is a long path to really untangle the confusing thing we call
life. We might succeed in convincing ourselves that we have plumbed
the depths of insight even until the very day we die. But such
success has no value in samsara. Conditions will inexorably carry
on

Can we respect the Buddha's teaching by learning how to follow it
correctly, confident that at some time in the future, even if an aeon
from now, it will bring its supreme results?
--------- >>

Aaaaah, just walk.. just be mindful..

Samsara.. right or wrong insight.. depth of insight.. supreme
results.. These things take longer than one mindfulness to figure
out... So, let us walk.. let us be mindful.. The rest is not
important..

With metta,

Theresa.

 
409 From: Theresa   
Date: Sat Jun 3, 2000 7:32am
Subject: Re: sati

 
  Hello Robert,

I think you and I have the same understanding and the same practice,
but we might misunderstand because of the difference in terminology..
I am still learning very slowly the Buddhist terms, and keeps
forgetting them left and right..

<< -----
You wrote that insight, panna, changes, but that mindfulness
doesn't
develop or change:
> "Sati is Sati, and it is forever Sati.. We learn Sati,
> practice it, and will practice the same thing as long as we
> continue walking the Noble Path.. Sati will never "improve"
> or "change" into anything more wonderful than it, Sati..
> Mindfulness.. Pure Awareness.."

Yes, in one way this is true  – the reason we call it sati is
because
it has special characteristics that make it different from other
dhammas. Indeed that is the reason that any dhamma can be classified
according to its characteristics and functions. And I am sure you are
right that the change in panna, as it deepens, is more radical and
noticeable than sati. However, I might have misunderstood but it
seemed from the context of your writing that you think each moment of
sati is exactly the same as the last and will be exactly the same in
the future. Anyway, this is a good topic to discuss further. It is an
area that is rather difficult and I am just offering some
reflections.
-------- >>

Q: Is true that each moment of sati is exactly the same as the last
and will be exactly the same in the future ??
A: No, it is not.. If we consider the analogy of taking pictures..
Sati is the click of a button so that the camera can snap a picture..
The click of the button is always the click (sati), and nothing
more.. How clear or blurry the picture is (Concentration), or what
picture we have with each clicks (Insight/Mindfulness) changes over
time..

My initial teacher, Venerable Khippapanno (Kim-Trieu), taught me the
Buddhist term in Vietnamese, "Nie^.m", for the word "Mindfulness"..
He told me that this same word refers to different things
by "different Buddhist practices" (I'm not sure if this is what he
refers to)).. He also said that "Nie^.m" for Therevadan meditation
is "pure awareness".. Other Buddhist group might use the same term to
refer to repeating (praying) Buddha's name, or praying with suttas,
etc..

The only meaning of "Nie^.m" or Mindfulness or Sati I know is "pure
awareness", like a click of the camera, and that is all to it..
However, the value of Sati, when it is applied as Bojjangha-Sati, is
to help balance the mind, ie, to balance the two groups of
Bojjhanga.. One group is Insight, Effort and Piti.. The other group
is Concentration, Calmness and Upekkha.. When Mindfulness flows
continuously, these two groups are in balance, and thus, we have a
balanced mind..

By the way, I learn (?) Buddhism by practicing (meditating).. What I
practice is Vipassana.. My teacher gave me the tummy as the initial
point of focus and taught me what he learned from Venerable Mahasi of
Myanmar.. That's all I know, and nothing more.. :-))

<< Samma-sati, right awareness, is one of the factors of the
eightfold path. >>

Yes, it is..

<< It is mindful of the object – either a nama or a rupa. >>

All we have is Nama and Rupa and nothing more.. Buddha gave us the 5
aggregates, which is a different of dividing Nama-Rupa.. He gave us
the 4 foundations of MIndfulness, which is another way of looking at
Nama-Rupa.. Sati observes whatever is available and prominent in the
current moment..

<< At the same time samma–samadhi, right concentration, does its
work
of focusing on the object and samma-sankapa, (translated somewhat
misleadingly as right thinking) touches the object >>

I understand the word "Concentration", which is the ability to hold
our attention on ONE OBJECT FOR A PERIOD OF TIME..

<< ... samma-ditthi, right insight, understands it. >>

Insight is seeing and "understands"..

<< Samma-vayama, right effort, the energy for understanding is also
present. >>

I don't know the term Vayama.. I know the term "Viriya".. In my
previous posts, I shared how I exert Right Effort, and how it brings
immediate or quick results (?)..

<< -----
The Atthasalini, commentary to the Dhammasangani, explains that
usually while developing the path the other path factors of right
livelihood, right action and right speech are not present or at most
one of them is present. But that at the moment of experiencing
nibbana all factors are present.
-------- >>

All factors must be present for the Noble Path to be the Noble Path..

Talking in terms of CONDITIONS, the Noble Path (the 4th Noble Truth)
is the CAUSE for Nibbana (the 3rd Noble Truth); and the second Noble
Truth is the Cause of the first Noble Truth..

My teacher explained in layman terms something like this : "When we
are mindful and have Insight, we don't do things wrong, we don't do
wrong livelihood.. With Insight, we do things right.. To help
meditators keep Right Speech, we keep Noble Silence during meditation
retreat.. When we have Silence, we don't speak wrongly.. RIGHT IN THE
MOMENT when we sit in meditation, we meditate and so, we don't speak,
we don't act wrong, and we don't work with the wrong job.. The act of
meditating helps us keep Sila, thus, Right Speech, Right Action and
Right Livelihood, very well.."

<< -----
I remember reading that as samma-ditthi, panna, insight develops also
samma-samadhi develops and at the brief moment when enlightenment
occurs samma-samadhi has strength comparable to the level of the
first stage of jhana; a major development. Accordingly, it seems
likely that sati and the other factors undergo some degree of
development too, although probably not as noticeably as samma-samadhi
and samma-ditthi.
-------- >>

The development, the Noble Path, is like this :
     Sila  -->  Concentration  --> Insight

Sati is one factor which must be present all the time, and helps
steady the mind and balance all other factors of enlightenment..

<<at the brief moment when enlightenment occurs samma-samadhi has
strength comparable to the level of the first stage of jhana >>; this
comparison is very new to me..

All I know is that, when all 7 factors of enlightenment arise at the
same, all present, all in balanced of each other, the meditator is
ready to use Lakkhana as the guide and Nibbana as the Object, and the
rest is history.. hehehehe.. Sati is like the pivot for the two sides
of the scale, and it keeps things together and balanced with each
other.. Speaking in terms of the 7 factors of enlightenment, Sati
stands alone, while the other 6 factors work together as two groups..

<< -----
We know that ekkaggata cetasika, (samadhi)concentration arises
together with kusala or akusala cittas (unwholesome or wholesome
consciousness) It is affected , conditioned by the other cetasikas
and by the citta that arises at the same time, therefore there must
be some difference between the ekkagata cetasikas. Even sanna
cetasika, perception, which arises with all cittas is  not always
exactly the same. The Atthasalini explains that the strength of its
qualities depend on whether the citta it is associated with are
associated with panna and also depend on the strength of samadhi at
different moments. Perhaps the same applies to sati.
-------- >>

You use a lot of terms, which I don't know.. :-))

I shared with you in the previous posts, how Mindfulness,
Concentration and Insight work together, IN TERMS OF PRACTICE..

My initial teacher said that (something like) : "Before we know how
to combine the 7 factors of enlightenment, we must be able to have
(or identify ?) each factor separately.. Whenever each factor can
arise easily, we then learn how to combine them.. The way to combine
and balance them is to having Mindfulness continuously.."

<< -----
And when we consider the enormously complex interplay of conditions
that make up each moment it must be true that not even the moments
that just passed are exactly the same as the moments that are
appearing now.
-------- >>

I guess you are referring to Insight and Concentration..

Insight, -- which is what we see or experience with Mindfulness, --
changes rapidly from moment to moment.. Insight SEES (or understands)
that << not even the moments that just passed are exactly the same as
the moments that are appearing now. >>

Concentration, -- which is the ability to seize (or grab) each object
of Mindfulness with precision, on time, not sooner, not later,
exactly on time, -- may change from moment to moment..

Mindfulness continues steadily.. Click.. Click.. Click.. Click.. like
snaping picture by pushing on the button of the camera..

With metta,

Theresa.

 
 
410 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Sat Jun 3, 2000 9:58am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: stages of vipassana

 
  Dear Theresa,
I think we may have to agree to disagree on a few
points. 
I guess take a conservative approach to the Dhamma
these days. It wasn’t always like that – I was quite
happy to believe the words of any teacher. Now I find
that the Tipitaka: the vinaya, the suttanta and the
Abhidhamma to be the most helpful guide. Many people
claim to be sotapanna or higher – this is easy to say
– but I am more interested in hearing and learning
about the characteristic and function of realities
that are appearing at this moment. From learning about
the subtle distinction and seeing myself these
distinctions little by little I have learned just how
tricky and refined lobha, craving can be. I have
learned from direct study of realities that lobha can
come with wrong view or without and that it is not so
easy to comprehend. Perhaps you think I should not be
skeptical of the claims of others who think they have
had deep insight but I  assure you I try to be more
skeptical of my own knowledge. I realize more and more
that I know very little indeed. I have seen for myself
that I can truly believe that I know something clearly
when in fact it was merely attachment not
understanding. Whenever I think I am really
understanding something deeply I conclude that this is
just conceit arising.

Every week or so, two or three Mormons come to visit
me at my office in Japan. Not always the same ones;
they stay for two years before going home. 

They like visiting me because it is one of the few
chances they get to speak English – sort of a rest-
but it still counts as missionary activity. The ones
who know me well don’t try too hard to convert me. We
discuss Buddhism and christianity and other topics and
try to understand each others thinking . Everyone has
a profitable time.  The new, keen ones almost
invariably- once we get on the topic of how we can
know whether this or that belief is the truth – state
that they have had an experience where any doubts they
had about God and Mormonism been the true path
dissolve. When I inquire how they know this they say
that it is by practicing, praying and living the right
way.  This answer comes in the form of a feeling of
joy and clarity of mind- that they say is unmistakable
and anyone who has it will know for themselves. They
say that if I would study more with them and practice
in this way this will happen to me. In some ways it is
appealing. They are extremely upright young men. Their
complexions glow and they are clearly happy, confident
and content. Compared to my badly shaven,
weather-beaten visage they look angelic. The very best
ones have a way of speech that is calm, refined and
polite, their gaze gentle yet firm. Their beliefs and
lifestyles seem to fit well with them. Why do I remain
unswayed? 

Well, for the same reasons I mentioned earlier above.
I find that the phenomena explained in the suttas and
Abhidhamma so helpful to me right now. Doing special
practices to try to have some experiences is not where
my interest lies. I don’t mind much whether I have
feelings of clarity or joy. I am more concerned in
learning about the subtlety of moha and whether there
is ditthi or not present. Awareness of anger,
jealousy, boredom, lobha(craving) and the different
feelings that arise at the same time – this is my
interest. At this moment, there is seeing contacting
the rupa which is visible object. I used to think this
was a rather boring thing to study – “it is there
every moment my eyes are open what could I learn from
such a mundane thing?” But this has become most
interesting too. 
 Whenever people tell me they are enlightened;or that
they have deep insight into anicca, dukkha, anatta; or
that they had satori while mediating at the zen temple
near my city;  or they know that God exists; or that
they are scientists and that after death everything
ends; or that their teacher can perform miracles I
reply in much the same way.  I mentally and verbally
wish them well. I explain what I have understood from
studying the Tipitika, I talk about how lobha,
attachment can attach to anything and how it distorts
our vision. I explain that when it is associated with
ditthi (view)it makes us believe that our way is
right. I explain that I must admit to no special deep
insight. All I can say is that more and more the words
contained in the Tipitika seem so right. The
Abhidhamma seems to describe life exactly as it
appears and thus I continue on learning how to study
the present moment in my own clumsy, plodding way. 
Robert



 
411 From: Theresa   
Date: Sat Jun 3, 2000 1:14pm
Subject: Re: stages of vipassana

 
  Hello Robert,

I guess our discussion has carried a lot of metta.. Each has tried to
share what we know for the benefits of the other.. To me, this is the
important task of dhamma friends.. Whether or not what we practice or
believe is true and correct to us or everyone else is not important..
The importance, as I understand, is that each of us finds a way to
know and understand ourselves, from moment to moment..

> I think we may have to agree to disagree on a few points.

Actually, I have not disagreed to your views.. I might share here and
there things I know (or I think I know), but that does not mean that
I disagree with you.. :-))

<< -----
...I  assure you I try to be more skeptical of my own knowledge...
-------- >>

This is a very healthy attitude.. I hope that you will, one day, not
even be skeptical of your own knowledge, but you simply know yourself
from moment to moment.. There is no need for a final conclusion
on "Self".. :-))

> Well, for the same reasons I mentioned earlier above.
> I find that the phenomena explained in the suttas and
> Abhidhamma so helpful to me right now.

You have a solid foundation.. :-))

> ... I am more concerned in
> learning about the subtlety of moha and whether there
> is ditthi or not present. Awareness of anger,
> jealousy, boredom, lobha(craving) and the different
> feelings that arise at the same time – this is my
> interest.

This is my daily practice, too..
The simple awareness of things happening..

>  Whenever people tell me they are enlightened;or that
> they have deep insight into anicca, dukkha, anatta; or
> that they had satori while mediating at the zen temple
> near my city;  or they know that God exists; or that
> they are scientists and that after death everything
> ends; or that their teacher can perform miracles I
> reply in much the same way.  I mentally and verbally
> wish them well.

The enlightenment of Buddha and Arahants does not help us..
Our own enlightenment is our salvation.. :-))

The wish to share the "how-to" is metta..
The progress of an individual is his/her own benefits and depends on
his/her own kammas..

> All I can say is that more and more the words
> contained in the Tipitika seem so right. The
> Abhidhamma seems to describe life exactly as it
> appears and thus I continue on learning how to study
> the present moment in my own clumsy, plodding way.

I guess we have a common belief that each of us will benefit most
from having Continuous Mindfulness and learning from the current
moments..

When students report their progress, teachers limit the progress to
things occur most often during practice and happened in the last 24
hours only..

I still have "Self" and I still have a lot to learn.. :-))

Let us be mindful and walk further on the Noble Path..

With metta,

Theresa.

 
412 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Sat Jun 3, 2000 1:44pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: stages of vipassana

 
  Dear Theresa,
Thank you for the  nice reply.
Robert
--- Theresa   wrote:
> Hello Robert,
> 
> I guess our discussion has carried a lot of metta..
> Each has tried to
> share what we know for the benefits of the other..
> To me, this is the
> important task of dhamma friends.. Whether or not
> what we practice or
> believe is true and correct to us or everyone else
> is not important..
> The importance, as I understand, is that each of us
> finds a way to
> know and understand ourselves, from moment to
> moment..
> 
> > I think we may have to agree to disagree on a few
> points.
> 
> Actually, I have not disagreed to your views.. I
> might share here and
> there things I know (or I think I know), but that
> does not mean that
> I disagree with you.. :-))
> 
> << -----
> ....I  assure you I try to be more skeptical of my
> own knowledge...
> -------- >>
> 
> This is a very healthy attitude.. I hope that you
> will, one day, not
> even be skeptical of your own knowledge, but you
> simply know yourself
> from moment to moment.. There is no need for a final
> conclusion
> on "Self".. :-))
> 
> > Well, for the same reasons I mentioned earlier
> above.
> > I find that the phenomena explained in the suttas
> and
> > Abhidhamma so helpful to me right now.
> 
> You have a solid foundation.. :-))
> 
> > ... I am more concerned in
> > learning about the subtlety of moha and whether
> there
> > is ditthi or not present. Awareness of anger,
> > jealousy, boredom, lobha(craving) and the
> different
> > feelings that arise at the same time – this is my
> > interest.
> 
> This is my daily practice, too..
> The simple awareness of things happening..
> 
> >  Whenever people tell me they are enlightened;or
> that
> > they have deep insight into anicca, dukkha,
> anatta; or
> > that they had satori while mediating at the zen
> temple
> > near my city;  or they know that God exists; or
> that
> > they are scientists and that after death
> everything
> > ends; or that their teacher can perform miracles I
> > reply in much the same way.  I mentally and
> verbally
> > wish them well.
> 
> The enlightenment of Buddha and Arahants does not
> help us..
> Our own enlightenment is our salvation.. :-))
> 
> The wish to share the "how-to" is metta..
> The progress of an individual is his/her own
> benefits and depends on
> his/her own kammas..
> 
> > All I can say is that more and more the words
> > contained in the Tipitika seem so right. The
> > Abhidhamma seems to describe life exactly as it
> > appears and thus I continue on learning how to
> study
> > the present moment in my own clumsy, plodding way.
> 
> I guess we have a common belief that each of us will
> benefit most
> from having Continuous Mindfulness and learning from
> the current
> moments..
> 
> I still have "Self" and I still have a lot to
> learn.. :-))
> 
> Let us be mindful and walk further on the Noble
> Path..
> 
> With metta,
> 
> Theresa.
> 
> 
> 



 
413 From: amara chay   
Date: Sun Jun 4, 2000 5:59pm
Subject: 'Viriya'

 
  Dear friends in the dhamma,

<http://www.dhammastudy.com/> has uploaded 'Viriya-Parami' in the advanced 
section, translated from a talk aired on the occasion of his majesty the 
King's 72nd birthday, last December 5th.,  one of the broadest studies of 
perseverance, if not so profound in certain areas.

Please help us correct mistakes and we would appreciate comments,

Amara

 
414 From: amara chay   
Date: Mon Jun 5, 2000 3:50am
Subject: Re: It's quite all right.. :-))

 
  --- "Theresa " wrote:

> (1) I vow to change me, not the world.


Theresa, 

I finally found a moment to go through your letter again, and will  
now try to show you some of your misunderstandings, according to the 
Tipitaka; I hope your attitude of trying to change yourself will not 
be too tested.  =^_^=
 

> (5) Pain and hurt are healthy and needed to help me grow 
> spiritually.. Without them, I tend to forget Mindfulness and think 
> too proud of myself.. [[ By the way, we must know the first Noble 
> Truth (suffering) before we can understand the other four Noble 
> Truths.. Suffering is a pre-requisite to Nibbana.. Interesting, 
isn't 
> it ??.. hehehe.. ]]


In the Tipitaka, there are two kinds of dukkha: 'dukkha' which is
Pali for impermanence, while bodily and mental suffering are 'dukkha 
dukkha'.  The first ariya sacca is therefore not suffering but 
impermanence.  Neither impermanence nor suffering are prerequisites
to Nibbana as you claim, but wisdom (panna) is.  (We are talking
about 
Buddhism here, so if you refer to your own theories and not the 
Tipitaka, I would begin to wonder if our religion is the same one and 
therefore perhaps our discussions should end here).

In the tipitaka, the devas came to listen to the teachings and many 
attained high levels of panna, as did many happy and healthy people, 
therefore bodily and mental sufferings are not necessary in the
least: devas are of the happy plane, without any suffering until they 
leave that life.  Yet even for them impermanence rules, dukkha is 
present in the form of change, although most of the time it is hard
to 
see for all the happiness.  You should look up the Pali terms in the 
Tipitaka sometimes to help your understanding of the teachings.

> (6) Whenever I feel hurt or happy or numb, I must find out what (!!)
> bothers me or what my secret expectation(s) are.. Expectations 
> (Lobha) and Bothers (Dosa) are, of course, the Second Noble
Truths.. 
> hehehe.. Do you see how I appreciate the moment Mindfulness ?? :-))

Samudaya is the second ariya sacca, and it does not translate as 
'expectation or bother' but something much deeper: the origin or
cause of impermanence, of arisings and fallings away, of births and 
rebirths.  You must try to look deeper than the level of your own 
emotions here, the Buddha was not teaching just people with petty 
pains but all beings with panna, even 'happy' ones who still can 
develop panna to become ariyans.

 
> (7) Must try and try to be in others' shoes.. Must try to have more 
> than one viewpoints.. If there is a new viewpoint which I have
never 
> heard of before, it must be my ignorance, and so, I must learn and 
> accept it as another possibility to life, which I have been blind 
> to.. This task is challenging and continues to be.. :-))


I am glad you also have as you call in Robert's case, a 'healthy 
attitude', so let's procede.

 
> Ex: Love and hate are the same in that they are "changeable"; which 
> emotion (Lobha/Dosa) I get in each moment depends on what I want or 
> don't want to get or loose.. When I change my mind about what I
want 
> or don't want, my feeling/emotion (love/hate, like/dislike, 
> lobha/dosa) change accordingly..  Such inseparable mixture !!


This is again not correct. Each reality arises and falls away so 
rapidly that not even the Buddha can change them, he can only know
and eradicate them.  Lobha and dosa can arise alternately in you but 
you cannot change one to the other, though with enough wisdom (panna) 
you might be able to eradicate them one day.

Maybe you will need time to check some of the things above in the 
Tipitaka, so I will leave it at this, if I find the time I will try
to point out more misunderstandings in your writings, I hope this 
helps you clarify some things,

Amara

 
415 From: Theresa   
Date: Mon Jun 5, 2000 6:14am
Subject: Re: It's quite all right.. :-))

 
  Hello Amara,

First, I would like to thank you to take the time to point out my 
misunderstandings.. I guess that I can understand what you write 
better than you can understand what I wrote.. My terminology is 
something I always have to watch out for but still don't know how 
to..  :-))

<< -----
T: (5) Pain and hurt are healthy and needed to help me grow 
spiritually.. Without them, I tend to forget Mindfulness and think 
too proud of myself.. [[ By the way, we must know the first Noble 
Truth (suffering) before we can understand the other four Noble 
Truths.. Suffering is a pre-requisite to Nibbana.. Interesting, 
isn't it ??.. hehehe.. ]]

A: In the Tipitaka, there are two kinds of dukkha: 'dukkha' which is
Pali for impermanence, while bodily and mental suffering are 'dukkha 
dukkha'.  The first ariya sacca is therefore not suffering but 
impermanence.  Neither impermanence nor suffering are prerequisites 
to Nibbana as you claim, but wisdom (panna) is.  (We are talking
about Buddhism here, so if you refer to your own theories and not the 
Tipitaka, I would begin to wonder if our religion is the same one and 
therefore perhaps our discussions should end here).
------- >>

About the kinds of Dukkha, what you explained sounds like what my 
teacher said.. 

You wrote : << Neither impermanence nor suffering are prerequisites 
to Nibbana as you claim... >> 

Direct experience into this matter is the only way to prove.. 
Whenever you reach Magga/Phala/Nibbana yourself, you will be the best 
judge of my claim.. :-))  Please set my words aside, and continue 
practicing as you have been doing.. 

You wrote : << The first ariya sacca is therefore not suffering but 
impermanence.>>

I don't know a better way to explain what I experience.. I can only 
say that *WHENEVER* Impermanence is understood continuously, from 
moment to moment, THEN the knowledge about Dukkha springs from the 
knowledge of Impermanence.. It seems like two sides of the same 
coins.. This is how Lakkhana I understand "so far" through direct 
experience.. 

Another point as I understand, the knowledge or understanding about 
Lakkhanas continue to change as we walk further on the Noble Path.. I 
can not explain more than that.. 

It is best that you put aside what I shared with you, continue 
practicing what you have been doing, and allow yourself to know the 
truths from your own practice/experience.. :-)) 

You and I are trying to discuss about the TRUTHS.. Being right or 
wrong on discussions is not important, because TRUTHS shall forever 
be TRUTHS for us to know and learn from.. 

We meditate because we want to understand the truths.. We post 
messages because we wish to share what we learn to dhamma friends.. I 
find that each dhamma friend have taught me Dhamma and something 
about myself, which I have yet to learn.. :-))

Your wrote : << We are talking about Buddhism here, so if you refer 
to your own theories and not the Tipitaka, I would begin to wonder if 
our religion is the same one and therefore perhaps our discussions 
should end here. >> 

I don't know any "religion".. I only know how to pracitice Vipassana 
in all four postures.. A dhamma friend teased me : "Shame on you ! 
You are a Theravadan Buddhist.. Because you practice Vipassana, you 
are a Therevadan.. Don't you know that??.." I learned to observe my 
tummy (my breath) and be mindful during walking, before my teacher 
gave me the terms, "Nama, Rupa" and said that they are "Buddhist 
terms" for the experience I had had and explained in my own layman 
terms during my progress report.. Couple months after first 
practicing, my teacher told me that what he taught me and I had 
practiced was called "Vipassana".. Therefore, I continue to claim 
that I know nothing about "Buddhism" and that I am still very blind 
to everything.. :-))

<< -----
In the tipitaka, the devas came to listen to the teachings and many 
attained high levels of panna, as did many happy and healthy people, 
therefore bodily and mental sufferings are not necessary in the 
least: devas are of the happy plane, without any suffering until they 
leave that life.  Yet even for them impermanence rules, dukkha is 
present in the form of change, although most of the time it is hard 
to see for all the happiness.  You should look up the Pali terms in 
the Tipitaka sometimes to help your understanding of the teachings.
-------- >>

I appreciate your repeating the story told in the Tipitaka.. I do 
need to hear more stories.. :-))

You wrote : << devas are of the happy plane, without any suffering 
until they leave that life. >>

Amara, with respect, I understand what you tried to explain, and yet, 
don't know how to better explain what I understand/experience.. 
Please continue to meditate as you have been doing.. I am confident 
that what you will experience/understand can not be different from 
what I have experienced, off and on, depending on the current 
meditation level(s) in the current moment.. After all, Buddha gaves 
us the same tool, which the four Foundations of Mindfulness, and so, 
we ought to see the same Four Noble Truths, so I strongly believe.. 

With respect and honesty, I would like to share another strong belief 
of mine : << "Dukkha" as the First Noble Truths MUST exist in all 
planes (happy planes, human planes, lower planes, or whatever planes 
there are but I don't know), because, being the "ultimate" truths, 
Dukkha MUST exist in realms, all conditions, all times, without 
exceptions.. Meaning, Buddha's Dhamma, especially the Four Noble 
Truths, are unconditional and must remain unchanged forever, even 
though our understanding of the truths can be gradual and at 
different levels as we grow spiritually over time.. >>  

So far, I have seen "Dukkha" right in the happy moment (when I win, 
when I feel succesful, when I feel being loved, etc.), and also in 
the sad/angry/dosa moments, too.. I don't have terms and am not 
qualified to explain the term "Dukkha".. 

I am not sure if Robert and I referred to same thing when we 
mentioned the same terms, and I like to blame my poor terminology.. 
However, Robert seems to understand/experience "Dukkha" from moment 
to moment as I have been.. For me, "Dukkha" changes its meaning, from 
gross to finer, with practice, experience, and Insight.. 

<< -----
T:
(6) Whenever I feel hurt or happy or numb, I must find out what (!!)
bothers me or what my secret expectation(s) are.. Expectations 
(Lobha) and Bothers (Dosa) are, of course, the Second Noble Truths.. 
hehehe.. Do you see how I appreciate the moment Mindfulness ?? :-))

A: 
Samudaya is the second ariya sacca, and it does not translate as 
'expectation or bother' but something much deeper: the origin or 
cause of impermanence, of arisings and fallings away, of births and 
rebirths.  You must try to look deeper than the level of your own 
emotions here, the Buddha was not teaching just people with petty 
pains but all beings with panna, even 'happy' ones who still can  
develop panna to become ariyans.
---------- >>

With respect and honest, I can not explain more than what I already 
did.. When I asked my teacher on similar topics you raised, he did 
not answer me but simply told me : "Go home.. Continue practice what 
you have been doing.. You will understand everything yourself.." and 
he also said : "Paramitta.. Paramitta.. Paramitta.." ( or is 
it, "Parami" ?? I'm not sure of the term ).. 

As I understand, in order to understand the Ariyas, we must develop 
Insight to the point that the Four Noble Truths are directly 
understood and experienced from moment to moment, without any time 
for reasoning, comparing, or pondering on the meanings.. 

The terms, 'expectation or bother', are my own clumsy layman terms.. 
For this, I am sorry and ask that you could help me learn more.. 

<< -----
T: 
Ex: Love and hate are the same in that they are "changeable"; which 
emotion (Lobha/Dosa) I get in each moment depends on what I want or 
don't want to get or loose.. When I change my mind about what I want 
or don't want, my feeling/emotion (love/hate, like/dislike, 
lobha/dosa) change accordingly..  Such inseparable mixture !!

A: 
This is again not correct. Each reality arises and falls away so 
rapidly that not even the Buddha can change them, he can only know 
and eradicate them.  Lobha and dosa can arise alternately in you but 
you cannot change one to the other, though with enough wisdom (panna)
you might be able to eradicate them one day.
-------- >>

I am pretty sure that we use the same terms to discuss two different 
ideas.. I referred to Lobha/Dosa as two sides of the same coin, and 
the difference is the "attachment" (what we want or do not want), 
when "Self" leads.. You referred to Lobha/Dosa occured in ONE instant 
(one moment) of experience, when there is no room to change Lobha to 
Dosa or vice versa and when there is "No Self".. What you said is 
very true, when Mindfulness is present.. What I said is useful 
whenever Mindfulness is not present, and it is helpful to 
remind "Self" to get back to Mindfulness.. :-))

If I can keep Mindfulness and experience "Selfless" continuously 24 
hours a day for the rest of my life, I would not need 
reminders/reasonings.. 

YOu wrote : <<Each reality arises and falls away so rapidly that not 
even the Buddha can change them, he can only know and eradicate 
them.>> 

I am happy if you have been continuously seeing "each reality arises 
and falls away so rapidly".. This is my goal.. :-)).. You said 
that "not even the Buddha can change them [Dosa/Lobha]".. Yet, He 
taught us how to CONVERT a Sankhara/kamma into a Dhamma.. This 
conversion is done by Mindfulness plus Insight.. 

<< -----
Maybe you will need time to check some of the things above in the 
Tipitaka, so I will leave it at this, if I find the time I will try 
to point out more misunderstandings in your writings, I hope this 
helps you clarify some things,
-------- >>

Thank you, Amara.. :-)) You are right about the fact that I need to 
learn from the Tipitaka.. 

With metta,

Theresa.

 
416 From: amara chay   
Date: Mon Jun 5, 2000 9:21am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: It's quite all right.. :-))

 
  >From: "Theresa " 

>My terminology is
>something I always have to watch out for but still don't know how
>to..  :-))


Theresa,

I would suggest you read a book on our website called 'Summary of 
Paramatthadhamma' which will help you with more precise terminology so that 
you could communicate better in the future and avoid further confusion, for 
which a very complete glossary is being prepared.


>I don't know a better way to explain what I experience.. I can only
>say that *WHENEVER* Impermanence is understood continuously, from
>moment to moment, THEN the knowledge about Dukkha springs from the
>knowledge of Impermanence.. It seems like two sides of the same
>coins.. This is how Lakkhana I understand "so far" through direct
>experience..


Nothing can be understood continuously because citta can only arise one at a 
time and at the instant of seeing there can be no thinking or 
'understanding' as you call it.  People without sati think there can be 
seeing and hearing at the same time, or any other sense perceptions at the 
same time, but the citta is much faster than that, between instants of 
seeing and thinking and hearing, there are bhavanga ciita arising in between 
in large numbers.  Even the Buddha while performing the most difficult form 
of miracle which requires the highest concentration, must have bhavanga 
citta arising every third citta in the stream of citta.  If you think you 
have continous understanding then you are only thinking without being 
conscious of thinking.


>Another point as I understand, the knowledge or understanding about
>Lakkhanas continue to change as we walk further on the Noble Path.. I
>can not explain more than that..

You cannot explain because the understanding cannot change if it is the 
right understanding, it can only deepen and become more clear and precise.  
The lakkhana do not change either because none can change their reality 
which by the time you know them have fallen away, uncontrolable, 
unchangeable: hence the name Paramatthadhamma.


>You and I are trying to discuss about the TRUTHS.. Being right or
>wrong on discussions is not important, because TRUTHS shall forever
>be TRUTHS for us to know and learn from..

The TRUTH cannot be both right and wrong, indeed the Buddha spent 45 years 
teaching about what is 'miccha' (wrong) and what is 'samma' (right) and to 
ignore it is to think you are wiser than the Buddha.  It is true that we can 
learn from both, but the knowledge must include how to distinguish right 
from wrong, it is vital to do so, otherwise you might be practicing miccha 
samathi and take it for vipassana, simply because you couldn't distinguish 
between the two.


>We meditate because we want to understand the truths.. We post
>messages because we wish to share what we learn to dhamma friends.. I
>find that each dhamma friend have taught me Dhamma and something
>about myself, which I have yet to learn.. :-))

I practice vipassana according to the tipitaka, I don't know if you would 
call it meditation because as I said earlier, I don't have to sit down in 
order to meditate or expect sati to arise in certain possitions.  And I 
study Dhamma not from any dhamma friend but a kalayanamitta who study the 
tiitaka, not individuals who speculate  and are not sure what is what.


I only know how to pracitice Vipassana
>in all four postures..

What four, and where are they mentioned in the Tipitaka, and in what 
context?  There are not only four postures but while you are in any posture 
at all you can study the true characteristics of realities, of nama and 
rupa.  (But this is already better than rushing to sit cross legged at the 
drop of a hat thinking that that is what meditation is).

I learned to observe my
>tummy (my breath) and be mindful during walking, before my teacher
>gave me the terms, "Nama, Rupa" and said that they are "Buddhist
>terms" for the experience I had had and explained in my own layman
>terms during my progress report.. Couple months after first
>practicing, my teacher told me that what he taught me and I had
>practiced was called "Vipassana".. Therefore, I continue to claim
>that I know nothing about "Buddhism" and that I am still very blind
>to everything.. :-))


Then you had better start learning about real vipassana in the Tipitaka, 
which you can also find in the 'Summary of Paramatthadhamma'
Part IX, Advanced section, <http://www.dhammastudy.com/>  so you can pass it 
on correctly.

>Amara, with respect, I understand what you tried to explain, and yet,
>don't know how to better explain what I understand/experience..
>Please continue to meditate as you have been doing.. I am confident
>that what you will experience/understand can not be different from
>what I have experienced, off and on, depending on the current
>meditation level(s) in the current moment.. After all, Buddha gaves
>us the same tool, which the four Foundations of Mindfulness, and so,
>we ought to see the same Four Noble Truths, so I strongly believe..

Yes? Please finish.
If I were you however, I would study his teachings befor I starting using 
his terminology without knowing precisely what anything meant.

>With respect and honesty, I would like to share another strong belief
>of mine : << "Dukkha" as the First Noble Truths MUST exist in all
>planes (happy planes, human planes, lower planes, or whatever planes
>there are but I don't know), because, being the "ultimate" truths,
>Dukkha MUST exist in realms, all conditions, all times, without
>exceptions.. Meaning, Buddha's Dhamma, especially the Four Noble
>Truths, are unconditional and must remain unchanged forever, even
>though our understanding of the truths can be gradual and at
>different levels as we grow spiritually over time.. >>

It does, as it is impermanence.  But not as sufferings, or 'dukkha dukkha', 
or at least not in all the plains, while in others, such as the hell planes, 
there is suffering most of the time, so much so that they cannot pay 
attention to the dhamma.  Beings in the hell planes can never be enlightened 
during that lifetime.

>So far, I have seen "Dukkha" right in the happy moment (when I win,
>when I feel succesful, when I feel being loved, etc.), and also in
>the sad/angry/dosa moments, too.. I don't have terms and am not
>qualified to explain the term "Dukkha"..
>
>I am not sure if Robert and I referred to same thing when we
>mentioned the same terms, and I like to blame my poor terminology..
>However, Robert seems to understand/experience "Dukkha" from moment
>to moment as I have been.. For me, "Dukkha" changes its meaning, from
>gross to finer, with practice, experience, and Insight..

You won't have any problems with terminologies if you read the book 
mentioned above, I really recommend it so that we could all communicate more 
efficiently in the future, as well as for all your future communications 
with anyone at all on the same subject.

It would avoid anyone confusing anyone else!

Amara




 
417 From: Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala   
Date: Mon Jun 5, 2000 6:14pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] 'Viriya'

 
  Dear Amara,
Many thanks for your e-mail and for the wonderful phone conversation the
other day. I spoke with Achaan Suchin and she suggested that I come over to
her house next Saturday (the 10th) so that she could talk to me. Would you
be free at all to take me over there? If so, I could meet you at your house
and then we can drive over there together. Please let me know.

Also, I checked out your translation of "Viriya" at the website and the
first thing that hit my eye was that the beautiful graphics depicting a
library and books was so vivid that the text could not be read easily. Can
that be fixed up so that it can be read and suggestions given?

Looking forward to hearing from you.
Many thanks, Betty
----- Original Message -----
From: amara chay 
Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2000 11:59 PM
Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] 'Viriya'


> Dear friends in the dhamma,
>
> <http://www.dhammastudy.com/> has uploaded 'Viriya-Parami' in the advanced
> section, translated from a talk aired on the occasion of his majesty the
> King's 72nd birthday, last December 5th.,  one of the broadest studies of
> perseverance, if not so profound in certain areas.
>
> Please help us correct mistakes and we would appreciate comments,
>
> Amara

 
418 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Mon Jun 5, 2000 6:43pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] 'Viriya'

 
  Dear amara,
Thank you for all your viriya in translating Viriya.
It is wonderful, everyone should read it. 


Robert


 
419 From: amara chay   
Date: Mon Jun 5, 2000 9:23pm
Subject: Re: 'Viriya'

 
  --- "Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala" wrote:
> Dear Amara,
> Many thanks for your e-mail and for the wonderful phone
conversation 
the
> other day. I spoke with Achaan Suchin and she suggested that I come 
over to
> her house next Saturday (the 10th) so that she could talk to me. 
Would you
> be free at all to take me over there? If so, I could meet you at 
your house
> and then we can drive over there together. Please let me know.


Dear Betty,

It was a real pleasure talking to you, I look forward very much to 
Saturday.  I am so sorry to say I have misplaced the e-mail Khun Jack 
sent with your phone numbers, could you please send them again to my 
private e-mail at <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/post?protectID=100232113180158135072098186064129241078152>, or call me?  Please come to my 
place on Saturday at your convenience, I live only five minute's
drive from Tan Acharn's.  


> Also, I checked out your translation of "Viriya" at the website and 
the
> first thing that hit my eye was that the beautiful graphics 
depicting a
> library and books was so vivid that the text could not be read 
easily. Can
> that be fixed up so that it can be read and suggestions given?


Thank you very much for your suffestions, I have tried to reduce the 
colors of the page but without too much success, I'm afraid the
result 
is almost the same as before.  Could you please check it again to see 
if you can read it any better?  (Please remember to click on 'reload' 
or 'refresh' at the top of your screen, and as the article is rather 
long it may take a while to load.) It you still can't read it, please 
tell me and I will change the background set entirely.  I am very 
grateful  that you have pointed it out so that we could present the 
article in the best way possible,

Thank you and see you Saturday,

Amara

 
420 From: Sarah Procter Abbott  
Date: Tue Jun 6, 2000 6:47am
Subject: experiences & experiences

 
  Dear Theresa,

Jonothan and I have just come back from a weekend in Bangkok with Khun Sujin 
and friends like Amara and Ivan & Ell from the list group here. We had 
useful discussions. (Betty and other  Thai friends on the list, we were 
sorry not to meet you...hope to next time!)

Theresa, we've been reading and enjoying your correspondence with Robert and 
Amara and appreciate your considerable interest in the dhamma. I'd like to 
tell you a little about my background in Buddhism...

Like you, I also studied with a very famous teacher (in Bodh Gaya in my 
case) for many months initially. He had been a foremost pupil of Mahasi 
Sayadaw and what he taught was also the 'Burmese method' meditation...focus 
on the breathing at the belly, continuous mindfulness in the 4 postures etc 
etc.....I soon became an 'expert' meditator and afterwards spent many months 
in a temple in Sri Lanka continuing my practice under another well-known 
teacher of the same 'method'. I became so good at 'continuous mindfulness' 
that I cut off all contact with the outside world, never got angry or spoke 
a harsh word, followed the 8 precepts perfectly and in fact was so mindful 
whilst eating that I nearly starved as it was such a slow motion process... 
I seldom read even letters from home, let alone books and didn't write or do 
anything that would distract me from my medtation. I kept a diary, like you 
I think, which I read out to the head monk and as I ticked off the stages of 
insight, he encouraged me and said 'good, good, carry on'....

What happened? One day, another visitor, Ann, left an unedited manuscipt of 
a book in my 'cell' and I srtarted to read it. It was 'Abhidhamma in Daily 
Life' by Nina Van Gorkom. I read and reread and also started to listen to a 
set of very badly recorded tapes of discussions with Khun Sujin on a trip to 
India. A little panna (understanding), initially at an intellectual level, 
began to understand that there really is no control. What did that mean? It 
meant any reality could arise at any moment and no self could make it 
otherwise. Seeing was not self and was just as real whether in the temple or 
on a crowded bus. And so for all realities...they were conditioned and no 
self could force any mindfulness and what for anyway? The key was the right 
understanding. There was no need to follow any meditation practice or to try 
and have mindfulness or concentration.

In fact if there is a beginning of understanding there is no interest in 
doing anything special because it becomes clear that this is motivated by 
the view of self being mindful and wanting to have it rather than 
understanding the moments of seeing , hearing, like and dislike appearing 
now.

That was 25 years ago. After that I returned to family and friends. I 
returned to work and a 'normal' life. I studied a lot of the Tipitaka, I 
spent time with Nina, Khun Sujin and other dhamma friends. I listened a lot 
to the tapes from Bangkok and the considering and understanding slowly began 
to grow without any of the former illusions of having attained high 
levels....I was happy to be in kindergarten on the right track. I haven't 
had any wish or interest in following a 'meditation practice' since then.

Best wishes and please continue to raise any concerns or issues regarding 
the practice with us here.

metta, Sarah

 
421 From: Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala   
Date: Tue Jun 6, 2000 8:30am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] experiences & experiences

 
  Dear Sarah,
What a joy to read your letter describing the history of your search for
Dhamma since there are parallels with my own search. After arriving in
Bangkok from New York, over 34 years ago with my husband, who is Thai, he
had tried to introduce Buddhism to me by bringing me to Wat Bavornives.
There, Pra Khantipalo and other monks tried to teach me meditation. Though I
tried, I could never master the discipline of it and it never became
internalized. Then, in 1972, I was introduced to the mystical side of
Buddhism with a wonderful teacher named  Achaan Boonphen. At the time, it
was what I needed, and though I gained a lot of understanding through
psychic abilities, it did not change me internally. And when, toward the end
of his life, Tan Achaan Boonphen urged us all the meditate, I still could
not on a regular basis. After his death, I searched for other teachers, but
they also could not answer the many questions that began to arise. Doubts
about Buddhism, based on a lot of "moha", were continually plaguing me and
the same old patterns of behavior/anger ("dosa"), especially at my husband
and my children's nanny, kept recurring. I kept "trying out" new teachers,
but things never changed. Then, one of the monks at Wat Bavorn suggested I
contact the Dhamma Study group, and the rest is history. I feel that I'm now
finally, as you say, back in Kindergarten, but starting on the right track.

But what struck me most about your story and my own is that it was necessary
to try out the various things we did in order to become ready for a proper
study of Dhamma.

Many thanks for listening. I regret that I missed meeting many from the
group last Saturday sinceI misunderstood the directions to Khunying
Nopparat's house and never arrived.

With metta,
Betty

----- Original Message -----
From: Sarah Procter Abbott 
Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 11:47 AM
Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] experiences & experiences


>
> Dear Theresa,
>
> Jonothan and I have just come back from a weekend in Bangkok with Khun
Sujin
> and friends like Amara and Ivan & Ell from the list group here. We had
> useful discussions. (Betty and other  Thai friends on the list, we were
> sorry not to meet you...hope to next time!)
>
> Theresa, we've been reading and enjoying your correspondence with Robert
and
> Amara and appreciate your considerable interest in the dhamma. I'd like to
> tell you a little about my background in Buddhism...
>
> Like you, I also studied with a very famous teacher (in Bodh Gaya in my
> case) for many months initially. He had been a foremost pupil of Mahasi
> Sayadaw and what he taught was also the 'Burmese method'
meditation...focus
> on the breathing at the belly, continuous mindfulness in the 4 postures
etc
> etc.....I soon became an 'expert' meditator and afterwards spent many
months
> in a temple in Sri Lanka continuing my practice under another well-known
> teacher of the same 'method'. I became so good at 'continuous mindfulness'
> that I cut off all contact with the outside world, never got angry or
spoke
> a harsh word, followed the 8 precepts perfectly and in fact was so mindful
> whilst eating that I nearly starved as it was such a slow motion
process...
> I seldom read even letters from home, let alone books and didn't write or
do
> anything that would distract me from my medtation. I kept a diary, like
you
> I think, which I read out to the head monk and as I ticked off the stages
of
> insight, he encouraged me and said 'good, good, carry on'....
>
> What happened? One day, another visitor, Ann, left an unedited manuscipt
of
> a book in my 'cell' and I srtarted to read it. It was 'Abhidhamma in Daily
> Life' by Nina Van Gorkom. I read and reread and also started to listen to
a
> set of very badly recorded tapes of discussions with Khun Sujin on a trip
to
> India. A little panna (understanding), initially at an intellectual level,
> began to understand that there really is no control. What did that mean?
It
> meant any reality could arise at any moment and no self could make it
> otherwise. Seeing was not self and was just as real whether in the temple
or
> on a crowded bus. And so for all realities...they were conditioned and no
> self could force any mindfulness and what for anyway? The key was the
right
> understanding. There was no need to follow any meditation practice or to
try
> and have mindfulness or concentration.
>
> In fact if there is a beginning of understanding there is no interest in
> doing anything special because it becomes clear that this is motivated by
> the view of self being mindful and wanting to have it rather than
> understanding the moments of seeing , hearing, like and dislike appearing
> now.
>
> That was 25 years ago. After that I returned to family and friends. I
> returned to work and a 'normal' life. I studied a lot of the Tipitaka, I
> spent time with Nina, Khun Sujin and other dhamma friends. I listened a
lot
> to the tapes from Bangkok and the considering and understanding slowly
began
> to grow without any of the former illusions of having attained high
> levels....I was happy to be in kindergarten on the right track. I haven't
> had any wish or interest in following a 'meditation practice' since then.
>
> Best wishes and please continue to raise any concerns or issues regarding
> the practice with us here.
>
> metta, Sarah

 
422 From: amara chay   
Date: Tue Jun 6, 2000 11:13am
Subject: Viriya revised by Robert

 
  Dear friends in the dhamma,

I have just uploaded the revised version of 'viriya' sent by Robert, 
thank you so much, for the overwhelming encouragements as well!

Betty, could you please take another look at the page (please 
remember to click on 'reload' or 'refresh') and see if it is any 
better than last time.  I have changed the font size, but if it is 
still hard to read, it is vital to change the background completely 
which is not hard to do, so kindly tell me what you think.

Sarah, don't you think it would give us much to discuss on the 
Cambodia trip!  (I really hope you and Jonothan could come!)

Amara

 
423 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Tue Jun 6, 2000 2:02pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Viriya revised by Robert

 
  Dear Amara,
I really feel embarrased to see my name put as the
revisor of your excellent translation. The very few
corrections I made are so minor. So please take my
name off the article. 

Robert
--- amara chay  wrote:
> Dear friends in the dhamma,
> 
> I have just uploaded the revised version of 'viriya'
> sent by Robert, 
> thank you so much, for the overwhelming
> encouragements as well!
> 
> Betty, could you please take another look at the
> page (please 
> remember to click on 'reload' or 'refresh') and see
> if it is any 
> better than last time.  I have changed the font
> size, but if it is 
> still hard to read, it is vital to change the
> background completely 
> which is not hard to do, so kindly tell me what you
> think.
> 
> Sarah, don't you think it would give us much to
> discuss on the 
> Cambodia trip!  (I really hope you and Jonothan
> could come!)
> 
> Amara
> 
> 
> 



 
424 From: Theresa   
Date: Tue Jun 6, 2000 11:04pm
Subject: Re: experiences & experiences

 
  Hello Sarah,

Thank you for your very kind post and sharing your past experience 
with us...

My practice, as you mentioned, uses the belly as the initial point of 
focus, and continuous mindfulness as a goal.. Most of my practice is 
General Meditation, and Sitting Meditation is done twice a day, once 
in the morning right after waking up and once at night before lying 
down to sleep.. I don't see myself as an "expert" meditator because I 
am learning from moment to moment.. In the past, I attended two ten-
day meditation retreats plus one two-day retreat.. I have been 
reading books from Venerables from Thailand (Venerable Acharn Chah, 
Venerable Boowa, etc.. [sorry for my mispellings], and Venerables 
from other places.) I have never travelled to learn, except attending 
the retreats I mentioned earlier.. Most of my practice time is at 
home and among family and friends.. If I don't tell them, they don't 
know that I am a meditator.. I live and handle my responsibilities.. 
I eat, sleep, chat, laugh, simply live, and have been applying for 
job without luck.. I don't keep any diary of my practice, except when 
I first learned Vipassana, when I had too many terms to learn.. Every 
day I write letters/emails, talk to and meet my friends and family.. 
I am a single parent with two sons, and they are attached to me.. 
Family and friends contact me whenever they need my support or 
listening.. I don't cut off myself from the world around me, but see 
that I am part of the world.. I see myself as a nail or a screw for 
the entire system to work, and yet, I'm expendable.. :-)) 

<< ---
A little panna (understanding), initially at an intellectual level, 
began to understand that there really is no control. What did that 
mean? It meant any reality could arise at any moment and no self 
could make it otherwise. Seeing was not self and was just as real 
whether in the temple or on a crowded bus. And so for all 
realities...they were conditioned and no self could force any 
mindfulness and what for anyway? The key was the right  
understanding. There was no need to follow any meditation practice or 
to try and have mindfulness or concentration.
------ >>

Thank you, Sarah, for sharing.. I will keep your words in mind, and 
will give it a try.. I have put myself through many tests (many 
techniques, suggestions), and don't doubt others' words upon 
hearing.. I am a bit skeptical to share with you that, in fact, I 
have lived my life from moment to moment and, many times during the 
day, have seen this-thing, that-thing happening but there is "No-
Self"; it's rather body-working, mind-working, body-working, mind-
working, etc.. The reason I'm skeptical because I don't want my lack 
of terminology confuse anyone.. :-))

<< ----
In fact if there is a beginning of understanding there is no interest 
in doing anything special because it becomes clear that this is 
motivated by the view of self being mindful and wanting to have it 
rather than understanding the moments of seeing , hearing, like and 
dislike appearing now.
------- >>

Understanding from moment to moment !! That's how my practice has 
gone so far, at least for two years.. That's why I believe that there 
is no need for a final conclusion on "Self".. 

<< -----
Best wishes and please continue to raise any concerns or issues 
regarding the practice with us here.
-------- >>

Thank you, Sarah.. Maybe it is best for everyone that I read more 
than write in order to reduce the confusion caused by my lack 
terminology.. :-)) .. Before and after my posts on this list, things 
go smoothly as life does, and in between, you thought of "me".. Thank 
you, Sarah..

With metta,

Theresa.

 
 
425 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Wed Jun 7, 2000 10:54am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] about Right Effort (was: re: abhidhamma in daily life)

 
  Theresa,

>(( A NOTE for Robert and other members of the list who are practicing
>at these progressive levels of Insight..
>I encourage you to put your head down and to nail the task of
>Mindfulness, one by one, steady and firm, catching the end of one
>event as clearly as possible, grabbing the beginning of a new event
>with precision, leaving no room between events no matter how fine
>events become.. Sadhu! Sadhu! Sadhu! .. Please do not look forward or
>wish for anything.. The best way to balance our mind and to bring
>Upekkha coming, matured and steady, is to keep Mindfulness constant,
>steady, continuous, careful, respectful.. If you need a boost, a week
>of intense retreat should help.. ))

I am a mere beginner.  But mindfullness as taught by the Buddha is surely 
mindfullness that arises naturally, without having to put one's head down, 
trying to "catch" realities or spending time in a retreat?

Jonothan

 
426 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Wed Jun 7, 2000 11:24am
Subject: Re: Dead friend

 
  Theresa,

Thanks for your comments.

>It gets better with practice.. I mentally assume my death, the
>extreme and slow pain which is painful enough to kill a
>strong/healthy body, the decay of my body, the disappearance of so-
>called "I", and the knowledge.. The more I remember those Truths, the
>more I can just live, and the more I can accept loosing anything and
>anyone I have.. After 100 years from right now, where are we, even
>the newborn being born today ??.. Thinking like that helps me detach
>in the current moment..

Useful reflection on death, such as when someone we know dies, can have a 
calming effect.  But only a temporary effect.  It does not, cannot, 
eradicate any of our accumulations of lobha.

Visualisation practice such as you have mentioned is another thing 
altogether.  There seems to be an element of "thinking" oneself into 
detachment.

Jonothan


 
427 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Wed Jun 7, 2000 2:04pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Dead friend

 
  Dear Jonathan
--- 
You commented on Theresa's words where she said
,Theresa: "the decay of my body, the
> disappearance of so-
> >called "I", and the knowledge.. The more I remember
> those Truths, the
> >more I can just live, and the more I can accept
> loosing anything and
> >anyone I have.. Thinking like
> that helps me detach
> >in the current moment.."
> 
>You said that: 
Jonathan: "Useful reflection on death, such as when
someone we
> know dies, can have a 
> calming effect.  But only a temporary effect.  It
> does not, cannot, 
> eradicate any of our accumulations of lobha."

This is true, only vipassana can gradually elimate
lobha and at first it only eliminates the type of
lobha that is associated with miccha-ditthi (wrong
view). 

However, any kusala is worth developing provided we
understand its limitations - (as you do). The
reflections on death that Theresa mentions are very
valuable and they can be a support as well for
intellectual right understanding; at the same time
right understanding supports those kusala thoughts.

Also reflecting on death (maranasati)very naturally
conditions viriya to arise - one realizes that the
very next citta could be cuti-citta, death moment. One
sees that the only right thing to do is to develop the
Buddha's path. 

To be truly succesful reflecting on death has to go
hand in hand with an acceptance of anatta. Otherwise
it will be "me" who is going to die. And if there are
times when we are afraid of death this can be like a
warning that we are clinging to self - it shows our
deep-rooted attachment.
However, even if one is not yet ready to understand
anatta refecting on death still has great benefits.
Once the bodhisatta was a farmer. He had a wife, a
son, and  a daughter. One day he was out on the farm
with his son when the son was bitten by a snake and
died. The farmer (our bodhisatta) considered that
nothing could be done and so calmly continued working.
When he came home alone that evening his wife realized
that the son must have died and so calmly went about
prepering for his cremation. Later the family were
burning the body when Sakka, king of the devas, asked
them if they were burning some rubbish. He said that
they looked so relaxed that he couldn't believe it was
someone they cared for. But all of them said how much
they loved the son and what a wonderful son, brother
he was. Their calmness came about because of their
wise refections on death. 

Thus we see that reflecting on death in daily life is
a cause  for calmness. It is indeed a most useful type
of samattha meditation. Those who develop it correctly
can become courageous in many areas. It can be like
our best friend. It can go hand in hand with the
development of vipassana.
Robert



 
428 From: Sarah Procter Abbott  
Date: Wed Jun 7, 2000 11:06pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: experiences & experiences

 
  Hello Theresa,
>
>Thank you for your very kind post and sharing your past experience
>with us...
>
>My practice, as you mentioned, uses the belly as the initial point of
>focus, and continuous mindfulness as a goal..

Theresa, thanks for yr response too..

The problem lies with the goal...better to understand one reality now for a 
brief moment such as seeing, hearing, hardness, softness..whatever appears. 
Awareness or mindfulness (sati) will then arise automatically with the 
understanding without any goal of continuous mindfulness...To this end we 
learn more and more about the realities, the objects of understanding.

 >Family and friends contact me whenever they need my support or
>listening.. I don't cut off myself from the world around me, but see
>that I am part of the world.. I see myself as a nail or a screw for
>the entire system to work, and yet, I'm expendable.. :-))
>
sounds like you play a very useful role and it's good that you understand 
the value of practice in daily life.

>Thank you, Sarah, for sharing.. I will keep your words in mind, and
>will give it a try..

No need to try, no need to do anything special. By reading and considering 
more about realities, different from concepts or stories and understanding 
that they cannot be controlled there will be more and more conditions for 
understanding to develop of its own accord.


>I have lived my life from moment to moment and, many times during the
>day, have seen this-thing, that-thing happening but there is "No-
>Self"; it's rather body-working, mind-working, body-working, mind-
>working, etc.. The reason I'm skeptical because I don't want my lack
>of terminology confuse anyone.. :-))
>
It's not a matter of living from moment to moment. Our life is but a moment 
of seeing, hearing etc whether there is any understanding of what appears or 
not. These realities are conditoned. Seeing only sees visible object or 
colour, a rupa, and thinking thinks about different stories or concepts. The 
thinking is real but the stories are only stories, not realities. Don't 
worry about the terminology...we're only interested in the understanding 
behind it!

>
>Understanding from moment to moment !! That's how my practice has
>gone so far, at least for two years.. That's why I believe that there
>is no need for a final conclusion on "Self"..
>
Never mind about the moment to moment, just one reality now, a moment of 
seeing now as no being or thing in it, different from thinking about it or 
trying to be mindful.

>Thank you, Sarah.. Maybe it is best for everyone that I read more
>than write in order to reduce the confusion caused by my lack
>terminology.. :-)) .. Before and after my posts on this list, things
>go smoothly as life does, and in between, you thought of "me".. Thank
>you, Sarah..
>
I highly recommend any writings by Nina Van Gorkom (some are on the 
websites) and some are in book form. Tapes of discussions with Khun Sujin 
are also useful as is Tipitaka study as Amara has been urging.

The understanding of the Buddha's teachings is not easy for any of us and 
you are most welcome to ask any questions, raise concerns or disagree 
anytime! I'm glad you found us!

metta, Sarah


 
429 From: Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala   
Date: Wed Jun 7, 2000 7:21pm
Subject: Fw: Be on Alert

 
  Dear Friends,
Am passing this on because I believe it is from a reliable source. If it
turns out to be a hoax, please forgive me.
Betty
----- Original Message -----
[sni[p]
Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2000 8:50 AM
Subject: Fwd: Be on Alert


>
>
>  >Subject: Be on Alert
> >Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2000 10:32:27 +0800
> >
> >FW: Apcosoftians....Be on AlertThere is a new virus - WOBBLER. It will
> >arrive on e-mail titled
> >CALIFORNIA.  IBM and AOL have announced that it is very
> >powerful, more so
> >than Melissa, there is no remedy. It will eat all your
> >information on the
> >hard drive and  also destroys Netscape Navigator and
> >Microsoft Internet
> >Explorer. Do not open anything with this title and please pass this
> >message on  to all your contacts and anyone who uses your
> >e-mail facility.
> >Not
> >many people seem to know about this yet so propagate it as fast as
> >possible.
> >
> >   2.If you receive an e-mail titled "Win A. Holiday" DO NOT open it. It
> >will erase everything on your hard drive. Forward this
> >letter to as many
> >people as you can. This is a new, very malicious virus and not many
> >people know
> >about it. This information was  announced yesterday morning from
> >Microsoft.
> >
> >          >
>
>
> Amrita
>

 
430 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Thu Jun 8, 2000 10:34am
Subject: Re: Dead friend

 
  Robert wrote-

> However, any kusala is worth developing provided we
> understand its limitations - (as you do). The
> reflections on death that Theresa mentions are very
> valuable and they can be a support as well for
> intellectual right understanding; at the same time
> right understanding supports those kusala thoughts.


Yes, kusala of any degree is extremely valuable and is to be
encouraged.  But visualising one's own death and bodily decay and
"living" the pain of death, as a kind of meditation exercise,
is not maranasati in any shape or form.

By contrast, the sober reflection that arises naturally when someone
we know dies is likely to be so – but is there awareness of it as
such?

Jonothan

 
431 From: amara chay   
Date: Thu Jun 8, 2000 3:59am
Subject: itinerary

 
  Dear friends in the dhamma,

You can find the itinerary of the Cambodian trip in Newsletter 5, please 
click on the underlined word 'Itinerary', many thanks to Ell for sending it 
in.  From what I heard the trips are getting so popular that it is turning 
into a mammoth tour, with over a hundred signed up and limits set at 200!  I 
wouldn't be surprised if it will take ages to travel about so please arm 
yourselves with lots of metta and khanti (just kidding!) and most of all 
lots of questions for Khun Sujin!!!

Amara

 

 
433 From: Sarah Procter Abbott  
Date: Fri Jun 9, 2000 0:20am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Dead friend & maranasati

 
  Robert,

this is an interesting theme!
>
>However, any kusala is worth developing provided we
>understand its limitations - (as you do). The
>reflections on death that Theresa mentions are very
>valuable and they can be a support as well for
>intellectual right understanding; at the same time
>right understanding supports those kusala thoughts.

..if they really are maranasati or  with rt understanding of death at the 
level of samatha....mostly when we think or reflect on death it isn't.  
K.Sujin stressed how difficult this object is on our recent visit compared 
to say the development of metta (loving-kindness) when we are with other 
people.
>
>Also reflecting on death (maranasati) very naturally
>conditions viriya to arise - one realizes that the
>very next citta could be cuti-citta, death moment. One
>sees that the only right thing to do is to develop the
>Buddha's path.

You prompted me to look up in the Visuddhimagga.. I don't pretend to know 
much about maranasati. However the Vis. urges caution in reflection of an 
'agreeable' person's death as sorrow tends to arise  on one's own death as 
anxiety tends to arise....instead 'avert to the death of beings already dead 
but formerly seen enjoying good things, doing so with mindfulness, with a 
sense of urgency and with knowledge, after which he can exercise his 
attention in the way beginning "Death will take place"...' Vis V111,4f.

So often what seems like a moment of calm or viriya is really a moment of 
lobha..
>
>To be truly succesful reflecting on death has to go
>hand in hand with an acceptance of anatta. Otherwise
>it will be "me" who is going to die. And if there are
>times when we are afraid of death this can be like a
>warning that we are clinging to self - it shows our
>deep-rooted attachment.
>However, even if one is not yet ready to understand
>anatta reflecting on death still has great benefits.


Depends on whether it really is kusala

....>Once the bodhisatta was a farmer. He had a wife, a
>son, and  a daughter. One day he was out on the farm
>with his son when the son was bitten by a snake and
>died. The farmer (our bodhisatta) considered that
>nothing could be done and so calmly continued working.
>When he came home alone that evening his wife realized
>that the son must have died and so calmly went about
>prepering for his cremation. Later the family were
>burning the body when Sakka, king of the devas, asked
>them if they were burning some rubbish. He said that
>they looked so relaxed that he couldn't believe it was
>someone they cared for. But all of them said how much
>they loved the son and what a wonderful son, brother
>he was. Their calmness came about because of their
>wise refections on death.

exactly...the wise reflections developed over many lifetimes..

>Thus we see that reflecting on death in daily life is
>a cause  for calmness.

the key is the understanding

It is indeed a most useful type
>of samattha meditation. Those who develop it correctly
>can become courageous in many areas. It can be like
>our best friend. It can go hand in hand with the
>development of vipassana.

better to understand more about realities now than be concerned about 
developing maranasati... if there are conditions for rt understanding at 
this level, fine, otherwise let it go, o'wise for sure it's attachment being 
developed...

I should add that there's nothing wrong w/visualisations, breathing 
exercises, sitting meditations (or doing yoga or Tai Chi as I do) for health 
or other reasons, as long as one doesn't kid oneself that this in itself is 
the practice of the Buddha's Path.

Sarah

 
434 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Thu Jun 8, 2000 9:25pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Dead friend & maranasati

 
  --- 
Thank you sarah for reminding us of the difficulty of
samattha. Yes it is hard to know.
> ..."if they really are maranasati or  with rt
> understanding of death at the 
> level of samatha....mostly when we think or reflect
> on death it isn't.  
> K.Sujin stressed how difficult this object is on our
> recent visit compared 
> to say the development of metta (loving-kindness)
> when we are with other 
> people.

I was interested that maranasati is more difficult
than metta. It may depend also on accumulations? could
some people be more inclined, have more past
accumulations in maranasati than in metta? Khun sujin
once said to me that maranasati can be like ones best
friend. For some people it is certainly unsuitable at
certain times- it can just condition dosa. But one of
the reasons that it is  easier than anapanasati is
because if there is any dosa one immediately realizes
that one is on the wrong track. Still nothing is
actually easy. Even giving , the most basic type of
kusala, is usually mixed up with lobha - how much more
so these more subtle ways of development.

h

> 
> better to understand more about realities now than
> be concerned about 
> developing maranasati... 

Well, yes understanding realities is always the best.
But the path depends on many complex factors; parami
developed at different levels. It seems hasty to
negelct any area of kusala- even if it is difficult to
understand properly.
Robert




 
435 From: Sarah Procter Abbott  
Date: Sat Jun 10, 2000 0:24am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello!

 
  Dear Mike,

We haven't heard from you in a while and hope you're still there! When you 
posted details of yr website a while ago I was too busy to spend time 
reading and browsing. I've just been doing so and appreciate yr great format 
and all the work that has gone into poducing the site. It's especially good 
to see Tipitaka translations and a good glossary there. Feel free to put a 
link from here anytime (and viceversa if you wish) and to let us know of 
anything of special interest to this group.

Sorry you didn't get to join the discussions in California. It looks like 
Jonothan and I (along with Amara, Robert and others from this list) will be 
joining the discussions in Cambodia. Khun Sujin has promised there will be 
discusions in English as well as in Thai and I'd be delighted if you or 
anyone else from the list is free to join. Agreeing with what she or we say 
is NOT necessary at all - in fact, disagreements lead to more lively 
discussions often!

best regards, Sarah >

>Hi!
>
>I just joined this group and want to introduce myself.  I've read many
>of Nina van Gorkom's books and find her writing to be very clear.  I've
>recommended her books to many others. Alan Weller has been helpful in
>allowing me to post a chapter from Abhidhamma in Daily Life on my
>website, The Ganges Sangha, where I have collected a number of
>resources on Abhidhamma studies.  I'm in the process of getting a
>wonderful article written by Rupert Gethin about the Bhavanga and
>Rebirth which I hope to post on the site as soon as I can get
>permission to do so.  There are extensive offerings there and I invite
>you to explore it (http://personal.mem.bellsouth.net/~mikep/)
>
>I enjoyed Robert's article about meditation techniques and mindfulness.
>  It was helpful to be reminded that even when there is no understanding
>there is an opportunity to understand that, too. :-)
>
>With metta,
>
>Mike Potter
>

 
436 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Sat Jun 10, 2000 1:43pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] experiences & experiences

 
  Betty wrote-

>I regret that I missed meeting many from the
>group last Saturday since I misunderstood the directions to Khunying
>Nopparat's house and never arrived.

Betty,

Yes, Sarah and I were sorry not to have met you.  I hope your experience was 
not as frustrating as my own.  My taxi from the hotel took 2 hours to reach 
Khunying Nopparat’s house, the last hour of which was spent going back and 
forth along Chaengwattana Road looking for the right turnoff.  A combination 
of being lost, stuck in traffic and being persuaded that I must have given 
the wrong address or the wrong directions for getting to that address had me 
in a state of some anxiety by the time I arrived.  It took me the rest of 
the afternoon’s talk to recover!

(Note for Amara:  this was no “wide, deep, slow moving river”, more like a 
raging torrent.)

Fortunately, there were some occasions of remembering that dosa arising is 
just the manifestation of accumulations for having dosa.  As long as the 
tendency is there it will find an object.  However, the understanding of 
that dosa as being not self is another thing altogether.  And the stronger 
the dosa, the more remote that possibility can seem.

Jonothan


 
437 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Sat Jun 10, 2000 4:29pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Dosa as a conditioned reality

 
  Theresa,

Thanks for your comments on my earlier message in the archives on the 
relation between dosa (aversion) and lobha (attachment) to sensuous objects.

I agree with your observation that-
>There is Dosa, because there is something you wish for but can not
>get it.. Meaning, there is a minute Lobha behind your Dosa..

But I am not so sure about your second proposition that-
>There is Lobha, because there is something you don't like and then
>you don't have it.. Meaning, there is a minute Dosa behind your
>Lobha. … We are happy, because there is something we fear and are lucky not 
>to
>have it..

It seems to me that lobha has been accumulated because of moha (ignorance) 
about the true nature of realities.  If we understood better the true nature 
of realities we would not see anything about them worth clinging to.  This 
is why we take for pleasant/happiness that which is intrinsically 
insubstantial and not conducive to our happiness.

But until understanding is highly developed we are bound to continue to 
accumulate more ignorance and attachment, and to experience more dosa on 
that account (sigh).

Jonothan


 
438 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Sat Jun 10, 2000 4:43pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: It's quite all right.. :-))

 
  Amara,

In a message to Theresa you said-

>In the Tipitaka, there are two kinds of dukkha: 'dukkha' which is
>Pali for impermanence, while bodily and mental suffering are 'dukkha
>dukkha'.  The first ariya sacca is therefore not suffering but
>impermanence.

Could you elaborate on what you mean when you say that the first ariya sacca 
(noble truth) is not suffering but impermanence.

Jonothan

 
439 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Sat Jun 10, 2000 10:11pm
Subject: Re: Hello!

 
  On the subject of Mike's website, the new URL is-

http://www.geocities.com/ganges_sangha/index.htm

and the home page contains a lot of links to other Dhamma sites. 
Well worth bookmarking.

--- In http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/post?protectID=114015113213038031090057228208100015039145163254013109241227048211120136083229073126, "Sarah Procter Abbott" 
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/post?protectID=061166091237042125213218046036129208> wrote:
> 
> Dear Mike,
> 
> We haven't heard from you in a while and hope you're still there! 
When you 
> posted details of yr website a while ago I was too busy to spend 
time 
> reading and browsing. I've just been doing so and appreciate yr 
great format 
> and all the work that has gone into poducing the site. It's 
especially good 
> to see Tipitaka translations and a good glossary there. Feel free
to 
put a 
> link from here anytime (and viceversa if you wish) and to let us 
know of 
> anything of special interest to this

 
 
440 From: amara chay   
Date: Sat Jun 10, 2000 4:41pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: It's quite all right.. :-))

 
  >From: "Jonothan Abbott" 
>Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: It's quite all right.. :-))
>Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 08:43:21 GMT
>
>Amara,
>
>In a message to Theresa you said-
>
> >In the Tipitaka, there are two kinds of dukkha: 'dukkha' which is
> >Pali for impermanence, while bodily and mental suffering are 'dukkha
> >dukkha'.  The first ariya sacca is therefore not suffering but
> >impermanence.
>
>Could you elaborate on what you mean when you say that the first ariya 
>sacca
>(noble truth) is not suffering but impermanence.
>


Jonothan,

I think that there would be no problems in the world if there were no 
impermanence, there could be as much attachment as you want to any world 
anywhere: nothing would ever change, for example in the happier planes and 
the brahma worlds, life lasts a very long time indeed, without 'sufferings', 
at least in the physical sense.  But even there things come to an end where 
conditions no longer cause the beings to live there but for the next set of 
kamma to yield results, and they are born in their next lives, which could 
be anywhere, and after that life, the next and the next.  The Tipitaka says 
we have all been born everything imaginable, from the highest brahma to the 
lowliest creatures in hell and back again and again, during the billions of 
years we have been in samsara vatta. With each death comes parting, what was 
clung to is then gone, never to come again.  In this cycle of births and 
deaths, the impermanence of life is the greatest threat in all the worlds.  
This is one of the reasons why you have been finding maramasati so 
beneficient, don't you think?

Something that affected us all today was when some of Ell's friends who had 
wanted to join the discussions Khun Sujin had with Betty this afternoon but 
couldn't because they had to go to a funeral of their daughter's friends, 
two boys who were celebrating their high school graduation in Phuket with 
their classmates who were run over by a van.  One can see that impermanence 
can visit beings at any time, maybe without any physical or mental pain, but 
surely with changes.  Their parents probably suffer more than they do, that 
they had to change, after such a short life, according to conditions.  And 
these changes can cause dukkha dukkha to arise, indeed it does all the time,
bodily aches and pains arise when the temperature inside or outside changes 
too much, when there is too much hardness (as when you get cut by a knife or 
hit by a bullet) or even when there is too much tension in your muscles.  
Mental attachment to things can of course cause great pain when the object 
of your attachment changes or your views of the object change, or when they 
are gone definitively.  But with panna even impermanence cannot cause dukkha 
dukkha to arise, because panna knows impermanence as it is and does not 
expect it to be any different, knowing it for what it is there at the 
highest level would eliminate attachments that could cause any more rebirths 
and therefore no deaths nor any impermanence any more.

But that is panna of the arahanta level and not of just the understanding or 
intellectual level, or even in the level of studying and experiencing, of 
accumulating panna, but the attainment level.  Still, the higher levels of 
panna can be attained only by accumulating the first levels to condition the 
higher ones to arise: by knowing what sati is and studying realities that 
appear to accumulate the knowledge of their true characteristics, with the 
right understanding that sati can arise anywhere at any time when there are 
conditions for it to.  Only then would panna be powerful enough to eradicate 
attachment as well as all other kilesa to free you from rounds of rebirth, 
from attachments and impermanence.

Writing about this has been conditioning some sati to arise for me, thank 
you for making me think about it,

Amara


 
441 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Sun Jun 11, 2000 9:17pm
Subject: Re: Dukkha vs Annica (was It's quite all right.)

 
  Amara,

Many thanks for your informative reply.  I can see that the unfortunate 
incident regarding the 2 schoolboys was a condition for some useful 
reflection.  Would this be a level of maranasati (death as object of 
concentration), I wonder, or some other aspect of kusala?

Yes, I do understand that dukkha (unsatisfactoriness) can only be understood 
in the context of annica (impermanence).  But the two are nevertheless 
separate and distinct characteristics, and the Buddha chose to state the 
second ariya sacca in terms of dukkha rather than annica.  So presumably 
that must be the most helpful way to consider it?

Jonothan


 
442 From: amara chay   
Date: Sun Jun 11, 2000 6:42pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Dukkha vs Annica (was It's quite all right.)

 
  >From: "Jonothan Abbott" 
>Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Dukkha vs Annica (was It's quite all 
>right.)
>Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 13:17:06 GMT
>
>Amara,
>
>Many thanks for your informative reply.  I can see that the unfortunate
>incident regarding the 2 schoolboys was a condition for some useful
>reflection.  Would this be a level of maranasati (death as object of
>concentration), I wonder, or some other aspect of kusala?


Upon reflection I think there were both contemplation of death and the 
urgency of studying while one still has the opportunity to do so, and the 
characteristics that appear when one thinks of sati, the touches of the keys 
as you print, the sight of the screen, etc. even as I write and read here 
and now.  And the realization that there are more moments without sati than 
with, regretably!


>Yes, I do understand that dukkha (unsatisfactoriness) can only be 
>understood
>in the context of annica (impermanence).  But the two are nevertheless
>separate and distinct characteristics, and the Buddha chose to state the
>second ariya sacca in terms of dukkha rather than annica.  So presumably
>that must be the most helpful way to consider it?

According to the Tipitaka, unsatisfactoriness is dosa, of a certain degree.  
Dukkha is impermanence or subject to changes, arising and falling away, and 
dukkha dukkha is suffering.  You might check it with Khun Sujin as well, but 
as I remember, the dukkha in the first ariya sacca is impermanence and not 
suffering, even if suffering results from it.  In the tilakkhana as well, 
which are anicca, dukkha and anatta, stresses impermanence, not durable of 
enduring, and non-self or under no one's control.  Sometimes the Tipitaka 
uses terms that are not really the general usage, for example the word 
'loka' which in other contexts means 'world' is explained in a certain 
passage as 'that which falls away, destroyable'.  If you like I will ask 
Khun Sujin when we next meet, to make sure,

Amara

 
443 From: amara chay   
Date: Mon Jun 12, 2000 2:05am
Subject: Re: Dukkha vs Annica (was It's quite all right.)

 
  Just now I forgot to suggest you check it in the 'Summary' towards
the 
end of Part I, on <http://www.dhammastudy.com/>, advanced section, on 
the 4 ariya sacca dhamma, in the meantime,

Amara


> >Yes, I do understand that dukkha (unsatisfactoriness) can only be 
> >understood
> >in the context of annica (impermanence).  But the two are 
nevertheless
> >separate and distinct characteristics, and the Buddha chose to 
state the
> >second ariya sacca in terms of dukkha rather than annica.  So 
presumably
> >that must be the most helpful way to consider it?
> 
> According to the Tipitaka, unsatisfactoriness is dosa, of a certain 
degree.  
> Dukkha is impermanence or subject to changes, arising and falling 
away, and 
> dukkha dukkha is suffering.  You might check it with Khun Sujin as 
well, but 
> as I remember, the dukkha in the first ariya sacca is impermanence 
and not 
> suffering, even if suffering results from it.  In the tilakkhana as 
well, 
> which are anicca, dukkha and anatta, stresses impermanence, not 
durable of 
> enduring, and non-self or under no one's control.  Sometimes the 
Tipitaka 
> uses terms that are not really the general usage, for example the 
word 
> 'loka' which in other contexts means 'world' is explained in a 
certain 
> passage as 'that which falls away, destroyable'.  If you like I
will 
ask 
> Khun Sujin when we next meet, to make sure,
> 
> Amara
> 

 
444 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Mon Jun 12, 2000 3:01pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Dukkha vs Anicca

 
  >Just now I forgot to suggest you check it in the 'Summary' towards
>the
>end of Part I, on <http://www.dhammastudy.com/>, advanced section, on
>the 4 ariya sacca dhamma, in the meantime,


Amara,

Thanks for pointing me to this source.

I found the following in the section headed “All sankhara are dukkha” (which 
follows the section “All sankhara are impermanent”)—

All sankhara-dhamma arise and fall away whether they be good or bad citta, 
rupa that are beautiful or not, all arise and fall away alike.  This 
impermanence of arising and falling away is dukkha because [all sankhara] do 
not last ... sankhara are dukkha because they are impermanent.  When they 
arise, they fall away; they should not be taken for happiness.  Some may 
wonder why sankhara are dukkha when the citta can be pleasant, delightful 
and happy.  They are dukkha because the pleasant, delightful and happy citta 
is also impermanent.  Sankhara -dhamma, namely citta, cetasika and rupa, are 
all dukkha because they are all impermanent.[ends]

This confirms the close connection between anicca and dukkha.  But it is not 
quite the same as saying that dukkha means impermanent.  Not only are 
sankhara dhammas impermanent but they are also, because of that 
impermanence, unsatisfactory.  Both characteristics must be known.  And 
different beings have different accumulations as to which characteristic is 
the more apparent.

In an earlier message you said-
>According to the Tipitaka, unsatisfactoriness is dosa, of a certain 
>degree.[ends]
Could you refer us to the passage you have in mind?  Thanks.

Jonothan



 
445 From: Sarah Procter Abbott  
Date: Tue Jun 13, 2000 0:03am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Dead friend & maranasati

 
  Robert,

>I was interested that maranasati is more difficult
>than metta. It may depend also on accumulations? could
>some people be more inclined, have more past
>accumulations in maranasati than in metta? Khun sujin
>once said to me that maranasati can be like ones best
>friend. For some people it is certainly unsuitable at
>certain times- it can just condition dosa. But one of
>the reasons that it is  easier than anapanasati is
>because if there is any dosa one immediately realizes
>that one is on the wrong track. Still nothing is
>actually easy. Even giving , the most basic type of
>kusala, is usually mixed up with lobha - how much more
>so these more subtle ways of development.
>
You mention the dosa but what about lobha, what about moha? we are seldom on 
the right track...it's so easy to take one of these for being calmness and 
so easy to develop attachment to a practise of calmness or concentration 
rather than  developing rt understanding. K.Sujin suggested metta was easier 
because there are beings around us most the time, but not dead bodies. Just 
as metta cannot arise unless a bing is present, I wondered if she meant the 
same with maranasati but would have to check further as I hadn't heard this 
before and am not sure where to find relevant Tipitaka reference. You or 
Amara may know.

One thing for sure is that whenever there is the inclination to develop 
maranasati, metta or any other kind of kusala one can be pretty sure it's 
lobha with an idea of self lurking and no understanding of the present 
reality. It's like when we talk about India or Thailand or reading dh books 
or meditating as being more conducive to the practice or development of 
satipatthana....no understanding of seeing, hearing etc and the latent or 
not so latent clinging to self is lurking...

>Well, yes understanding realities is always the best.
>But the path depends on many complex factors; parami
>developed at different levels. It seems hasty to
>negelct any area of kusala- even if it is difficult to
>understand properly.
>Robert
>
So consider and develop more understanding of all realities without 
selection.....and it depends on conditions what will appear.. but no use in 
minding or having the idea of developing any particular kind of kusala.... 
not easy..because of the clinging to self and clinging to kusala.

Sarah
>
I'd like to follow up w/ K.S. about how maranasait can be like one's best 
friend - I haven't heard this reference.

 
446 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Mon Jun 12, 2000 5:51pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Dead friend & maranasati

 
  Dear Sarah,
just one point. You said that metta cannot be
developed without beings been present.

Do you mean that one has to be in their presence?
If so I think that is incorrect. Metta takes a
concept, a person, as object. But the person does not
have to be in the same room or even same country for
metta towards them to arise.
Robert


 
447 From: amara chay   
Date: Mon Jun 12, 2000 5:22pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Dukkha vs Anicca

 
  >All sankhara-dhamma arise and fall away whether they be good or bad citta,
>rupa that are beautiful or not, all arise and fall away alike.  This
>impermanence of arising and falling away is dukkha because [all sankhara] 
>do
>not last ... sankhara are dukkha because they are impermanent.  When they
>arise, they fall away; they should not be taken for happiness.  Some may
>wonder why sankhara are dukkha when the citta can be pleasant, delightful
>and happy.  They are dukkha because the pleasant, delightful and happy 
>citta
>is also impermanent.  Sankhara -dhamma, namely citta, cetasika and rupa, 
>are
>all dukkha because they are all impermanent.[ends]
>
>This confirms the close connection between anicca and dukkha.  But it is 
>not
>quite the same as saying that dukkha means impermanent.  Not only are
>sankhara dhammas impermanent but they are also, because of that
>impermanence, unsatisfactory.  Both characteristics must be known.  And
>different beings have different accumulations as to which characteristic is
>the more apparent.


Jonothan,

I think you must condider it more deeply and in accordance with the fact 
that lobha and dosa can never arise simultaneously so that lobha or pleasure 
or satisfactoriness cannot arise with dosa or displeasure or 
unsatisfactoriness.  Therefore to think that dukkha as a character universal 
to all things can be both is not logical, while all things are indeed 
impermanent, they all arise and fall away, therefore all things are dukkha 
that are subject to changes, but not all are dukkha dukkha or sufferings.  
You might ask Khun Sujin about it next time.


>In an earlier message you said-
> >According to the Tipitaka, unsatisfactoriness is dosa, of a certain
> >degree.[ends]
>Could you refer us to the passage you have in mind?  Thanks.


One of the places you could look would be at the end of ch. 10, Citta (9-16) 
Part IIa of the 'Summary'.  Dosa is not only anger or fear or sorrow but 
also the slightest unpleasant feeling or unsatisfactoriness, even uneasy 
sympathy in another's emotions.  You might also ask Khun Sujin to explain it 
further, One can easily identify strong lobha or dosa, but the ones that 
accompany us from the moment we wake up to the moment we fall asleep are 
much harder to discern. If we do not desire pleasant feeling, why do we wash 
and dress in the morning, if we do not dislike dirt and unclean clothings, 
why do we change and put on things we feel comfortable in on?  We are pushed 
and pulled by lobha and dosa all day long as part of daily life, we are not 
even conscious of it.  Only instants of sati can show us what things really 
are, which is why they are so precious, at whatever level they arise.

Amara

 
448 From: amara chay   
Date: Mon Jun 12, 2000 5:55pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Dukkha vs Anicca

 
  the Buddha chose to state the second ariya sacca in terms of dukkha rather 
than annica.  So presumably that must be the most helpful way to consider 
it?


Jonothan,

The term Dukkha is comparable to the expression unendurable or unenduring, 
it can be both something hard to endure; or something perishable, 
unenduring, something that does not endure.  It is not only impermanent in 
the sense of being there only for a time to be passed on as in temporary 
usage but also arises and falls away completely, at each instant, never to 
come again.  Dukkha dukkha is explained because it is differentiated from 
dukkha, otherwise they would not have distinguished between the two.  Dosa 
is characterised by both while lobha only dukka and not dukkha dukkha.

I don't know if this helps,

Amara


 
449 From: Sarah Procter Abbott  
Date: Wed Jun 14, 2000 1:34am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] marana to metta

 
  Robert,

I have heard Kh Sujin say that the time for metta is when one is with other 
people and as a general rule I think this is when it can and does arise, but 
I may have misunderstood this to mean one must be with other people. 
Obviously there can be metta while speaking on the phone or writing to 
others at the computer, for example, because, as you say, a concept, a 
person is the object. Like dana, however, it must be practised and developed 
in daily life naturally and there must be right understanding(at level of 
samatha or vipassana) for it to develop. I think the point was that it 
cannot be developed by sitting alone in a quiet room 'willing' it to develop 
or just repeating 'may all beings be happy...'

Thanks for yr correction...We can start a list of Cambodia topics..metta, 
marana. I find the emphasis on welfare of others below to be helpful.

'As to characteristic, etc., loving kindness is characterized here as 
promoting the aspect of welfare. Its function is to prefer welfare. it is 
manifested as the removal of annoyance. its proximate cause is seeing 
lovableness in beings. it succeeds when it makes ill-will subside, and it 
fails when it produces (selfish) affection.'

Vis (ch 1X,93) p274 (quoted in Cetasikas by Nina Van G where she gives a lot 
more helpful detail about metta)
Sarah

>Dear Sarah,
>just one point. You said that metta cannot be
>developed without beings been present.
>
>Do you mean that one has to be in their presence?
>If so I think that is incorrect. Metta takes a
>concept, a person, as object. But the person does not
>have to be in the same room or even same country for
>metta towards them to arise.
>Robert
>

 
450 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Tue Jun 13, 2000 10:04pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Dukkha vs Anicca

 
  Amara,

Thanks for your comments and suggestions.

>I think you must consider it more deeply and in accordance with the fact
>that lobha and dosa can never arise simultaneously so that lobha or 
>pleasure
>or satisfactoriness cannot arise with dosa or displeasure or
>unsatisfactoriness.. .. ..

I have not previously come across the terms satisfactoriness and 
unsatisfactoriness used to describe particular aspects of lobha and dosa 
respectively, and personally I do not find these terms helpful in this 
context.  In any event, unsatisfactoriness as you have used it here must 
mean something other than the dukkha which is a characteristic of all 
sankhara dhammas.


>One of the places you could look would be at the end of ch. 10, Citta 
>(9-16)
>Part IIa of the 'Summary'.

This is an interesting discussion of Vedana but I could not found anything 
directly on the present issues.

>The term Dukkha is comparable to the expression unendurable or unenduring,
>it can be both something hard to endure; or something perishable,
>unenduring, something that does not endure.  It is not only impermanent in
>the sense of being there only for a time to be passed on as in temporary
>usage but also arises and falls away completely, at each instant, never to
>come again.

The point is that this Dukkha is a characteristic separate and distinct from 
the other characteristic of anicca, so impermanence should not be the focus. 
  As I understand it, the focus should be on insubstantiality (as you have 
mentioned) and worthlessness.  For some reason you seem to find the usual 
term "unsatisfactory" in this context to be, well, unsatisfactory!

In the end, of course, what is important is the direct understanding rather 
than the words used.

Jonothan


 
451 From: amara chay   
Date: Wed Jun 14, 2000 2:38am
Subject: Re: Dukkha vs Anicca

 
  > I have not previously come across the terms satisfactoriness and 
> unsatisfactoriness used to describe particular aspects of lobha and 
dosa 
> respectively, and personally I do not find these terms helpful in 
this 
> context.  In any event, unsatisfactoriness as you have used it here 
must 
> mean something other than the dukkha which is a characteristic of 
all 
> sankhara dhammas.


Jonothan,

That is why Dukkha is unenduring or hard to endure while dukkha
dukkha 
would mean a degree of dosa, while unsatisfactoriness is another 
degree (as a torrent is to a drop of rain?  But in the end with the 
eradication of dosa, there would not be even hint of moisture left!).
 

> >One of the places you could look would be at the end of ch. 10, 
Citta 
> >(9-16)
> >Part IIa of the 'Summary'.
> 
> This is an interesting discussion of Vedana but I could not found 
anything 
> directly on the present issues.


It talks about dosa that arises even as sympathetic sorrow.

 
> >The term Dukkha is comparable to the expression unendurable or 
unenduring,
> >it can be both something hard to endure; or something perishable,
> >unenduring, something that does not endure.  It is not only 
impermanent in
> >the sense of being there only for a time to be passed on as in 
temporary
> >usage but also arises and falls away completely, at each instant, 
never to
> >come again.
> 
> The point is that this Dukkha is a characteristic separate and 
distinct from 
> the other characteristic of anicca, so impermanence should not be 
the focus. 
>   As I understand it, the focus should be on insubstantiality (as 
you have 
> mentioned) and worthlessness.  For some reason you seem to find the 
usual 
> term "unsatisfactory" in this context to be, well, unsatisfactory!
> 
> In the end, of course, what is important is the direct
understanding 
rather 
> than the words used.
> 
> Jonothan


I agree that in the end it is the study of the reality itself which
is 
most important to the accumulation of panna.  Still, to me lobha and 
chanda can be very close and arise one with the other, but 
unsatisfactoriness is certain to be dosa except for the arahanta, who 
would recognize the qualities with kiriya citta and therefore be 
completely indifferent.  Once one is not satisfied, one cannot be 
indifferent, I don't think.  As we discussed the other day, one of
the 
vipassana nana is to be indifferent before kusala nad akusala alike, 
but we are not there yet!!!

Amara

 
452 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Wed Jun 14, 2000 9:46am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Dukkha vs Anicca

 
  Amara,

While our differences remain, I hope you have found this exchange as useful 
as I have.

Sadly, noone else on the list seems to find this point of interest.

I would like to mention at his point that Sarah and I will be away for 2 
weeks plus as from this coming Friday, and we do not expect to have access 
to the internet during that period, except perhaps very occasionally.  So 
don't be surprised if you don't hear from us for a while.

Jonothan


>From: "amara chay" 
>Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Dukkha vs Anicca
>Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 18:38:03 -0000
>
>
> > I have not previously come across the terms satisfactoriness and
> > unsatisfactoriness used to describe particular aspects of lobha and
>dosa
> > respectively, and personally I do not find these terms helpful in
>this
> > context.  In any event, unsatisfactoriness as you have used it here
>must
> > mean something other than the dukkha which is a characteristic of
>all
> > sankhara dhammas.
>
>
>Jonothan,
>
>That is why Dukkha is unenduring or hard to endure while dukkha
>dukkha
>would mean a degree of dosa, while unsatisfactoriness is another
>degree (as a torrent is to a drop of rain?  But in the end with the
>eradication of dosa, there would not be even hint of moisture left!).
>
>
> > >One of the places you could look would be at the end of ch. 10,
>Citta
> > >(9-16)
> > >Part IIa of the 'Summary'.
> >
> > This is an interesting discussion of Vedana but I could not found
>anything
> > directly on the present issues.
>
>
>It talks about dosa that arises even as sympathetic sorrow.
>
>
> > >The term Dukkha is comparable to the expression unendurable or
>unenduring,
> > >it can be both something hard to endure; or something perishable,
> > >unenduring, something that does not endure.  It is not only
>impermanent in
> > >the sense of being there only for a time to be passed on as in
>temporary
> > >usage but also arises and falls away completely, at each instant,
>never to
> > >come again.
> >
> > The point is that this Dukkha is a characteristic separate and
>distinct from
> > the other characteristic of anicca, so impermanence should not be
>the focus.
> >   As I understand it, the focus should be on insubstantiality (as
>you have
> > mentioned) and worthlessness.  For some reason you seem to find the
>usual
> > term "unsatisfactory" in this context to be, well, unsatisfactory!
> >
> > In the end, of course, what is important is the direct
>understanding
>rather
> > than the words used.
> >
> > Jonothan
>
>
>I agree that in the end it is the study of the reality itself which
>is
>most important to the accumulation of panna.  Still, to me lobha and
>chanda can be very close and arise one with the other, but
>unsatisfactoriness is certain to be dosa except for the arahanta, who
>would recognize the qualities with kiriya citta and therefore be
>completely indifferent.  Once one is not satisfied, one cannot be
>indifferent, I don't think.  As we discussed the other day, one of
>the
>vipassana nana is to be indifferent before kusala nad akusala alike,
>but we are not there yet!!!
>
>Amara
>
>
>


 
453 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Wed Jun 14, 2000 6:30pm
Subject: sati , comment s on tape

 
  Jonathan kindly sent me tapes of the discuusions in
Bangkok earlier this month.
There is an interesting part about a young man who is
keen to have sati and is curious about what it is. In
the past he went on meditation retreats and felt that
he could see progress and awareness growing, but over
the last few years he has started to study Abhidhamma
and tried to understand anatta.
Apparently he understands that anatta is the key to
buddhism but he cant fathom why he is not having
direct experinece of realities yet.
Khun sujin explained that in the past he was always
trying to get something but true sati comes with
detachment - it is not about getting something at all.
khun Ell commented that he told her that he "just
wants to have sati one time" than he will be
confident.
Again this is lobha - and in the beginning sati, even
true sati, is too weak to stand out.
 Amara made the comment, which I think is pertinent,
that he was looking for some banner or flashing light
which will say "yes, here it is this is sati, now you
know whaT IT is".(I paraphrase her words) Of course
until sati has developed sufficiently and reached the
level of satipatthana stages it is not so clear.  

khun sujin noted that it is understanding that is
important. -Thus  someone may talk about anatta but
unless they really grasp that there is no one, nothing
, no way to control or make anything arise, one will
have these misunderstandings and desires that block
the path. 
Ivan noted that even when someone is saying they want
understanding or sati they should realize that at
those moments there is just cetasikas and cittas
arising, no self.

Let me know if I misrepresented anyone where I
summarised the discussion.
Robert


 
454 From: Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala   
Date: Wed Jun 14, 2000 7:46pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] sati , comment s on tape

 
  Dear Jonathan and Robert,
Many thanks for your interesting observation about the young man and his
"attempt" to "acquire" sati, which took him farther away from understanding.
I missed the discussions in Bkk  2 weeks ago because I misunderstood the
directions to Khunying Noparat's house. But last week I did finally meet
Achaan Suchin for the first time and went with her to the center in
Thonburi. She is a fantastic teacher who is ever so patient and
understanding of her students, even ones like me who are just starting in
kindergarten, so to speak. The other students are full of encouragement and
I can't thank everyone enough for all they have given me.

But, I noticed that you mentioned tapes of the meetings in Bkk. Is there
anyone here in Bkk who might loan me those tapes to that I may copy them?
Replaying the tapes of my first lesson with Achaan was wonderful for me and
helped me to understand a lot better what was being said. At the time of the
meeting, however, I felt totally overwhelmed and so the tapes are a
wonderful teaching tool.

Many thanks,
Betty
----- Original Message -----
From: Robert Kirkpatrick 
Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] sati , comment s on tape


>
> Jonathan kindly sent me tapes of the discuusions in
> Bangkok earlier this month.
> There is an interesting part about a young man who is
> keen to have sati and is curious about what it is. In
> the past he went on meditation retreats and felt that
> he could see progress and awareness growing, but over
> the last few years he has started to study Abhidhamma
> and tried to understand anatta.
> Apparently he understands that anatta is the key to
> buddhism but he cant fathom why he is not having
> direct experinece of realities yet.
> Khun sujin explained that in the past he was always
> trying to get something but true sati comes with
> detachment - it is not about getting something at all.
> khun Ell commented that he told her that he "just
> wants to have sati one time" than he will be
> confident.
> Again this is lobha - and in the beginning sati, even
> true sati, is too weak to stand out.
>  Amara made the comment, which I think is pertinent,
> that he was looking for some banner or flashing light
> which will say "yes, here it is this is sati, now you
> know whaT IT is".(I paraphrase her words) Of course
> until sati has developed sufficiently and reached the
> level of satipatthana stages it is not so clear.
>
> khun sujin noted that it is understanding that is
> important. -Thus  someone may talk about anatta but
> unless they really grasp that there is no one, nothing
> , no way to control or make anything arise, one will
> have these misunderstandings and desires that block
> the path.
> Ivan noted that even when someone is saying they want
> understanding or sati they should realize that at
> those moments there is just cetasikas and cittas
> arising, no self.
>
> Let me know if I misrepresented anyone where I
> summarised the discussion.
> Robert
>
 
  
 
455 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Wed Jun 14, 2000 8:32pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] sati , comment s on tape

 
  Dear Betty,
I am so pleased that everyone is helping you now in
Bangkok. 
I truly respect those like you who have the
accumulations, patience, and interest to develop this
most difficult of paths. Yesterday I received the
translation of the Buddhavamsa commentary, the
Madhuratthavilasini, from the Pali text society. Here
the Buddha's past lives when he met other Buddhas are
detailed as well as the lives of these other Buddhas.
It is inspiring to read about the paramis they
developed over incalculably long periods of time. When
developing wisdom in countless lives they went from
wise men to wise men asking them numerous questions -
what is skilful, what is unskilful and more. They gave
up kingdoms, wives, children, their eyes, even their
lives over and over again so that they could become
Buddhas and help people like us.

Another point on the tapes: Jonathan said that if that
young man kept listening and contemplating Abhidhamma
than he was making the conditions for right
understanding to grow. But Khun Sujin said it also
depended on the type of cittas - Thus someone could
study but if they had the motivation of getting
something for self then there were no real conditions
for wisdom to accumulate. 

"I noticed that you mentioned tapes of the
> meetings in Bkk. Is there
> anyone here in Bkk who might loan me those tapes to
> that I may copy them?"

They have a thousand or more tapes in Thai language in
bangkok but English ones are harder to find.I have
quite a number of tapes here in Japan and will send
you an assortment (I am a little slow sometimes). Just
send me your address.
Robert


 
456 From: Mike Potter   
Date: Wed Jun 14, 2000 8:49pm
Subject: Re: About Concentration (was: re: abhidhamma in daily life)

 
  Dear Theresa,

Thank you for your comments.  I no longer visit this list regularly.  
Please excuse my late response.

>In my own practice, I notice that the strong the Big-C gained from
>the Samadhi practice helps me gain easier and faster the small-C
>during Vipassana practice, and thus, I can keep Vipassana Mindfulness
>going continuously for a longer period of time.. Yet, I can use the
>small-C alone to strengthen the small-C without the need to switch
>over to practicing Samadhi for more big-C..

This is true in my practice as well.  I find it to be skillful means, 
especially on retreat, to alternate between Big-C and small-C until 
conditions are present to support the arising of small-C immediately 
upon focusing my awareness in the present moment.  As you say, the 
Big-C conditions an easier and faster entry into small-C in Vipassana 
practice until those conditions arise.  But my principal practice is 
Vispassana and I use Samadhi a merely a "tool" to support a deepening 
awareness through Insight.

>You referred to "awakening"..
>I guess you stress the development of Insight..

Yes.

>For me, the small-C is directly linked to and helps develop Insight..
>If we have the small-C steady, we can keep Mindfulness going and
>developing Insight in any situation. ((..While living.. During our
>normal life.. Even in stressful situations.. When our mind screams
>for help, wants to give up everything and quit..)) For me, the big-C,
>which is useful to help gain and keep the small-C during
>Vipassana/Insight, does not contribute directly to the development
>and growth of Insight..

I concur.

>"CONDITIONS".. Kamma.. that's our ruler.. :-))
>We don't control our meditation, but we are in it.. Anatta.. :-))
>Let us relax and be mindful.. :-))
>Moment by moment, we walk the Noble Path..
>We must experience the three Lakkhanas in order to go toward
>Nibbana.. :-))

Well said.  You may not use all of the terminology of a scholar, but 
the insights you have gained through your direct experience are clear 
from your comments.  While the "official" terminology may be helpful 
in communicating concepts with others, and I won't dissuade you from 
learning it, your manner of expression is fresh and clear - and more 
importantly, is based on your own experience - so don't lose that 
quality in search of the "right words". :-)

> Only seven STAGES ?? There are about 14 or 19 LEVELS of Insight.. I
> don't have the Insight Levels memorized, and I don't recall the 
> exact numbers of Insight Levels.. Venerable Mahasi listed them in
> his books, somewhere.. Either STAGES or LEVELS, let us move forward
> with Mindfulness, Concentration and Insight.. :-))

The Dhamma, like a hologram, can be gleaned from many angles - each 
"view" being a gateway to the whole.  The seven stages to which I 
referred are the seven stages of purification set forth in the 
Visuddhimagga.  These stages, along with the related "insight 
knowleges," are listed on the website I maintain, The Ganges Sangha.
See http://www.geocities.com/ganges_sangha/Purification.htm

For additional information, read The Progress of Insight - A Modern 
treatise on Buddhist Satipatthana Meditation by Ven. Mahasi Sayadaw.  
It may be read online at
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/progress.html

> Have you thought of the term "Living Meditation" ??
> Living with Mindfulness.. :-))
> Mindfulness is life, Life is mindfulness..
> Oh well, that's my goal.. :-))

Yes!! "Living Meditation" IS Mindfulness, and it is to be practiced
in all postures - at all times!  As the Buddha said in the 
Satipatthana Sutta:

"And again, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu in going forward and in going back, 
[he] applies clear comprehension; in looking straight ahead and in 
looking away from the front, [he] applies clear comprehension; 
in wearing the three robes, and in carrying the bowl, [he] applies 
clear comprehension; in eating, drinking, chewing and savoring, [he] 
applies clear comprehension; in obeying the calls of nature, [he] 
applies clear comprehension; in walking, standing, sitting, falling 
asleep, waking, speaking, and in keeping silent, [he] applies clear 
comprehension."

So mindfulness it is not to be practiced by JUST sitting on a
cushion; yet sitting meditation is also a skillful means to develop 
Right Effort, Right Mindfulness and Right Concentration.  It has been 
my experience that a regular sitting meditation practice supports a 
deep level of Insight practice in everyday life.  Each person has to 
find what works for them, based on their own unique accumulations.

> Samadhi and Vipassana are both "tools" to help us walk the Noble
> Path.. Let us encourage each of us to walk.. Let us not worry much
> about falling off the cliff, because there are no cliff and no side
> to the Noble Path.. hehehe..

And no "one" who is mindful - just mindfulness rising and falling ... 


With metta,

Mike

 
457 From: Alan Weller   
Date: Wed Jun 14, 2000 9:04pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] marana to metta

 
  Robert and Sarah,
As I understand metta has to be towards real beings, present or not i.e you
cannot have metta to a fictitious character as in a film or novel or statue,
but you could have metta towards someone on the internet.
----- Original Message -----
From: Sarah Procter Abbott 
Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 12:34 AM
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] marana to metta


> Robert,
>
> I have heard Kh Sujin say that the time for metta is when one is with
other
> people and as a general rule I think this is when it can and does arise,
but
> I may have misunderstood this to mean one must be with other people.
> Obviously there can be metta while speaking on the phone or writing to
> others at the computer, for example, because, as you say, a concept, a
> person is the object. Like dana, however, it must be practised and
developed
> in daily life naturally and there must be right understanding(at level of
> samatha or vipassana) for it to develop. I think the point was that it
> cannot be developed by sitting alone in a quiet room 'willing' it to
develop
> or just repeating 'may all beings be happy...'
>
> Thanks for yr correction...We can start a list of Cambodia topics..metta,
> marana. I find the emphasis on welfare of others below to be helpful.
>
> 'As to characteristic, etc., loving kindness is characterized here as
> promoting the aspect of welfare. Its function is to prefer welfare. it is
> manifested as the removal of annoyance. its proximate cause is seeing
> lovableness in beings. it succeeds when it makes ill-will subside, and it
> fails when it produces (selfish) affection.'
>
> Vis (ch 1X,93) p274 (quoted in Cetasikas by Nina Van G where she gives a
lot
> more helpful detail about metta)
> Sarah
>
> >Dear Sarah,
> >just one point. You said that metta cannot be
> >developed without beings been present.
> >
> >Do you mean that one has to be in their presence?
> >If so I think that is incorrect. Metta takes a
> >concept, a person, as object. But the person does not
> >have to be in the same room or even same country for
> >metta towards them to arise.
> >Robert
> >

 
458 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Wed Jun 14, 2000 9:33pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] marana to metta

 
  dear Alan,
Interesting point. In the Visuddhimagga it also notes
that a monk was developing metea to his teacher. But
he didnt know the teacher had died - it is said that
the he failed because of this. This is talking about
development to the stage of JHNAn though, so i
wondered if there could still be moments of metta to a
dead person? Perhaps not. The vissudhmagga also notes
that we can have dosa to inanimate objects but not
metta. 
I always wondered about metta to characters in a film
- sometimes I feel touched by a movie, some emotion is
present. Sometimes one feels something that resembles
compassion? It all shows how difficult kusala is , how
hard to be sure, how rapidly cittas change, and it
shows the omniscience of the Buddha that he
comprehended it all.


--- Alan Weller <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/post?protectID=> wrote:
> Robert and Sarah,
> As I understand metta has to be towards real beings,
> present or not i.e you
> cannot have metta to a fictitious character as in a
> film or novel or statue,
> but you could have metta towards someone on the
> internet.


 
459 From: Theresa   
Date: Wed Jun 14, 2000 10:48pm
Subject: Fwd: Some advices..

 
  Hello all,

Here is a message posted the dhamma list..
I hope you like it.. 

Theresa.

========================================

From: "Huang Jing Rui" 
Subject: Some advices... Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 00:33:07 +0800 
Dear friends, 


Several days ago, due to the Global Conference on Buddhism, several 
kind  and wise Venerables had arrived at Singapore.  Here, I pick 4 
of the  Venerables...and share with all what I had heard from them.  
=)  Pls take  note that what I'd typed below may not be the exact 
words of what the  Venerables had said.  I hope that I have 
successfully brought out, at  least, the essence of what they meant.  
However, pls do not place much  trust in my memory and understanding 
of their teachings.  Whatever you find  relevant and useful, pls keep 
them in mind and abide by them.  Whatever you  find irrelevant and 
doubtful, pls cast them away.  =) 

PS:  If you find them long, pls don't delete.  Just read one per 
day.  =)   They might be useful to you. 

With regards, 
Jing Rui 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~ Ven.  K. Sri Dhammanada: 


1) After hearing my speech, if you feel happy, it is not me who 
caused your happiness.  It is you, upon listening to my speech, 
arouses happiness in  
yourself.  If you feel unhappy after hearing my speech, it is not me 
who  caused the unhappiness.  It is you, upon listening to my speech, 
arouses  unhappiness in yourself. 



Ven. Tenzin Palmo: 



1) It is good that you have started to learn the Dharma when you're 
so young.  Now after hearing all the  Dharma talks, go home, and 
PRACTICE  
HARD.  The Dharma is very simple.  But it is not easy.  Simple and 
easy are  different.  It is not so easy to practice.  You will 
require patience and  perseverance. 



Claude Anshin Thomas: 



1) We are all interconnected together.  The elements that our body is 
made up of are the SAME elements that make up the Earth!  The stars 
are in me.   
The clouds are in me.  The grass and the trees are in me.  The Earth 
is in  me.  :) 



2) You can learn something from the experiences in my life, because 
your own experiences are as dramatic to you as my experiences are to 
me. 




3) A doctor asked Anshin, "In my work, sometimes I give drugs (such 
as painkillers) to my patients, to help them relieve their pain and 
suffering.  
However, I know that such drugs when taken on the long term, 
contributes  to the shortening of the patient's lifespan.  As I'm a 
Buddhist, I'm often  in a dilemma on whether what I'm doing is 
correct." 

Anshin answered, "I cannot tell you this is right and that is 
wrong.....Do  not fill your mind with "shoulds" and "should 
nots".....Now, start to  practice meditation.  Take note of every 
moment, and live in the present  moment.  In the situation, observe 
the conditions and you will understand  what to do......We have to 
take up the responsibility of making decisions  and choices, and not 
to look for an instruction/law to rely upon." 

**Side Note: 
A teacher of mine added this remark, "The problem with the doctor is, 
he  thinks of not making mistakes instead of taking up the 
responsibilities for  the mistakes he makes." ** 



4) "Do you know where the Buddha is?"  Anshin asked. We all shook our 
heads. 
Pointing at the space in front of him, he said to me,"Come and sit 
here.   Come."  Nervously I walked over and sat at the space he 
pointed. "Here is Buddha."  he said as he pointed to me. "Here is 
Buddha."  he said as he pointed to the others. "Here is Buddha."  he 
said as he pointed to the table, the bed,  the.....etc. "Everywhere 
is Buddha.  Everywhere is temple." As Anshin rattled on, I started to 
feel uneasy..and during a short pause in  his speech, I immediately 
seized the chance to slip back to my own seat.   Everybody 
laughs.  :P Surprised, he asked, "Why did you go 
back?" "Errr...." "Were you frightened?"  he asked in a concerned 
tone. "Errr...not really frightened....." I looked nervously at him 
and sensed a kind of concern and encouragement  from his eyes.  
Plucking my courage, I answered, "I feel.......out of  
place." "Oh..OUT of place!" he exclaimed with slight surprise. Gently 
and slowly, he said, "I hope you will slowly feel IN place.  :)   
Because everywhere is your home.  Everywhere is Buddha." 



5) Anshin places a small box on his palm.  "TRY to take it out of my 
hand." he said. 
My friend reaches out for the box and picks it up. "No....no."  
Anshin stopped her, "You didn't listen carefully.  I  said....TRY to 
take it out." My friend looked confused.  She reached out for the box 
and slowly picked  it up again.. "No...:)  I said TRY."  Anshin 
smiled. My friend was even more blurrrr...she reached out for the box 
and couldn't  decide whether to take it out or not. A broad grin 
appeared on Anshin's face. "You see..it is impossible.  :)  There is 
no such thing as TRY to  do....there is only DO or NOT DO." 



6) You feel that you are different from me.  You wish that you will 
change and become like me.  In this way, we are already separate. 




7) The major part of Zen practice is Meditation.  Meditation, 
however, is not just about sitting meditation.  It also consists of 
walking meditation,  
sleeping meditation, eating meditation, telephone meditation......In 
fact,  LIFE IS MEDITATION.  They are not separate. 



Ajahn Brahmavamso: 



1) People learn meditation for different reasons.  Some meditate so 
that the mind will be peaceful.  Some meditate so as to gain 
insight.  It is  
just like two people climbing a high mountain.  One climbs with the 
wish to  view the spectacular sights from the top of the mountain, 
while the other  climbs to breathe the fresh air on top.  However, 
upon reaching the top,  both men will be able to: 1) view the sights; 
2) breathe the fresh air.  So  is meditation.  No matter whether one 
sits so that the mind will be  peaceful, or so as to gain insight, 
when the meditation is good, one will  experience both peace and 
insight. 



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

No dependence upon letters or words, but direct pointing to the 
source of  human mind! No stepping up any ladders, but mounting 
straight to the  Buddha-land. 

--Bodhidharma (d.534)

 
460 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Wed Jun 14, 2000 11:54pm
Subject: About the practice (was About Concentration)

 
  Mike,
I read your post with interest.  There are a number of points worth 
discussing in it, but I would like to take just one.  You said—

>So mindfulness it is not to be practiced by JUST sitting on a
>cushion; yet sitting meditation is also a skilful means to develop
>Right Effort, Right Mindfulness and Right Concentration.  It has been
>my experience that a regular sitting meditation practice supports a
>deep level of Insight practice in everyday life.

May I suggest that your experience has been based on the premise that the 
practice must begin with some form of sitting practice, and proceeds from 
there.  This of course is how most people take the teachings to be.  Any 
person who begins that way will naturally have the experience you have 
recounted.  But does this premise find support in the Tripitika?  Granted 
there are many references to solitude and sitting at the roots of trees etc. 
  But a skilful reading of the whole Tripitika shows clearly that the Buddha 
urged his listeners, both monks and laypeople, to develop the path in the 
course of the life they were living from day to day.  He did not urge them 
to set aside time from their daily routine for practice, nor did he nominate 
any special time or place of practice as being prime time for the 
development of the path.

Implicit in the Buddha’s teaching is the potential for awareness at some 
level of the reality arising at the present moment, without the need for a 
particular form of practice.  If one understands the teachings in this 
light, one’s experience is bound to be wholly different from that you have 
given.  And one of the most important differences is the absence of any idea 
of being able to make awareness arise by undertaking a certain form of 
practice.

It is understanding the conditions for the arising of awareness at a time 
not of one’s own choosing that is the key to the development of the path.
Jonothan


 
461 From: Theresa   
Date: Thu Jun 15, 2000 5:59am
Subject: About practices/teachings (was re: About Concentration)

 
  Hello Mike,

Would you please explain the "link" (similarities?) between the 
Vipassana practice as I have known, learned and practiced, and 
the "eaching" (wrong term?) of Sujin Boriharnwanaket.. I ask for your 
explanations, because it seems that you, Mike, have knowledge of both 
practices/teachings: Sujin's and Mahasi's "techniques/teachings" 
(terms?).. 

As I know, there is only one Buddha's teaching.. I guess that the 
confusion or the difference in views is only because of the students' 
or meditators' comprehension of Buddha's teaching.. 

Robert sent me three books: (1) "Realities and Concepts", (2) "Taking 
Refuge in Buddhism", and (3) "Buddhism In Daily Life".. I am a very 
slow reader, so it will be sometimes before I will get through all of 
them.. Besides, I must spend time with learning something to re-new 
my old career so that I can look for a job to feed myself and my 
sons.. I have read few areas from the three books, and found that 
what I have practiced, experienced and understood is not at all 
different from what Sujin Boriharnwanaket explained.. In fact, Sujin 
explains extremely clear what I experienced in my own practice and 
what I learned from my teachers and books of other respectful 
Venerables/commentators.. 

Q # 1 : Why do discussions on this list seem to stress on 
the "differences in views", whereas it seems to me that there is no 
difference ??

Sitting is one of the four natural postures of a human being, and so 
Sitting Meditation is an off-course.. During Sitting Meditation, the 
body is not moving and the eyes are probably closed, and so, the 
number of distractions reduces drastically.. The benefits of Sitting 
Meditation is appreciated because the reduced number of 
distractions.. Sitting Meditation is a good condition for the arise 
of Concentration.. I have followed the Vipassana practice taught by 
Venerable Mahasi, and meditated in all 4 postures (ie, sitting, 
standing, walking, and lying-down).. If we are mindful, we should be 
able to know when "Self" is present and when "Self-less" is present.. 
When Mindfulness is continuous, there is no chance for "Self".. 

Q # 2 : Is there a belief that Sitting Meditation is needless or 
useless ?? (( I believe that it is crucial to not miss Sitting 
Meditation as part of our practice, because we sit many times during 
the day, in a car, on a chair, in bed, on the floor, on the 
meditation cushion, at work, at home, on a stool, in the yard, 
etc. )) 

Q # 3 : What does your own personal experience tell you about the 
suggestion that meditators should not bother with Sitting Meditation 
at all but they should simply carry on their lives as life goes ??  
(( My own experience tells me that Sitting Meditation helps condition 
my mind so that Concentration and Mindfulness would be more 
continuous and gained much easier during my normal-living daily 
practice.. In terms of Anatta, Sitting Meditation is a *condition* to 
help arise Concentation and Insight, and eventually, meditators can 
gain both Concentration and Insight -- at the drop of a hat -- or as 
soon as a person sits down any place anywhere.. )) 

Anatta is one of the three Lakkhanas; Meditators must experience and 
understand Anatta.. I agree.. When communicating, languages ask 
for "subject + verb" to make a sentence.. I find it challenging to 
describe Dhammas or true experiences without using the subject "I" 
and "concepts" (even Pali terms or whatever).. Realities, true 
realities, can be known only by the meditator ("I", "concept") right 
in the mindful moment whenever the right condition (another concept) 
happens.. 

Q # 4 : Have you found a good way to communicate your experiences 
(realities) as dana to dhamma friends, if they have not experienced 
the same realities as you did ??  (( By the way, I am very happy that 
you understand what I wrote with my ppor layman terms.. :-)) 
Dhammas/realities can be easily understood by those who have similar 
experiences.. Before I gain certain experience, I find others' 
experiences my encouragement, because they are proofs to me that 
Buddha's Dhamma still work and increase my Faith on Triple Gem.. I do 
hope that all meditators can see others' experiences as encouragement 
and nothing more.. ))

My questions are not directed to "correctness" or judgment of any 
kind.. The concern is on how discussions between dhamma friends could 
be most benificial to all of us.. I hope discussions on this list 
could help create the right conditions for Sila - Concentration - 
Insight (the Noble Path) to arise in each and everyone of us, 
naturally and continuously.. 

I love to loose to discussions as long as my friends and I, somehow, 
become more mindful of ourselves.. I have written messages with a 
hope that my writings will be a condition to remind Mindfulness (the 
good sankhara) in all of us.. I'm grateful that members of this list 
(and you are one of them) have shown Metta in the posted messages.. 

May we be mindful to know when anatta is present and when it's not..

With metta,

Theresa.

 
462 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Thu Jun 15, 2000 9:22am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] sati , comment s on tape

 
  Betty,

I am glad you were eventually able to meet Khun Sujin.  I am reminded of my 
experience when I first arrived in Bangkok, and the long trek by bus(es) 
across town to find Wat Bovorn and join the weekly talks.  It almost didn't 
happen!

I notice that Robert has kindly offered to send you some tapes of previous 
discussions (anumodana, Robert), and I am sure you will benefit from these.  
However, as you are in Bangkok, I urge you to take every opportunity to meet 
Khun Sujin and others and to join in live discussions and ask your own 
questions.  Because there is no substitute for participating in this way.  
The tapes are a useful resource for those times when you cannot take part in 
discussions yourself.

My experience in Bangkok has always been that if you show interest, the 
occasions happen.  And please feel free to raise anything on this list, too.

Jonothan


 
463 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Thu Jun 15, 2000 9:40am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] About practices/teachings (was re: About Concentration)

 
  Dear theresa,
As this was a letter to Mike, I comment on one point
only.
--- > Q # 1 : Why do discussions on this list seem to
> stress on 
> the "differences in views", whereas it seems to me
> that there is no 
> difference ??

Maybe there is no difference? You can investigate
carefully and check. I just saw a book that said there
is no difference between the core of Buddhism and the
core of christianity- just that people misunderstand
the teachings. Maybe this is true - we should
investigate. But is not discussion one means of coming
to understanding of what other people believe and of
examining what we ourseleves believe? 



I have found that I have many blindspots- areas where
I had truly thought I understood the Buddha's teaching
-and that discussing with friends like Jonathan and
Ivan and Khun Sujin has helped me to see those. 
It would be very easy for me on this discussion group
to just say to everyone - great, thanks for your
comment, I agree with everything you say. No doubt all
would feel very cheery but would any understanding
come? Any furtherance of knowledge? The commentaries
say that a key ingredient for wisdom to grow is
discussuion with those who can point out fine details
of the teaching. This is the advantage of meeting with
someone like Khun Sujin. Someone who is ready to
answer question after question - A thousand is not too
many.
We need to discuss and study and learn many details so
that there can be true distinguishing between sati and
samadhi . It is hard for most people to understand the
difference between the two. 

Thus the Buddha taught so many details so that those
with accumulations and interest could learn to
distinguish realities directly.

I think we need to often examine our ourselves (myself
very much included) . Do we really want to know what
the Buddha taught? Are we really true students,
prepared to give up even our most deeply held ideas if
we learn more? Or do we just want to feel happy? Are
we merely looking for justification for our own way of
thinking? Or are we looking for understanding no
matter how uncomfortable it makes us feel? 

If we are truly after understanding then when someone
disagrees with us we feel gratitude. We have the
chance to examine our understanding, to see whether
they can teach us something new. 
This can never mean that we always agree with what
they say- but we welcome the chance to consider their
words. If we think they have misunderstood something,
then, if we really want to help them, if we realize
that samasara is so long, and painful, we will try to
point out their clingings. We want to help.
Robert



 
464 From: Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala   
Date: Thu Jun 15, 2000 11:10am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] sati , comment s on tape

 
  Dear Jonathan,
Many thanks for your kind encouragement. I plan to do precisely that. This
Saturday will again go to the center and continue talking with Achaan
Suchin. But in addition, I also wanted to hear what I had missed on the day
you all were here 2 weeks ago.

You are absolutely right: when the interest is there and the time is right,
it all happens. I really like the practice of building awareness in everyday
life and find this far more effective than sitting meditation which I had
tried to do, with only moderate success, for many years. But the daunting
thing is trying to learn all the Pali terminology and classifications. That
is a tremendous intellectual exercise, but hope it will become internalized
in time.

with metta,
Betty
----- Original Message -----
From: Jonothan Abbott 
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] sati , comment s on tape


> Betty,
>
> I am glad you were eventually able to meet Khun Sujin.  I am reminded of
my
> experience when I first arrived in Bangkok, and the long trek by bus(es)
> across town to find Wat Bovorn and join the weekly talks.  It almost
didn't
> happen!
>
> I notice that Robert has kindly offered to send you some tapes of previous
> discussions (anumodana, Robert), and I am sure you will benefit from
these.
> However, as you are in Bangkok, I urge you to take every opportunity to
meet
> Khun Sujin and others and to join in live discussions and ask your own
> questions.  Because there is no substitute for participating in this way.
> The tapes are a useful resource for those times when you cannot take part
in
> discussions yourself.
>
> My experience in Bangkok has always been that if you show interest, the
> occasions happen.  And please feel free to raise anything on this list,
too.
>
> Jonothan
>

 
465 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Thu Jun 15, 2000 11:44am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] sati , comment s on tape

 
  Best wishes in your study Betty,
"But the daunting
> thing is trying to learn all the Pali terminology
> and classifications. That
> is a tremendous intellectual exercise, but hope it
> will become internalized
> in time."
> 
It is useful to learn the Pali  as the meanings are
precise, whereas The English translations have
assorted connotations. 
When we see that the terminology of the Abhidhamma is
actually very precise desciptions of the realities
that are appearing right at this moment then we see
that it is very different from an academic subject.

Also the idea  is not to become good at Pali or an
expert at Abhidhamma but to develop wisdom. It is
always the meaning, not the terminolgy that is
important. If we see this then even at the moments we
are studying or thinking about Dhamma there can be
direct awareness of whatever realities are arising.
Robert



 
466 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Thu Jun 15, 2000 0:01pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] About practices/teachings (was re: About Concentration)

 
  Theresa,

I fully agree with you when you say-

>As I know, there is only one Buddha's teaching.  I guess that the
>confusion or the difference in views is only because of the students'
>or meditators' comprehension of Buddha's teaching..

We are all I think interested in understanding the Buddha’s teaching and in 
that teaching only, not someone else’s teaching or someone’s understanding 
of the Buddha’s teaching.

I wonder if we could agree on one other point.  Correct understanding of the 
Buddha’s teaching must begin with understanding at the intellectual level.  
And correct understanding at an intellectual level comes from the study and 
discussion of the teachings.  In other words, our intellectual understanding 
must always be in advance (very far in advance, I would suggest) of our 
realisation of the teachings.  But how often do we hear teachers urging 
their followers to take just the opposite approach!

The problem with pursuing a method of practice without having the necessary 
intellectual-level foundation is that our purported verification of that 
experience is purely subjective and is coloured by our own (substantial) 
ignorance.

I think the questions you have asked of Mike are very pertinent in this 
regard.

Jonothan



 
467 From: amara chay   
Date: Thu Jun 15, 2000 1:25pm
Subject: Re: Fwd: Some advices..

 
  Theresa,

Thank you for posting these interesting excerpts, I hope you don't 
mind my making a few comments,


> Ven. Tenzin Palmo: 
> 
> 
> 
> 1) It is good that you have started to learn the Dharma when you're 
> so young.  Now after hearing all the  Dharma talks, go home, and 
> PRACTICE  
> HARD.  


This makes me wonder why the speaker does not see that in the days of 
the Buddha, so many people reached diverse stages of wisdom according 
to their accumulations, DURING the time they were LISTENING TO HIS 
TEACHINGS?  They did not have to rush home and practice hard or 
whatever, but they must have UNDERSTOOD AND STUDIED WHILE HE WAS 
SPEAKING to have attained anything as he finished.

 
> Claude Anshin Thomas: 
> 
> 
> 
> 1) We are all interconnected together.  The elements that our body 
is 
> made up of are the SAME elements that make up the Earth!  The stars 
> are in me.   
> The clouds are in me.  The grass and the trees are in me.  The
Earth 
> is in  me.  :) 


I think if he had carried this to the logical conclusion he would
have 
added, in the end there is no me nor the universe, just nama and rupa.
=^_^=


> 3) A doctor asked Anshin, "In my work, sometimes I give drugs (such 
> as painkillers) to my patients, to help them relieve their pain and 
> suffering.  
> However, I know that such drugs when taken on the long term, 
> contributes  to the shortening of the patient's lifespan.  As I'm a 
> Buddhist, I'm often  in a dilemma on whether what I'm doing is 
> correct." 
> 
> Anshin answered, "I cannot tell you this is right and that is 
> wrong.....Do  not fill your mind with "shoulds" and "should 
> nots".....Now, start to  practice meditation.  Take note of every 
> moment, and live in the present  moment.  In the situation, observe 
> the conditions and you will understand  what to do......We have to 
> take up the responsibility of making decisions  and choices, and
not 
> to look for an instruction/law to rely upon." 


I think the abhidhamma can provide a different answer:  at the moment 
of decision making if one has sati, one can distinguish between the 
different cetana cetasika arising: is it kusala cetana to help or 
akusala cetana to harm.  That the doctor must answer himself, and the 
resulting vipaka is entirely his own.


> 4) "Do you know where the Buddha is?"  Anshin asked. We all shook 
our 
> heads. 
> Pointing at the space in front of him, he said to me,"Come and sit 
> here.   Come."  Nervously I walked over and sat at the space he 
> pointed. "Here is Buddha."  he said as he pointed to me. "Here is 
> Buddha."  he said as he pointed to the others. "Here is Buddha." 
he 
> said as he pointed to the table, the bed,  the.....etc. "Everywhere 
> is Buddha.  Everywhere is temple." As Anshin rattled on, I started 
to 
> feel uneasy..and during a short pause in  his speech, I immediately 
> seized the chance to slip back to my own seat.   Everybody 
> laughs.  :P Surprised, he asked, "Why did you go 
> back?" "Errr...." "Were you frightened?"  he asked in a concerned 
> tone. "Errr...not really frightened....." I looked nervously at him 
> and sensed a kind of concern and encouragement  from his eyes.  
> Plucking my courage, I answered, "I feel.......out of  
> place." "Oh..OUT of place!" he exclaimed with slight surprise. 
Gently 
> and slowly, he said, "I hope you will slowly feel IN place.  :)   
> Because everywhere is your home.  Everywhere is Buddha." 


I think there is confusion (in fact there is a lot there, all around) 
between the Buddha and God here.  In the Tipitaka, parinibbana is 
complete extinction, never to return again, although when one 'sees' 
or understands the dhamma, one is said to 'see' the Buddha, or at 
least parts of his panna.  But to confuse people is never part of the 
dhamma, which is to clarify and enlighten people according to their 
level of accumulations.


> Ajahn Brahmavamso: 
> 
> 
> 
> 1) People learn meditation for different reasons.  Some meditate so 
> that the mind will be peaceful.  Some meditate so as to gain 
> insight.  It is  
> just like two people climbing a high mountain.  One climbs with the 
> wish to  view the spectacular sights from the top of the mountain, 
> while the other  climbs to breathe the fresh air on top.  However, 
> upon reaching the top,  both men will be able to: 1) view the 
sights; 
> 2) breathe the fresh air.  So  is meditation.  No matter whether
one 
> sits so that the mind will be  peaceful, or so as to gain insight, 
> when the meditation is good, one will  experience both peace and 
> insight. 


This is not according to the Tipitaka, because the Buddha had
attained the highest jhana, as did his teachers Utakatapas and 
Aralatapas yet he knew that was not the path and discovered
vipassana.  The first people he thought of sharing the knowledge 
with were his very teachers but they had passed away to the 
arupa-brahma world where they had no more ears or eyes to receive 
his manifestations, in the Tipitaka they are lost for impossibly 
long eons while we are here, even with 2500 years separating us from 
the Buddha, able to catch glimpses of his wisdom.  I might add that 
the Tipitaka is predicted to disappear, to the last word, in about 
2500 more, and that the first pitaka to go will be the Abhidhamma, 
so we are lucky indeed to be able to study it in it's fullest form 
if one wishes.

Amara

 
468 From: Theresa   
Date: Thu Jun 15, 2000 1:37pm
Subject: Re: About practices/teachings

 
  Hello Jonothan and Robert,

I have more questions but no answer.. 
I am listening to learn.. 

<< ------
I wonder if we could agree on one other point.  Correct understanding 
of the Buddha's teaching must begin with understanding at the 
intellectual level.  And correct understanding at an intellectual 
level comes from the study and discussion of the teachings.  In other 
words, our intellectual understanding must always be in advance (very 
far in advance, I would suggest) of our realisation of the 
teachings.  But how often do we hear teachers urging their followers 
to take just the opposite approach!
--------- >>

Intellectual understanding comes from learning/reading..

Insight (panna, wisdom ?) comes from practice Buddha's Dhamma.. The 
Noble Path developed in three stages, ie, Sila-Concentration-Insight, 
is how Insight is developed.. 

Is that right ?

<< ----- 
The problem with pursuing a method of practice without having the 
necessary intellectual-level foundation is that our purported 
verification of that experience is purely subjective and is coloured 
by our own (substantial) ignorance.
-------- >>

Let the Truths speak for themselves.. 
Buddha taught the unshakable Truths..
Should we doubt Buddha's teaching ?

Experience is subjective.. Yes !!

Is Vedana subjective ? 
Is Rupa subjective ? 
Is Sanna, Sankhara and Vinnana, all, subjective ? 
Is the five aggregates subjective ?
Is the Four Foundations of Mindfulness based on subjectivity ?
Is Birth, Aging, Sickness, and Death, all, subjective ?
Is "Dukkha", the first Noble Truth, subjective ?
Is "the Cause of Dukkha" subjective ?
Is whatever known through Mindfulness subjective ?
How do we know (rely on Mindfulness) that we have Dosa or Lobha 
without subjectivity ?

Until Arahantship is reached, is there anything not based on 
subjectivity ? Until Arahantship is reached, Ignorance is in 
everything, isn't it ?

If all of the above are subjective, where is "objectivity" 
or "Realities" or "Truths" to us, blind non-Arahants ??  Because 
Ignorance is "I/me", "I/me" need guidance of good teachers..  

Ought we know when we are hurt (Dukkha), subjectively ? Ought we know 
when we are not hurt (even the end of one temporary instance of 
Dukkha), subjectively ? Ought we need approval of a qualified teacher 
to tell us that we have Dukkha ? Ought we compare our experience to 
Buddha's words to be certain that we have Dukkha ? If Dukkha is the 
Truth, we can identify it ourselves; is that right ? 

"I" see Dukkha in me in many forms.. Should I need someone telling 
me : "Now, Theresa, this experience you are having is definitely 
Dukkha.. You must learn what it means.. I now approve that you have 
actually and really experienced Dukkha.. Before now, you have not.." 

What should I rely on to know any form of physical Dukkha if I am 
paraplegic ?? What should I rely on to know any form of mental Dukkha 
if I am in a vegetable state, a coma, or severely mental retarded ?? 
With these conditions, can I ever experience Dukkha or Nibbana ?? 

Subjectivity ? Experience ? Ignorance ? or what ??

The concern (the main object of meditation in the current moment) is 
the current sankhara, the current Dukkha or the current end-of-
Dukkha.. With the extremely fast rate of changes of Nama and Rupa, 
who else, beside the meditator, must identify Dukkha or not-Dukkha ?  

What if "I" made a mistake in thinking that "I" reached Nibbana and 
felt extremely proud of "myself", until one day, "I" fall flat on my 
face with hurt and pain ?  Should we worry about Ignorance ? Or 
should we simply be mindful as much as we can ? Truths/Realities will 
teach me.. 

Before "I" want to hear, "I" will not hear or understand "correctly"; 
isn't it right ? Is it the reason for Right Speech calling for the 
right time to speak ?  

Subjectivity ? Condition ? Anatta ? Paramitta ? Kamma ? 

Should we encourage our friends to practice Mindfulness diligently ? 
Or should we insist that our friends see things "really as they are", 
the realities well spoken by Buddha and commentators ? 

Should we, with compassion for the inner peace and happiness 
subjectively felt by each dhamma friend, be happy with their 
achievement (?!) and support them when they are hurt ? Or should we 
insist that our friends understand what we have learned and 
understood ? Or should we encourage them to practice Buddha's Dhamma 
as they have learned from their teachers ? 

Experiences ? Subjectivity ?

Buddha taught us the Truths, "the" answer.. 
Good teachers know the temperament of each students and how to guide 
each of them.. 

What is Buddha's very last words right before his death ?
<<
Behold, O disciples, I exhort you. Subject to change are all 
component things. Strive on with diligence (vayadhamma samkhara, 
appamadena sampadetha).
>>

Is "striving" subjective and "self" ?
Is "diligence" subjective and "self" ?
How do disciples see Change (Impermanence) without "striving on with 
diligence" ?
Without Mindfulness, can we see Change ?
Without subjectivity, can we see Change ?
Subjectivity is Change, isn't it ?
Without Mindfulness, can we see "component things" as component 
things ?

Buddha taught Mindfulness..
I don't have any answer, but I "strive on" with Mindfulness.. 
Am I wrong ?  Dukkha will teach me in time according to my kamma and 
paramitta.. Never too soon, never too late, always on time, whenever 
that time is.. 

Let us be mindful.. Let us walk further on the Noble Path..
--- because "Self" is very much alive in many of us.. 

Anatta, until truly and directly experienced as Reality from moment 
to moment, is, to us, a theory, a subject of discussion, an 
encouragement for us to practice further, a learned concept, an 
intellectual knowledge.. 

May this message be the condition to wake up a series of Mindfulness 
sankhara in all of us.. May these Mindfulness sankharas be the 
condition for Insight and also Magga/Phala/Nibbana in all of us.. 

With metta,

Theresa.

 
469 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Thu Jun 15, 2000 1:48pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] About practices/teachings (was re: About Concentration)

 
  Dear Theresa,
Another point on your message to Mike,
You wrote
"When communicating,
> languages ask 
> for "subject + verb" to make a sentence.. I find it
> challenging to 
> describe Dhammas or true experiences without using
> the subject "I" 
> and "concepts" (even Pali terms or whatever)..
> 
Do not worry about this too much. We are only
interested in the understanding (or misunderstanding
)revealed by the words. Your meaning mostly comes
through quite clearly.

Even the Buddha used terms like I and mine and self as
designations in daily life. These words are most
useful to refer to concepts and we cannot dispense
with concepts at all.


Sometimes when I write on this list I minimize the use
of words like me or I but this is merely a stylistic
device that allows me to emphasize paramathha dhammas
more clearly. 

It is the understanding behind the words that is
important. I have met people who are expert in
Abhidhamma but when I discuss with them it seems like
they treat it as an academic subject. A body of
knowledge rather than a description of realities that
are happening right at this moment. 
Some people can talk about anatta but still not
understand what it really means, even at the
intellectual level. 

We are here to help each other learn more about what
the Buddha really taught.
Robert



 
470 From: amara chay   
Date: Thu Jun 15, 2000 1:57pm
Subject: Re: Dukkha vs Anicca

 
  > I would like to mention at his point that Sarah and I will be away 
for 2 
> weeks plus as from this coming Friday, and we do not expect to have 
access 
> to the internet during that period, except perhaps very 
occasionally.  So 
> don't be surprised if you don't hear from us for a while.
> 
> Jonothan


Jonothan and Sarah,

Bon voyage and have a wonderful trip (with lots of sati too!), 
do drop us a line if ever possible!  I so think there is a lot 
more fun when sati's around, there is so much to study that one is 
never lonely, and certainly a lot less dosa.  Or is that just my 
accumulation of lobha again?  More likely both!  

But seriously, it is wonderful that sati can arise anywhere any 
time, and I hope there are conditions for them to arise as often 
as possible, not only for the fringe benefits of pleasantness but 
your accumulation of knowledge during your trip as well as in your 
daily life,

Amara

 
471 From: Theresa   
Date: Thu Jun 15, 2000 2:05pm
Subject: Re: About practices/teachings

 
  Hello Robert,

<< -----
If we are truly after understanding then when someone disagrees with 
us we feel gratitude. We have the chance to examine our 
understanding, to see whether they can teach us something new.  This 
can never mean that we always agree with what they say- but we 
welcome the chance to consider their words. If we think they have 
misunderstood something, then, if we really want to help them, if we 
realize that samasara is so long, and painful, we will try to point 
out their clingings. We want to help.
-------- >>

Do you know a good quote on the definition a "good" dhamma friend ?

I guess it is good to have this reminder.. Yes ?? :-))

With metta,

Theresa.

 
472 From: Sarah Procter Abbott  
Date: Thu Jun 15, 2000 10:07pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] sati , comment s on tape

 
  Robert,
a good summary and reminder that when there is wanting to have a little 
awareness or mindfulness, let alone have it all the time, there is a lack of 
understanding of the conditioned nature of the present reality...the minding 
or selection  is always an indication of lobha, usually with wrong view.

These summaries of discussions from the tapes are useful (even for those of 
us who were there).

Betty, this talk and the last several discussions when we were in Bangkok 
were all officially recorded.  Ivan & Ell may know where the professionally 
recorded ones are, but it would be useful if someone in Bkk could make sure 
a set of each is kept at the Foundation and catalogued for library use as 
I'm sure they do with the Thai ones. I see Robert is kindly sending you a 
set, p'haps after you've copied these they could also join the 'library 
collection'...

So glad, Betty, you enjoyed meeting Khun Sujin. I highly recommend you 
record all the discussions and listen over and over again.

Sarah


>Jonathan kindly sent me tapes of the discuusions in
>Bangkok earlier this month.
>There is an interesting part about a young man who is
>keen to have sati and is curious about what it is. In
>the past he went on meditation retreats and felt that
>he could see progress and awareness growing, but over
>the last few years he has started to study Abhidhamma
>and tried to understand anatta.
>Apparently he understands that anatta is the key to
>buddhism but he cant fathom why he is not having
>direct experinece of realities yet.
>Khun sujin explained that in the past he was always
>trying to get something but true sati comes with
>detachment - it is not about getting something at all.
>khun Ell commented that he told her that he "just
>wants to have sati one time" than he will be
>confident.
>Again this is lobha - and in the beginning sati, even
>true sati, is too weak to stand out.
>  Amara made the comment, which I think is pertinent,
>that he was looking for some banner or flashing light
>which will say "yes, here it is this is sati, now you
>know whaT IT is".(I paraphrase her words) Of course
>until sati has developed sufficiently and reached the
>level of satipatthana stages it is not so clear.
>
>khun sujin noted that it is understanding that is
>important. -Thus  someone may talk about anatta but
>unless they really grasp that there is no one, nothing
>, no way to control or make anything arise, one will
>have these misunderstandings and desires that block
>the path.
>Ivan noted that even when someone is saying they want
>understanding or sati they should realize that at
>those moments there is just cetasikas and cittas
>arising, no self.
>
>Let me know if I misrepresented anyone where I
>summarised the discussion.
>Robert

 
473 From: Sarah Procter Abbott  
Date: Thu Jun 15, 2000 10:18pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] sati , comment s on tape

 
  >
>Another point on the tapes: Jonathan said that if that
>young man kept listening and contemplating Abhidhamma
>than he was making the conditions for right
>understanding to grow. But Khun Sujin said it also
>depended on the type of cittas - Thus someone could
>study but if they had the motivation of getting
>something for self then there were no real conditions
>for wisdom to accumulate.
>

Yes, a good reminder...not the action or outer appearance that counts!
Thanks

Sarah

 
474 From: Sarah Procter Abbott  
Date: Thu Jun 15, 2000 10:28pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Dukkha vs Anicca

 
  >
>That is why Dukkha is unenduring or hard to endure while dukkha
>dukkha
>would mean a degree of dosa, while unsatisfactoriness is another
>degree (as a torrent is to a drop of rain?  But in the end with the
>eradication of dosa, there would not be even hint of moisture left!).
>
>
> > >One of the places you could look would be at the end of ch. 10,
>Citta
> > >(9-16)
> > >Part IIa of the 'Summary'.
> >
> > This is an interesting discussion of Vedana but I could not found
>anything
> > directly on the present issues.
>
>
>It talks about dosa that arises even as sympathetic sorrow.
>
>
> > >The term Dukkha is comparable to the expression unendurable or
>unenduring,
> > >it can be both something hard to endure; or something perishable,
> > >unenduring, something that does not endure.  It is not only
>impermanent in
> > >the sense of being there only for a time to be passed on as in
>temporary
> > >usage but also arises and falls away completely, at each instant,
>never to
> > >come again.
> >
> > The point is that this Dukkha is a characteristic separate and
>distinct from
> > the other characteristic of anicca, so impermanence should not be
>the focus.
> >   As I understand it, the focus should be on insubstantiality (as
>you have
> > mentioned) and worthlessness.  For some reason you seem to find the
>usual
> > term "unsatisfactory" in this context to be, well, unsatisfactory!
> >
> > In the end, of course, what is important is the direct
>understanding
>rather
> > than the words used.
> >
> > Jonothan
>
>
>I agree that in the end it is the study of the reality itself which
>is
>most important to the accumulation of panna.  Still, to me lobha and
>chanda can be very close and arise one with the other, but
>unsatisfactoriness is certain to be dosa except for the arahanta, who
>would recognize the qualities with kiriya citta and therefore be
>completely indifferent.  Once one is not satisfied, one cannot be
>indifferent, I don't think.  As we discussed the other day, one of
>the
>vipassana nana is to be indifferent before kusala nad akusala alike,
>but we are not there yet!!!
>
>Amara
>
>
>
Amara,
you have studied the abhidhamma in far more detail than most of us, but I 
think you've misunderstood the English meaning of unsatisfactory here. When 
we talk about all sankhara dhammas being dukkha or inherently unsatisfactory 
it has nothing at all to do with dosa of any level and nothing to do with 
being dissatisfied. As you so clearly say, the key connection is anicca..we 
cling to seeing, hearing etc, all of which are impermanent. Understanding 
the unsatisfactoriness (dukkha and as you say, not to be confused with 
dukkha dukkha) is part of the deeper understanding of the reality of seeing 
or hearing and the understanding (even at a beginning level) is light and 
kusala. if there is any dosa, it shows there is no understanding of the 
characteristic.
Sarah





 
475 From: Sarah Procter Abbott  
Date: Thu Jun 15, 2000 10:40pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] experiences & dosa

 
  >Fortunately, there were some occasions of remembering that dosa arising is
>just the manifestation of accumulations for having dosa.  As long as the
>tendency is there it will find an object.  However, the understanding of
>that dosa as being not self is another thing altogether.  And the stronger
>the dosa, the more remote that possibility can seem.
>
>Jonothan
>
Jonothan,
how could there be a self able to direct any realities when the evidence of 
the stong kilesa (against one's wishes) is so apparent? In between the dosa 
there may be a moment of understanding a reality or of at least 
intellectually seeing the danger of the kilesa and then the conditioned dosa 
arises again...anatta.
Sarah

 
476 From: Sarah Procter Abbott  
Date: Thu Jun 15, 2000 11:04pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] metta to metta

 
  Dear Robert & Alan,

I also doubt there can be metta to a dead person, certainly not to an 
inanimate object and not to a fictitious character. How about when watching 
the news on television, can there be metta? What if a  message on the 
internet doesn't go through or if no one reads it? Well.... As I understand 
it, there must be an aspect of promoting the welfare of others..

Sarah
>
>dear Alan,
>Interesting point. In the Visuddhimagga it also notes
>that a monk was developing metea to his teacher. But
>he didnt know the teacher had died - it is said that
>the he failed because of this. This is talking about
>development to the stage of JHNAn though, so i
>wondered if there could still be moments of metta to a
>dead person? Perhaps not. The vissudhmagga also notes
>that we can have dosa to inanimate objects but not
>metta.
>I always wondered about metta to characters in a film
>- sometimes I feel touched by a movie, some emotion is
>present. Sometimes one feels something that resembles
>compassion? It all shows how difficult kusala is , how
>hard to be sure, how rapidly cittas change, and it
>shows the omniscience of the Buddha that he
>comprehended it all.
>
>

 
477 From: amara chay   
Date: Thu Jun 15, 2000 3:12pm
Subject: Re: Dukkha vs Anicca

 
  --- "Sarah Procter Abbott" wrote:
> >
> >That is why Dukkha is unenduring or hard to endure while dukkha
> >dukkha
> >would mean a degree of dosa, while unsatisfactoriness is anotxer
> >degree (as a torrent is to a drop of rain?  But in the end with the
> >eradication of dosa, there would not be even hint of moisture 
left!).
> >
> >
> > > >One of the places you could look would be at the end of ch. 10,
> >Citta
> > > >(9-16)
> > > >Part IIa of the 'Summary'.
> > >
> > > This is an interesting discussion of Vedana but I could not 
found
> >anything
> > > directly on the present issues.
> >
> >
> >It talks about dosa that arises even as sympathetic sorrow.
> >
> >
> > > >The term Dukkha is comparable to the expression unendurable or
> >unenduring,
> > > >it can be both something hard to endure; or something 
perishable,
> > > >unenduring, something that does not endure.  It is not only
> >impermanent in
> > > >the sense of being there only for a time to be passed on as in
> >temporary
> > > >usage but also arises and falls away completely, at each 
instant,
> >never to
> > > >come again.
> > >
> > > The point is that this Dukkha is a characteristic separate and
> >distinct from
> > > the other characteristic of anicca, so impermanence should not 
be
> >the focus.
> > >   As I understand it, the focus should be on insubstantiality 
(as
> >you have
> > > mentioned) and worthlessness.  For some reason you seem to find 
the
> >usual
> > > term "unsatisfactory" in this context to be, well, 
unsatisfactory!
> > >
> > > In the end, of course, what is important is the direct
> >understanding
> >rather
> > > than the words used.
> > >
> > > Jonothan
> >
> >
> >I agree that in the end it is the study of the reality itself which
> >is
> >most important to the accumulation of panna.  Still, to me lobha 
and
> >chanda can be very close and arise one with the other, but
> >unsatisfactoriness is certain to be dosa except for the arahanta, 
who
> >would recognize the qualities with kiriya citta and therefore be
> >completely indifferent.  Once one is not satisfied, one cannot be
> >indifferent, I don't think.  As we discussed the other day, one of
> >the
> >vipassana nana is to be indifferent before kusala nad akusala 
alike,
> >but we are not there yet!!!
> >
> >Amara
> >
> >
> >
> Amara,
> you have studied the abhidhamma in far more detail than most of us, 
but I 
> think you've misunderstood the English meaning of unsatisfactory 
here. When 
> we talk about all sankhara dhammas being dukkha or inherently 
unsatisfactory 
> it has nothing at all to do with dosa of any level and nothing to
do 
with 
> being dissatisfied. As you so clearly say, the key connection is 
anicca..we 
> cling to seeing, hearing etc, all of which are impermanent. 
Understanding 
> the unsatisfactoriness (dukkha and as you say, not to be confused 
with 
> dukkha dukkha) is part of the deeper understanding of the reality
of 
seeing 
> or hearing and the understanding (even at a beginning level) is 
light and 
> kusala. if there is any dosa, it shows there is no understanding of 
the 
> characteristic.
> Sarah


Sarah,

First I must say that I have not studied the Tipitaka as much as many 
people here, such as Robert, I still have so much more to read and 
inquire into, luckily we have Khun Sujin who has studied it for over 
50 years and is a wonderful teacher so that we can ask her to explain 
what is not clear in our reasonings.  As to the English terminology,
I think it may be confusing to translate dukkha as unsatisfactory as 
opposed to the feeling unsattisfied, I would think unenduring would 
render a clearer understanding of the word.  Many people might have 
trouble distinguishing the fine line between the two words, as 
probably I do.  So long as there is a distinction between dukkha 
and dukkha dukkha, we're on the right track.  This is why Khun Sujin 
prefers to use Pali terms, and explain the meanings instead of trying 
to find the exact verbatim translation which may be impossible in
some languages, I think.  Again we agree that it is the understanding 
that is important,

Amara

 
478 From: shinlin 
Date: Thu Jun 15, 2000 3:27pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] metta to metta

 
  Dear Sarah, Robert, Alan,
    I thought metta applys to the moment when our citta is kusala.  So even when the person is dead, we can have a moment of metta toward the dead person's previous kamma for being able to be born as human being or being born at least with the two roots, alobha and adosa. 
    Recently, I met a German friend, Mr. Dominique Bank. He likes the idea of  the buddist teaching. But he is very very new. So it would be appreciated if our friends in Dhamma Study group can help and share something with him. I don't know how to explain things without using Pali language or convey in a much simplier and easier language for people to understanding the reality.  I talked to him alittle about the six mind doors only.  I really don't know how to start or  explain anything simple to new people. So I hope you can help him.
    I have cc his email with this mail. Thankyou.
with regards,
Shin Lin
 
 
  
 
 From: Sarah Procter Abbott 
To: dhammastudygroup@egroups.com 
Sent: Friday, June 16, 2000 4:04 AM
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] metta to metta


Dear Robert & Alan,

I also doubt there can be metta to a dead person, certainly not to an 
inanimate object and not to a fictitious character. How about when watching 
the news on television, can there be metta? What if a  message on the 
internet doesn't go through or if no one reads it? Well.... As I understand 
it, there must be an aspect of promoting the welfare of others..

Sarah
>
>dear Alan,
>Interesting point. In the Visuddhimagga it also notes
>that a monk was developing metea to his teacher. But
>he didnt know the teacher had died - it is said that
>the he failed because of this. This is talking about
>development to the stage of JHNAn though, so i
>wondered if there could still be moments of metta to a
>dead person? Perhaps not. The vissudhmagga also notes
>that we can have dosa to inanimate objects but not
>metta.
>I always wondered about metta to characters in a film
>- sometimes I feel touched by a movie, some emotion is
>present. Sometimes one feels something that resembles
>compassion? It all shows how difficult kusala is , how
>hard to be sure, how rapidly cittas change, and it
>shows the omniscience of the Buddha that he
>comprehended it all.
>
>
>--- Alan Weller <aweller@zolag.co.uk> wrote:
> > Robert and Sarah,
> > As I understand metta has to be towards real beings,
> > present or not i.e you
> > cannot have metta to a fictitious character as in a
> > film or novel or statue,
> > but you could have metta towards someone on the
> > internet.
>
> >
 
 
479 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Thu Jun 15, 2000 3:55pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] metta to metta

 
  good points shinlin. It is a difficult subject. There
can be moments of kusala when thinking of a dead
person but are they metta or another type of kusala.?
It is useful to discuss all this as it also helps to
show that often what we think is metta is not metta,
often not even kusala. I must confess I am a little
out of my depth though. When we, for example, think
about Khun Sujin sometimes there is kusala citta, even
when we have no intention to contact her at that time
- but is it metta or another type of kusala.?
 As sarah noted earlier we should save some of these
questions for Khun Sujin.
can you get your friend to join this internet
discusion group? Then he would have many people to
help him.
Robert



 
480 From: Sarah Procter Abbott  
Date: Fri Jun 16, 2000 1:10am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Dukkha vs Anicca

 
  >
>First I must say that I have not studied the Tipitaka as much as many
>people here, such as Robert, I still have so much more to read and
>inquire into, luckily we have Khun Sujin who has studied it for over
>50 years and is a wonderful teacher so that we can ask her to explain
>what is not clear in our reasonings.  As to the English terminology,
>I think it may be confusing to translate dukkha as unsatisfactory as
>opposed to the feeling unsattisfied, I would think unenduring would
>render a clearer understanding of the word.  Many people might have
>trouble distinguishing the fine line between the two words, as
>probably I do.  So long as there is a distinction between dukkha
>and dukkha dukkha, we're on the right track.  This is why Khun Sujin
>prefers to use Pali terms, and explain the meanings instead of trying
>to find the exact verbatim translation which may be impossible in
>some languages, I think.  Again we agree that it is the understanding
>that is important,
>
>Amara
>

Dear Amara,

Unenduring sounds too close to impermanent to me..how about 
'worthless'..perhaps that would cause less confusion than unsatisfactory... 
Even a moment of sati or panna is inherently worthless ..hence the 
development of detachment from all realities...
I fully agree about the difficulty translating pali terms...

Sarah

Betty, just take yr time with the pali terms..you'll pick up a lot here, 
Actually it's the meaning and the understanding that is a lot more difficult 
than the terminology!

 
481 From: shinlin 
Date: Thu Jun 15, 2000 5:35pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] metta to metta

 
  Dear Robert,
    When a moment of metta arise, doesn't it mean that all most all sobhana cetasika arises, except maybe not the panna ? So if at the moment, we see the dead person as that person's karuna, then the moment of that thought is metta which is dosa. I think it depends on the thought right after seeing the dead person. So if the thought is kusula thought, then the moment of metta arises after that. Pls correct me if I am going to a wrong view with this concept or understanding.
 
regards,
Shin
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Robert Kirkpatrick 
To: dhammastudygroup@egroups.com 
Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 2:55 PM
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] metta to metta


good points shinlin. It is a difficult subject. There
can be moments of kusala when thinking of a dead
person but are they metta or another type of kusala.?
It is useful to discuss all this as it also helps to
show that often what we think is metta is not metta,
often not even kusala. I must confess I am a little
out of my depth though. When we, for example, think
about Khun Sujin sometimes there is kusala citta, even
when we have no intention to contact her at that time
- but is it metta or another type of kusala.?
 As sarah noted earlier we should save some of these
questions for Khun Sujin.
can you get your friend to join this internet
discusion group? Then he would have many people to
help him.
Robert

 
 
482 From: Sarah Procter Abbott  
Date: Fri Jun 16, 2000 1:41am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] About practices/teachings (was re: About Concentration)

 
  >Q # 1 : Why do discussions on this list seem to stress on
>the "differences in views", whereas it seems to me that there is no
>difference ??
>
>Sitting is one of the four natural postures of a human being, and so
>Sitting Meditation is an off-course.. During Sitting Meditation, the
>body is not moving and the eyes are probably closed, and so, the
>number of distractions reduces drastically.. The benefits of Sitting
>Meditation is appreciated because the reduced number of
>distractions.. Sitting Meditation is a good condition for the arise
>of Concentration.. I have followed the Vipassana practice taught by
>Venerable Mahasi, and meditated in all 4 postures (ie, sitting,
>standing, walking, and lying-down).. If we are mindful, we should be
>able to know when "Self" is present and when "Self-less" is present..
>When Mindfulness is continuous, there is no chance for "Self"..
>

Theresa,
like Robert, I hope you realise that we wish to help and exchanges and 
differences of view and experience are very healthy..this is how we can 
question and develop our understanding. I remember the Tibetan monks have 
often heated debates and exchanges on the abhidhamma....better than just 
agreeing we all have experienced great insights!

Anyway, to get to the point, like you, as I mentioned before, I also used to 
follow a Mahasi meditation practice and think that it was better to be 
removed from distractions and try to have mindfulness all the time. But what 
is the motive? What is the goal? The goal at such times is to have more 
mindfulness for oneself and by being in a specific place in a specific 
position to try and control it. What about now? What is real? Not sitting or 
writing because these are concepts. Hardness, heat, visible object are rupas 
that appear now. It doesn't matter how many 'distractions' there are. 
Whether we're on the busy, crowded underground in Hong Kong or in a quiet 
room in a meditation centre, hardness is still that rupa experienced by the 
body sense. It shows a lack of confidence in the power of sati (awareness) 
if one has the idea that the object which it is aware of is easier when 
there are no 'distractions'. The key is to learn more about the objects of 
awareness and the difference between concepts and realities.

It takes a lot of courage to understand realities and to realise that many 
of the levels of wisdom we thought we had attained are just figments of our 
imagination... better to know than to continue in ignorance, however. The 
difficulty is not in our use of terminology, but in the understanding or 
lack of it.

from your dhamma friend, Sarah

 
483 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Thu Jun 15, 2000 6:09pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: About Concentration (was: re: abhidhamma in daily life)

 
  Dear Mike,
Good to see you back on the list.
I make some comments on your letter to Theresa in the
spirit that wisdom needs careful consideration of the
Dhamma to develop. Whether you agree with anything I
say is not important, what is useful is if it
conditions any wise reflection.   As you rightly say
“Each person has to 
find what works for them, based on their own unique
accumulations.”  It really has to be our own
development. I think you realize that vipassana is not
some “technique”, something we can neatly package and
dispense like TM. The Buddha himself considered that
it was so profound and difficult to understand that he
contemplated not teaching it. No one can understand it
without having heard many details and having applied
the teachings over and over in many lives.
Thus we should not follow anyone blindly merely
because he or she has a reputation or large following
or because they agree with our preconceptions about
the path. Investigation, over and over in different
ways – that is what is needed.
   The good teachers  help us by encouraging us to
question again and again and again, and by encouraging
us to study deeply the Tipitika. They explain that
sati and panna are anatta, uncontrollable and that
studying realities directly should be done without any
hidden wish for quick insight. But whether anyone
really listens depends on manifold factors.
> 
in your letter to Theresa you wrote “And no "one" who
is mindful - just mindfulness rising and falling ... “
Right, there is no one. Whether there is mindfulness
or not. Even if we are absolutely certain that there
is a self, sure that we are in control, still the
truth is there are only a flux of conditions. No self,
never was, never can be.

You said “there is just mindfulness arising and
falling away”. We could be more precise. The  ancient
scriptures explain that sense-door procees citas arise
in a series of cittas. After there has been the brief
moment when a sense cognition such as seeing arises
(WHICH IS VIPAKA –THE RESULT OF KAMMA) after that
there is santirana-citta and votthapanna citta which
are also both vipakka cittas, result from past kamma.
After that there are javanna cittas, atotal of seven
and at these moments there can be either kusala or
akusala or kiriya(with sati or without) then there are
2 moments of tadaramma citta which is vipaka moments
of bhavanga citta, after that there can be minddoor
processes which take the same object. Even the Buddha
and the arahants have these same processes. In a flash
of lightning millions of these processes occur. Which
cittas then were javanna , which were vipaka, which
were bhavanga? These arise countless times and none of
them, even for the Buddha, are mindful. Which ones
were kusala unassociataed with knowledge ., which ones
kusala  with panna. What about the moments of lobha
that arise countless times – even at the moments when
we might think there is mindfulness. Which ones lobha
associated with miccha ditthi? Which ones lobha
asscocited with mana, conceit, which ones lobha only.
Which ones pure moha. All of these cittas that I just
listed come with either pleasant or neutral feeling. 
 We may feel highly calm but be merely observing
change without any actual awareness. Even cittas with
moha (ignorance) or lobha(desire) can observe and
experience different realities arising at the 6 doors
– Right now there is the experience of color, a
paramattha dhamma- but are the javanna cittas arising
afterwards lobha or sati or moha. Try concentrating on
some part of the body. Is the focusing done with a
sense that you made it happen?. Is the concentration
with sati, or with lobha? Both can experience the same
charateristic – that reality which is hard or hot or
cold or vibration. Concentrate for a long time on the
body – after  awhile you can learn to feel subtle
vibrations and changes in heat etc. but if it is lobha
or moha experiencing it all what is the point? If it
is moha then the feeling may be very neutral and
peaceful or if it is lobha very pleasant thus most
easy to think we are having sati. 
Or we may have the type of sati that is associated
with samattha, not vipassana Both are kusala but is it
not useful to learn details so that they can be
distinguished?

 Mike I notice already some changes in your thinking-
you lean a little more towards anatta now. You realize
that sati can arise any time any place. You write “ So
mindfulness it is not to be practiced by JUST sitting
on a
cushion”
  I think you said that you have been studying
abhidhamma a little over a year – perhaps you can
remember your views before you started. Perhaps now
there is better understanding? But no you who made it
happen. Did you think you had wrong view before, THAT
YOU WOULD CHANGE? When we have any view we are sure we
are right. It is like the saying goes "my opinions may
have changed but not the fact that I am right"

 But now your views are modified, It wasn’t by sitting
and concentrating - it happened because you heard (by
conditions) And reflected (by conditions) on the
Buddhas teaching TO SOME EXTENT. 
 No you who can decide, “Ok now I will understand
better, now I accept that there is no self I will not
go back to my old delusion.” You might say that to
yourself and then next week think you might think
“this  was all nonsense, this Abhidhamma stuff.”  You
might listen to some teacher who tells you the path is
all about focussing and getting calm and wonder why
you ever bothered with abstruse details such as we
mention today. This is because everything is anatta:-
we cannot control going right or wrong. This is
difficult for most people to accept. I say all these
things not because I expect you to believe me but
because I know that hearing difficult aspects of
Dhamma is a condition for reflection.
Of course it is far more than just listening to the
Abhidamma – we could become a world expert on
Abhidhamma, believe everything in it  and still
develop no deep understanding. I quote you again
““Each person has to 
find what works for them, based on their own unique
accumulations” Yes the teachings are our  guide  but
we are alone, life in the deepest sense is only a
moment , we have only now to strive. But how to strive
without lobha?
Robert



 
484 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Thu Jun 15, 2000 7:51pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: About Concentration (was: re: abhidhamma in daily life)

 
  This is just to correct a typing mistake I made in
the last message:
 I said "Which
cittas then were javanna , which were vipaka, which
were bhavanga? These arise countless times and none of
them, even for the Buddha, are mindful. "

I meant to say "Which
cittas then were javanna , which were vipaka, which
were bhavanga?  Bhavanga cittas and vipaka cittas
arise  countless times and none of
them, even for the Buddha, are mindful. And  which
javana cittas
were kusala unassociataed with knowledge ., which
ones..
Sorry for the carelessness
Robert
  

--- Robert Kirkpatrick
 wrote:
> 
>  
> Dear Mike,
> Good to see you back on the list.
> I make some comments on your letter to Theresa in
> the
> spirit that wisdom needs careful consideration of
> the
> Dhamma to develop. Whether you agree with anything I
> say is not important, what is useful is if it
> conditions any wise reflection.   As you rightly say
> “Each person has to 
> find what works for them, based on their own unique
> accumulations.”  It really has to be our own
> development. I think you realize that vipassana is
> not
> some “technique”, something we can neatly package
> and
> dispense like TM. The Buddha himself considered that
> it was so profound and difficult to understand that
> he
> contemplated not teaching it. No one can understand
> it
> without having heard many details and having applied
> the teachings over and over in many lives.
> Thus we should not follow anyone blindly merely
> because he or she has a reputation or large
> following
> or because they agree with our preconceptions about
> the path. Investigation, over and over in different
> ways – that is what is needed.
>    The good teachers  help us by encouraging us to
> question again and again and again, and by
> encouraging
> us to study deeply the Tipitika. They explain that
> sati and panna are anatta, uncontrollable and that
> studying realities directly should be done without
> any
> hidden wish for quick insight. But whether anyone
> really listens depends on manifold factors.
> > 
> in your letter to Theresa you wrote “And no "one"
> who
> is mindful - just mindfulness rising and falling ...
> “
> Right, there is no one. Whether there is mindfulness
> or not. Even if we are absolutely certain that there
> is a self, sure that we are in control, still the
> truth is there are only a flux of conditions. No
> self,
> never was, never can be.
> 
> You said “there is just mindfulness arising and
> falling away”. We could be more precise. The 
> ancient
> scriptures explain that sense-door procees citas
> arise
> in a series of cittas. After there has been the
> brief
> moment when a sense cognition such as seeing arises
> (WHICH IS VIPAKA –THE RESULT OF KAMMA) after that
> there is santirana-citta and votthapanna citta which
> are also both vipakka cittas, result from past
> kamma.
> After that there are javanna cittas, atotal of seven
> and at these moments there can be either kusala or
> akusala or kiriya(with sati or without) then there
> are
> 2 moments of tadaramma citta which is vipaka moments
> of bhavanga citta, after that there can be minddoor
> processes which take the same object. Even the
> Buddha
> and the arahants have these same processes. In a
> flash
> of lightning millions of these processes occur.
> Which
> cittas then were javanna , which were vipaka, which
> were bhavanga? These arise countless times and none
> of
> them, even for the Buddha, are mindful. Which ones
> were kusala unassociataed with knowledge ., which
> ones
> kusala  with panna. What about the moments of lobha
> that arise countless times – even at the moments
> when
> we might think there is mindfulness. Which ones
> lobha
> associated with miccha ditthi? Which ones lobha
> asscocited with mana, conceit, which ones lobha
> only.
> Which ones pure moha. All of these cittas that I
> just
> listed come with either pleasant or neutral feeling.
> 
>  We may feel highly calm but be merely observing
> change without any actual awareness. Even cittas
> with
> moha (ignorance) or lobha(desire) can observe and
> experience different realities arising at the 6
> doors
> – Right now there is the experience of color, a
> paramattha dhamma- but are the javanna cittas
> arising
> afterwards lobha or sati or moha. Try concentrating
> on
> some part of the body. Is the focusing done with a
> sense that you made it happen?. Is the concentration
> with sati, or with lobha? Both can experience the
> same
> charateristic – that reality which is hard or hot or
> cold or vibration. Concentrate for a long time on
> the
> body – after  awhile you can learn to feel subtle
> vibrations and changes in heat etc. but if it is
> lobha
> or moha experiencing it all what is the point? If it
> is moha then the feeling may be very neutral and
> peaceful or if it is lobha very pleasant thus most
> easy to think we are having sati. 
> Or we may have the type of sati that is associated
> with samattha, not vipassana Both are kusala but is
> it
> not useful to learn details so that they can be
> distinguished?
> 
>  Mike I notice already some changes in your
> thinking-
> you lean a little more towards anatta now. You
> realize
> that sati can arise any time any place. You write “
> So
> mindfulness it is not to be practiced by JUST
> sitting
> on a
> cushion”
>   I think you said that you have been studying
> abhidhamma a little over a year – perhaps you can
> remember your views before you started. Perhaps now
> there is better understanding? But no you who made
> it
> happen. Did you think you had wrong view before,
> THAT
> YOU WOULD CHANGE? When we have any view we are sure
> we
> are right. It is like the saying goes "my opinions
> may
> have changed but not the fact that I am right"
> 
>  But now your views are modified, It wasn’t by
> sitting
> and concentrating - it happened because you heard
> (by
> conditions) And reflected (by conditions) on the
> Buddhas teaching TO SOME EXTENT. 
>  No you who can decide, “Ok now I will understand
> better, now I accept that there is no self I will
> not
> go back to my old delusion.” You might say that to
> yourself and then next week think you might think
> “this  was all nonsense, this Abhidhamma stuff.” 
> You
> might listen to some teacher who tells you the path
> is
> all about focussing and getting calm and wonder why
> you ever bothered with abstruse details such as we
> mention today. This is because everything is
> anatta:-
> we cannot control going right or wrong. This is
> difficult for most people to accept. I say all these
> things not because I expect you to believe me but
> because I know that hearing difficult aspects of
> Dhamma is a condition for reflection.
> Of course it is far more than just listening to the
> Abhidamma – we could become a world expert on
> Abhidhamma, believe everything in it  and still
> develop no deep understanding. I quote you again
> ““Each person has to 
> find what works for them, based on their own unique
> accumulations” Yes the teachings are our  guide  but
> we are alone, life in the deepest sense is only a
> moment , we have only now to strive. But how to
> strive
> without lobha?
> Robert
> 


 
485 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Thu Jun 15, 2000 8:18pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] metta to metta

 
  -Dear shin,
This is explained, I think, either in the
Abhidhammathasangaha or the Atthasalini, the
commentary to the Dhammasangani, I forget which. I
give some details but please check _ I am saying all
this just from my aging memory. 

Metta is alobha but it is a particular type of alobha.
 There are other cetasikas such as mudita and kurana
which arise only with those cittas that have
sympathetic joy or compassion and at those times no
metta. These are all kusala , they all take a concept,
a person as object but they are different from each
other.  

I think you made a tyoing mistake when you said "that
thought is metta which is DOSA" I guess you meant
"that thought is metta which is alobha?

Also you wrote that ' if the thought is kusala thought
then the moment of metta arises after that" 
At the very moments of thinking with kusala, metta may
be present. 
Robert


> Dear Robert,
>     When a moment of metta arise, doesn't it mean
> that all most all sobhana cetasika arises, except
> maybe not the panna ? So if at the moment, we see
> the dead person as that person's karuna, then the
> moment of that thought is metta which is dosa. I
> think it depends on the thought right after seeing
> the dead person. So if the thought is kusula
> thought, then the moment of metta arises after that.
> Pls correct me if I am going to a wrong view with
> this concept or understanding.



 
486 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Thu Jun 15, 2000 8:24pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: About practices/teachings

 
  > -------- >>
> 
> "Do you know a good quote on the definition a "good"
> dhamma friend ?
> 
> I guess it is good to have this reminder.. Yes ??
> :-))
> 
> With metta,
> 
> Theresa.
> 
Yes Theresa this is a good reminder indeed. Perhaps
who could find us some quotes on this (no rush these
things take time)- there are a few in the suttas and
also the commentaries.
thank You
Robert
> 
> 

 
487 From: Theresa   
Date: Thu Jun 15, 2000 10:26pm
Subject: Re: metta to metta

 
  Hello Sarah,

<< ------ 
I also doubt there can be metta to a dead person, certainly not to an 
inanimate object and not to a fictitious character. How about when 
watching the news on television, can there be metta? What if a  
message on the internet doesn't go through or if no one reads it? 
Well.... As I understand it, there must be an aspect of promoting the 
welfare of others..
--------- >>

I pass Metta just because I pass Metta.. It's a training for "Self-
less".. Whether or not there is a recipient, or whether or not any 
recipients will ever receive in the form as I wished for, has nothing 
to do with the person passing Metta in the first place..

With Metta, (a good wish to the benefits of others)

Theresa.

 
488 From: Theresa   
Date: Thu Jun 15, 2000 10:34pm
Subject: Re: Dukkha vs Anicca

 
  Hello Amara, Jonothan, and Sarah,

<< -------
... think you've misunderstood the English meaning of unsatisfactory 
here. When we talk about all sankhara dhammas being dukkha or 
inherently unsatisfactory it has nothing at all to do with dosa of 
any level and nothing to do with being dissatisfied. As you so 
clearly say, the key connection is anicca..we cling to seeing, 
hearing etc, all of which are impermanent. Understanding the 
unsatisfactoriness (dukkha and as you say, not to be confused with 
dukkha dukkha) is part of the deeper understanding of the reality of 
seeing or hearing and the understanding (even at a beginning level) 
is light and kusala. if there is any dosa, it shows there is no 
understanding of the characteristic.
---------- >>

Thank you, Sarah, for explaining Dukkha/Unsatisfactoriness very 
clearly..

<< the key connection is anicca.. >>

The three Lakkhanas are closely related.. 
Because of Impermanence, we experience Dukkha (unsatisfactoriness)..
Because of Impermanence and Dukkha, we understand Anicca.. 

<< if there is any dosa, it shows there is no understanding of the 
characteristic. >>

Dosa is a impermanent thought.. Without Mindfulness, Dosa is the sign 
that there is "No Insight".. However, with Mindfulness, Dosa becomes 
a Dhamma and Insight can arise.. 

With metta,

Theresa.

 
489 From: Theresa   
Date: Thu Jun 15, 2000 10:47pm
Subject: Re: experiences & dosa

 
  Hello Jonothan and Sarah,

<< ------
Jonothan wrote :
Fortunately, there were some occasions of remembering that dosa 
arising is just the manifestation of accumulations for having dosa.  
As long as the tendency is there it will find an object.  However, 
the understanding of that dosa as being not self is another thing 
altogether.  And the stronger the dosa, the more remote that 
possibility can seem.

Sarah wrote :
how could there be a self able to direct any realities when the 
evidence of the stong kilesa (against one's wishes) is so apparent? 
In between the dosa there may be a moment of understanding a reality 
or of at least intellectually seeing the danger of the kilesa and 
then the conditioned dosa arises again...anatta.
---------- >>

Dosa is a sankhara, raise and fall temporarily... 
Impermanence !
Whenever we directly experience the Impermanence (thus, Dosa) as a 
sankhara (thus, with Mindfulness), Anatta is understood right at that 
moment.. 

During the moment we must rely on "a moment of ... at least 
intellectually seeing the danger of the kilesa", we do not have 
direct experience yet, but we obtain our understanding from 
Reasoning.. 

For Insight/knowledge to be true Insight/Panna, we must understand 
through "direct experience" right *in* the moment of Mindfulness, not 
sooner, not later.. 

Our Insight/Panna about three Lakkhanas must be experience directly 
and on time.. 

Q : what if what we think we experience directly and on time is not 
really direct and on time, because many (thousands? millions?) Nama 
and Rupa instances pass through without we even know about it, let 
alone being mindful ? 

My answer : Whatever we can see is whatever sankhara we have.. We use 
it, be mindful of it, and it will become a Dhamma.. 

With metta,

Theresa.

 
490 From: Theresa   
Date: Thu Jun 15, 2000 10:58pm
Subject: Re: metta to metta

 
  Hello Shinlin,

<< -------
     I thought metta applys to the moment when our citta is kusala.  
So even when the person is dead, we can have a moment of metta toward 
the dead person's previous kamma for being able to be born as human 
being or being born at least with the two roots, alobha and adosa. 
     Recently, I met a German friend, Mr. Dominique Bank. He likes 
the idea of  the buddist teaching. But he is very very new. So it 
would be appreciated if our friends in Dhamma Study group can help 
and share something with him. I don't know how to explain things 
without using Pali language or convey in a much simplier and easier 
language for people to understanding the reality.  I talked to him 
alittle about the six mind doors only.  I really don't know how to 
start or  explain anything simple to new people. So I hope you can 
help him.
---------- >>

I can relate to what you wrote.. 

When I didn't know anything about Buddhism, my teacher gave me an 
initial point of focus, taught me how to meditate, gave me the amount 
of time for meditation practice, and sent me to my practice.. I 
practiced as much as I could, and then came back to him with this 
report : "Sorry teacher, I could not follow your instructions.. I 
failed.. My mind jumps about all the time.. I get all sorts of 
thinking and feelings during sitting meditation session, but outside 
of it.."  My teacher said : "So, you have learned by experience that 
our body and mind are not permanent, but always changing.." 

From my own experience, practicing is the best way to learn 
Buddhism.. 

Robert invited your friend to join this list.. This is a great idea..

With metta,

Theresa.

 
491 From: Theresa   
Date: Thu Jun 15, 2000 11:29pm
Subject: About Sitting Meditation (was re: About practices/teachings)

 
  Hello Sarah, 

<< -----
like Robert, I hope you realise that we wish to help and exchanges 
and differences of view and experience are very healthy..this is how 
we can question and develop our understanding. I remember the Tibetan 
monks have often heated debates and exchanges on the 
abhidhamma....better than just agreeing we all have experienced great 
insights!
-------- >>

I do intentionally stop expressing my view if I happen to sense a 
slim possibility of Dosa/Lobha arising in me or my friends.. I don't 
understand what you mean by "heated debates", is it Dosa ?.. 

I will gladly share my views, whether or not right or wrong, as long 
as I and my friends practice Mindfulness diligently.. 

<< -----
... a Mahasi meditation practice and think that it was better to be 
removed from distractions and try to have mindfulness all the time. 
But what is the motive? What is the goal? The goal at such times is 
to have more mindfulness for oneself and by being in a specific place 
in a specific position to try and control it. What about now? What is 
real? Not sitting or writing because these are concepts. Hardness, 
heat, visible object are rupas that appear now. It doesn't matter how 
many 'distractions' there are. Whether we're on the busy, crowded 
underground in Hong Kong or in a quiet room in a meditation centre, 
hardness is still that rupa experienced by the  body sense. It shows 
a lack of confidence in the power of sati wareness) if one has the 
idea that the object which it is aware of is easier when there are 
no 'distractions'. The key is to learn more about the objects of 
awareness and the difference between concepts and realities.
-------- >> 

Sitting Meditation and retreats are like a training camp.. We should 
take the skills we gained from the camps and applied it to real 
life.. Many friends, who sat with me in retreats, liked to discuss 
about or practice Sitting Meditation, then Walking Meditation, next, 
while leaving the rest of the day to "relaxing" or "taking a break" 
from the challenging task of Mindfulness throughout the day.. That's 
my friends' choices.. However, the teachers, the Venerables, taught 
us to meditate continuously throughout the day.. 

My teachers, who are students of Venerable Mahasi, mentioned many 
times that we should practice in all postures, and that Sitting 
Meditation is a training, a place to start.. During retreat, my 
teachers encouraged, time after time, that we should practice all the 
time, as you mentioned above.. Yet, the students put their effort in 
Sitting Meditation and tried to "attain levels" then, rather than 
practicing continuously throughout the day.. Eating, Sitting, taking 
a shower, walking, sitting down, lying down, about to fall asleep, 
etc.. 

I guess that teachers encourage students to practice Mindfulness 
throughout the day, from moment to moment, and that, out of metta, 
they did not put down the effort (the wish) of the students to 
practice on Sitting Meditation more.. 

With metta,

Theresa.

 
492 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Thu Jun 15, 2000 11:30pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: About practices/teachings

 
  Theresa,

In response to my comments about the need for understanding of the teachings 
at an intellectual level as a beginning step, you suggested that-

>Insight (panna, wisdom ?) comes from practice Buddha's Dhamma.. The
>Noble Path developed in three stages, ie, Sila-Concentration-Insight,
>is how Insight is developed..

Perhaps you were thinking of the 3 levels of kusala (wholesomeness), namely 
dana (generosity), sila (morality) and bhavana (mental development, ie 
concentration and insight).  These are imortant to know about, but are not 
the same as stages of the development of insight.

As I think you already know, the Buddha did not teach a formal practice as 
such (and there is no term in the texts for meditation as we understand that 
expression).  His numerous sermons to people were in fact detailed 
explanations of how things really are and how we can come to understand 
those realities.  He taught that this understanding is to be developed by 
listening attentively to the teachings, by considering or reflecting on what 
one has heard and by applying it.  That is how the practice is developed, no 
matter what one’s level of understanding.

Knowing this, we can see that there is no impediment to developing the 
practice at this moment – because we have been and are listening to the 
teachings and considering what we have heard.  And the more we do so the 
better, particularly the parts that explain about the world of the six 
doorways (our world at this moment).

Jonothan


 
493 From: Theresa   
Date: Thu Jun 15, 2000 11:35pm
Subject: Re: About practices/teachings

 
  Hello Robert,

<< --------
Theresa wrote : 
"Do you know a good quote on the definition a "good" dhamma friend ?

I guess it is good to have this reminder.. Yes ??
:-))


Robert wrote : 
Yes Theresa this is a good reminder indeed. Perhaps who could find us 
some quotes on this (no rush these things take time)- there are a few 
in the suttas and also the commentaries.
----------- >>

Robert, I asked for your help, because I needed it.. I am a slow 
reader and read little, remember ??..  Because I don't where where 
those information are, I ask you for your help... hehehehe...

Theresa.

 
494 From: Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala   
Date: Fri Jun 16, 2000 0:01am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] sati , comment s on tape

 
  Dear Robert,
Many thanks for your best wishes and encouragement. I understand and accept
the necessity of learning the Pali terminology for the process of
recognizing the various nama and rupa as they arise in order for wisdom to
develop, but still find it a great challenge since I am very new to this.

With metta,
Betty
----- Original Message -----
From: Robert Kirkpatrick 
Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 10:44 AM
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] sati , comment s on tape


> Best wishes in your study Betty,
> "But the daunting
> > thing is trying to learn all the Pali terminology
> > and classifications. That
> > is a tremendous intellectual exercise, but hope it
> > will become internalized
> > in time."
> >
> It is useful to learn the Pali  as the meanings are
> precise, whereas The English translations have
> assorted connotations.
> When we see that the terminology of the Abhidhamma is
> actually very precise desciptions of the realities
> that are appearing right at this moment then we see
> that it is very different from an academic subject.
>
> Also the idea  is not to become good at Pali or an
> expert at Abhidhamma but to develop wisdom. It is
> always the meaning, not the terminolgy that is
> important. If we see this then even at the moments we
> are studying or thinking about Dhamma there can be
> direct awareness of whatever realities are arising.
> Robert

 
495 From: amara chay   
Date: Fri Jun 16, 2000 2:38am
Subject: Re: Dukkha vs Anicca

 
  --- "Sarah Procter Abbott" wrote:
> >
> >First I must say that I have not studied the Tipitaka as much as 
many
> >people here, such as Robert, I still have so much more to read and
> >inquire into, luckily we have Khun Sujin who has studied it for 
over
> >50 years and is a wonderful teacher so that we can ask her to 
explain
> >what is not clear in our reasonings.  As to the English 
terminology,
> >I think it may be confusing to translate dukkha as unsatisfactory 
as
> >opposed to the feeling unsattisfied, I would think unenduring would
> >render a clearer understanding of the word.  Many people might have
> >trouble distinguishing the fine line between the two words, as
> >probably I do.  So long as there is a distinction between dukkha
> >and dukkha dukkha, we're on the right track.  This is why Khun 
Sujin
> >prefers to use Pali terms, and explain the meanings instead of 
trying
> >to find the exact verbatim translation which may be impossible in
> >some languages, I think.  Again we agree that it is the 
understanding
> >that is important,
> >
> >Amara
> >
> 
> Dear Amara,
> 
> Unenduring sounds too close to impermanent to me..how about 
> 'worthless'..perhaps that would cause less confusion than 
unsatisfactory... 
> Even a moment of sati or panna is inherently worthless ..hence the 
> development of detachment from all realities...
> I fully agree about the difficulty translating pali terms...
> 
> Sarah


Sarah,

Worthless is a bit far from the Pali, I'm afraid.  In fact the way 
Khun Sujin explains it dukkha is very close to anicca, just a 
different angle of the same thing, and the very heart of the 
Abhidhamma, I find, because no other religion on earth teaches that 
the soul or the heart or the consciousness is in fact a stream of 
different realities arising and falling away in a stream of one citta 
at a time, not one single life that lasts from birth til death.

The more I consider the problem the more I think unenduring is best, 
with the related concept that hard to endure would be dukkha dukkha.

Still Pali is best, with or without the parenthesis juxtaposed!

Amara

 
496 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Fri Jun 16, 2000 7:25am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: About practices/teachings

 
  Ok I will try. Just from memory (I am a fairly fast
reader but lazy when it comes to looking things up).
The ancient commentary gives a list of qualities that
a kalynimitta should have. 
These qualities are in effect so rigorous that only a
Buddha could have all of them. Still as we get nearer
the end of the list I remember one that seems
important. It was that the friend should have a good
knowledge of the Tipitika(or words to that effect). if
I see any references during my reading later I will
send them to with the exact phrasing. 

There is also an interesting comment in the
Atthasalini (one of the most important
commentaries)"Only monks who are proficient in
Abhidhamma can be regarded as 'preachers of Dhamma
(dhammakathika)'. Others, even if they actually engage
in preaching, cannot truly be so called. When giving a
doctrinal exposition, they may, for instance, mix up
the various kinds of karma and karmic results or the
various factors found when analysing body and mind.
But those proficient in Abhidhamma do not make such
mistakes."
Robert



robert
> << --------
> Theresa wrote : 
> "Do you know a good quote on the definition a "good"
> dhamma friend ?
> 
> I guess it is good to have this reminder.. Yes ??
> :-))
> 
> 
> Robert wrote : 
> Yes Theresa this is a good reminder indeed. Perhaps
> who could find us 
> some quotes on this (no rush these things take
> time)- there are a few 
> in the suttas and also the commentaries.
> ----------- >>
> 
> Robert, I asked for your help, because I needed it..
> I am a slow 
> reader and read little, remember ??..  Because I
> don't where where 
> those information are, I ask you for your help...
> hehehehe...
> 
> Theresa.
> 
> 
> 




 
497 From: Sarah Procter Abbott  
Date: Fri Jun 16, 2000 3:53pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Dukkha vs Anicca

 
  >Worthless is a bit far from the Pali, I'm afraid.  In fact the way
>Khun Sujin explains it dukkha is very close to anicca, just a
>different angle of the same thing, and the very heart of the
>Abhidhamma, I find, because no other religion on earth teaches that
>the soul or the heart or the consciousness is in fact a stream of
>different realities arising and falling away in a stream of one citta
>at a time, not one single life that lasts from birth til death.
>
>The more I consider the problem the more I think unenduring is best,
>with the related concept that hard to endure would be dukkha dukkha.
>
>Still Pali is best, with or without the parenthesis juxtaposed!
>
>Amara

Amara,
well we have to agree to differ on the translation...you can check how Nina 
translates it and ask the others for their views. Another point to add to 
the Cambodia list with Khun Sujin!

Meanwhile I'm going to sign off and look forward to catching up with all the 
messages on return (2nd July). We'll be in the countryside with no internet, 
so probably have to wait til then. This has been a bumper month for messages 
(beaten all our records and the month is only halfway!).>Keep them up in our 
absence everyone!

best wishes, Sarah


 
498 From: shinlin 
Date: Fri Jun 16, 2000 10:45am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] metta to metta

 
  Dear Robert,
    Metta is not alobha but adosa. This is in the tipaka and Archan Sujin was talking about it two weeks ago in the Thai Dhamma talk. But I will check it out again.
 
best regards,
Shin
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Robert Kirkpatrick 
To: dhammastudygroup@egroups.com 
Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 7:18 PM
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] metta to metta



-Dear shin,
This is explained, I think, either in the
Abhidhammathasangaha or the Atthasalini, the
commentary to the Dhammasangani, I forget which. I
give some details but please check _ I am saying all
this just from my aging memory. 

Metta is alobha but it is a particular type of alobha.
 There are other cetasikas such as mudita and kurana
which arise only with those cittas that have
sympathetic joy or compassion and at those times no
metta. These are all kusala , they all take a concept,
a person as object but they are different from each
other.  

I think you made a tyoing mistake when you said "that
thought is metta which is DOSA" I guess you meant
"that thought is metta which is alobha?

Also you wrote that ' if the thought is kusala thought
then the moment of metta arises after that" 
At the very moments of thinking with kusala, metta may
be present. 
Robert


> Dear Robert,
>     When a moment of metta arise, doesn't it mean
> that all most all sobhana cetasika arises, except
> maybe not the panna ? So if at the moment, we see
> the dead person as that person's karuna, then the
> moment of that thought is metta which is dosa. I
> think it depends on the thought right after seeing
> the dead person. So if the thought is kusula
> thought, then the moment of metta arises after that.
> Pls correct me if I am going to a wrong view with
> this concept or understanding.


 
 
499 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Fri Jun 16, 2000 11:15am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] metta to metta

 
  Thank you Shinlin,
Quite right. Very careless of me. Thank you very much
for correcting this. 
Metta is adosa - no dosa,. Thus when we have aversion
to people there is dosa but this can immediately be a
reminder for metta, adosa to arise (if there are the
conditions).
Good work - please let us know more about the
characteristic of adosa and metta as you learn more. 

This is the way we help each other - not by assuming
anyone to be right or wrong but by carefully checking
anything anyone says - and if they are mistaken to
immediately point this out.
Thank you
Robert

--- shinlin  wrote:
> Dear Robert,
>     Metta is not alobha but adosa. This is in the
> tipaka and Archan Sujin was talking about it two
> weeks ago in the Thai Dhamma talk. But I will check
> it out again.
> 
> best regards,
> Shin
>   ----- Original Message ----- 
>   From: Robert Kirkpatrick 
>   Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 7:18 PM
>   Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] metta to metta
> 
> 
> 
>   -Dear shin,
>   This is explained, I think, either in the
>   Abhidhammathasangaha or the Atthasalini, the
>   commentary to the Dhammasangani, I forget which. I
>   give some details but please check _ I am saying
> all
>   this just from my aging memory. 
> 
>   Metta is alobha but it is a particular type of
> alobha.
>    There are other cetasikas such as mudita and
> kurana
>   which arise only with those cittas that have
>   sympathetic joy or compassion and at those times
> no
>   metta. These are all kusala , they all take a
> concept,
>   a person as object but they are different from
> each
>   other.  
> 
>   I think you made a tyoing mistake when you said
> "that
>   thought is metta which is DOSA" I guess you meant
>   "that thought is metta which is alobha?
> 
>   Also you wrote that ' if the thought is kusala
> thought
>   then the moment of metta arises after that" 
>   At the very moments of thinking with kusala, metta
> may
>   be present. 
>   Robert
> 
> 
>   > Dear Robert,
>   >     When a moment of metta arise, doesn't it
> mean
>   > that all most all sobhana cetasika arises,
> except
>   > maybe not the panna ? So if at the moment, we
> see
>   > the dead person as that person's karuna, then
> the
>   > moment of that thought is metta which is dosa. I
>   > think it depends on the thought right after
> seeing
>   > the dead person. So if the thought is kusula
>   > thought, then the moment of metta arises after
> that.
>   > Pls correct me if I am going to a wrong view
> with
>   > this concept or understanding.
> 
> 

 
500 From: shinlin 
Date: Fri Jun 16, 2000 11:23am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] metta to metta

 
  Dear Robert,
    Your mind is working so fast that you type different from what you are thinking. This happens to me most of the time. So PATIENCE or KANTI is necessary, the LOBHA for quickly or fast is going to accumulate more impatience and lobha. Just a little suggest from an avija person.
 
metta,
shin
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Robert Kirkpatrick 
To: dhammastudygroup@egroups.com 
Sent: Friday, June 16, 2000 10:15 AM
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] metta to metta


Thank you Shinlin,
Quite right. Very careless of me. Thank you very much
for correcting this. 
Metta is adosa - no dosa,. Thus when we have aversion
to people there is dosa but this can immediately be a
reminder for metta, adosa to arise (if there are the
conditions).
Good work - please let us know more about the
characteristic of adosa and metta as you learn more. 

This is the way we help each other - not by assuming
anyone to be right or wrong but by carefully checking
anything anyone says - and if they are mistaken to
immediately point this out.
Thank you
Robert

--- shinlin <shinlin@zebra.co.th> wrote:
> Dear Robert,
>     Metta is not alobha but adosa. This is in the
> tipaka and Archan Sujin was talking about it two
> weeks ago in the Thai Dhamma talk. But I will check
> it out again.
> 
> best regards,
> Shin
>   ----- Original Message ----- 
>   From: Robert Kirkpatrick 
>   To: dhammastudygroup@egroups.com 
>   Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 7:18 PM
>   Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] metta to metta
> 
> 
> 
>   -Dear shin,
>   This is explained, I think, either in the
>   Abhidhammathasangaha or the Atthasalini, the
>   commentary to the Dhammasangani, I forget which. I
>   give some details but please check _ I am saying
> all
>   this just from my aging memory. 
> 
>   Metta is alobha but it is a particular type of
> alobha.
>    There are other cetasikas such as mudita and
> kurana
>   which arise only with those cittas that have
>   sympathetic joy or compassion and at those times
> no
>   metta. These are all kusala , they all take a
> concept,
>   a person as object but they are different from
> each
>   other.  
> 
>   I think you made a tyoing mistake when you said
> "that
>   thought is metta which is DOSA" I guess you meant
>   "that thought is metta which is alobha?
> 
>   Also you wrote that ' if the thought is kusala
> thought
>   then the moment of metta arises after that" 
>   At the very moments of thinking with kusala, metta
> may
>   be present. 
>   Robert
> 
> 
>   > Dear Robert,
>   >     When a moment of metta arise, doesn't it
> mean
>   > that all most all sobhana cetasika arises,
> except
>   > maybe not the panna ? So if at the moment, we
> see
>   > the dead person as that person's karuna, then
> the
>   > moment of that thought is metta which is dosa. I
>   > think it depends on the thought right after
> seeing
>   > the dead person. So if the thought is kusula
>   > thought, then the moment of metta arises after
> that.
>   > Pls correct me if I am going to a wrong view
> with
>   > this concept or understanding.
> 
> 
 
 
501 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Fri Jun 16, 2000 11:55am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] metta to metta

 
  good points again Shin,
Yesterday the postings were coming in so thick and
fast that I rushed through a few of the replies in
between classes and other duties. As you note this is
not developing khanti. Better I write less but be more
careful about what I write.
Robert

--- shinlin wrote:
> Dear Robert,
>     Your mind is working so fast that you type
> different from what you are thinking. This happens
> to me most of the time. So PATIENCE or KANTI is
> necessary, the LOBHA for quickly or fast is going to
> accumulate more impatience and lobha. Just a little
> suggest from an avija person.
> 
> metta,
> shin
>   ----- Original Message ----- 
>   From: Robert Kirkpatrick 
>   Sent: Friday, June 16, 2000 10:15 AM
>   Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] metta to metta
> 
> 
>   Thank you Shinlin,
>   Quite right. Very careless of me. Thank you very
> much
>   for correcting this. 
>   Metta is adosa - no dosa,. Thus when we have
> aversion
>   to people there is dosa but this can immediately
> be a
>   reminder for metta, adosa to arise (if there are
> the
>   conditions).
>   Good work - please let us know more about the
>   characteristic of adosa and metta as you learn
> more. 
> 
>   This is the way we help each other - not by
> assuming
>   anyone to be right or wrong but by carefully
> checking
>   anything anyone says - and if they are mistaken to
>   immediately point this out.
>   Thank you
>   Robert
> 


 
502 From: amara chay   
Date: Fri Jun 16, 2000 0:13pm
Subject: Re: Dukkha vs Anicca

 
  > Amara,
> well we have to agree to differ on the translation...you can check 
how Nina 
> translates it and ask the others for their views. Another point to 
add to 
> the Cambodia list with Khun Sujin!
> 
> Meanwhile I'm going to sign off and look forward to catching up
with 
all the 
> messages on return (2nd July). We'll be in the countryside with no 
internet, 
> so probably have to wait til then. This has been a bumper month for 
messages 
> (beaten all our records and the month is only halfway!).>Keep them 
up in our 
> absence everyone!
> 
> best wishes, Sarah

Jonothan and Sarah,

Once again, bon voyage, say bonjour to France for me (one of my 
favorite countries!)!  And see you in two weeks+!

As to the translations, I think that the way the site is full of 
Nina's work is evident enough of how I feel towards her work as, I 
paraphrase Robert, the world's greatest English writer on Buddhism.  
And of course she is one of my oldest dhamma friends.  Still I do not 
agree with all her choices of English terminologies such as her 
choosing to translate viriya as energy in her translations which
might have confused people in the context of, for example, our latest 
article on Viriya-Parami.  What with the preparations Mahajanaka took 
before the ship went down, I'm afraid everyone will rush to eat 
something to accumulate energy for the plight, when in fact it was
the mental energy or perseverance that was at work here, and I had
checked with Khun Sujin's sister who oversaw the translation on this 
matter before also.  There are a few like this, but in all her works 
are incomparable.  

Amara

 
503 From: Theresa   
Date: Fri Jun 16, 2000 0:49pm
Subject: Guidelines ?

 
  Hello,

Friends of this list have mentioned about "Anatta" in their daily 
practice.. (( Please correct me if I mistunderstand English. )) 

I learned to use "Impermanence" in daily practice..

Practicing Impermanence ??

When I'm mindful, I can see :
* there's a beginning of an event, but there's no "I"..
* there's an ending of an event, but there's no "I"..
* there's an event, but there's no "I"..
* there's one event, and another, and another, but there's no "I"..
* there's one consciousness related to a sense door, but there's 
no "I".. 
etc. etc.
where an event could be a vedana, a thought, or whatever we can 
perceive in a moment of mindfulness.. 

That's what I learned and have practiced as much as I can throughout 
the day.. Besides that, I do Sitting Meditation, because I have time 
to sit quietly in the morning right after I wake up, and also at 
night before I lie down to sleep, and because I sometimes have extra 
time during the day to just sit quietly alone.. 

What I learned and practiced stresses on "Impermanence" (changes, 
temporary).. 

When I learned, I take "Impermanence" (the word !) as a communication 
means, a term, a concept.. 

In my practice, I see changes after changes while I move about 
(live).. This Mindfulness could be continuous for some time, maybe 15 
minutes, 30 minutes, one hour, etc.. During that time, I only see a 
series of changes.. When I only see changes, the idea (concept ?) 
of "No Self" is evident from mindfulness to mindfulness, from moment 
to moment.. Changes -- Unsatisfactoriness -- Selfless ... They are 
experienced from mindfulness to mindfulness.. 

When we see Changes with mindfulness, we experience Impermanence..
When we see Changes continuously, we experience Self-less..
When we see Changes continuously for sometimes, we experience 
Unsatisfactoriness.. 

I wrote the above paragraphs because I guess that there is no 
difference (if there exists any?) between Venerable Mahasi's 
technique (terms?) and Sujin's.. 
I truly feel that there is no difference.. 
Impermanence is used as a guideline to help meditators..
Anatta is sort of like a guideline to help meditators..
Impermanence and Anatta, both, are interrelated and not different 
from each other.. 

Because of Impermanence, there's Anatta..

It seems that, out of metta for me, Sarah, Robert and Amara, have had 
a concern that I am attached to "attainment".. I have given it some 
thought.. I guess it's the communication problem, which causes the 
misunderstanding.. I use "experience" and "Insight", not to mean 
something saintly, but to refer to simple knowledge.. 

When a mosquitoe stings, I get an experience.. 
When I see a vedana, I get an experience..
When I see the beginning of a thought, I get an experience..
When I see the end of a thought, I get an experience..
When I see an angry or happy feeling in me, I get an experience.. 
When I feel comfortable or uncomfortable physically, I get an 
experience.. 

Insight (panna) is my own direct experience of what Buddha 
taught/mentioned..

When I see the beginning of a thought, I have an Insight (the rise)..
When I see the end of a thought, I have an Insight (the fall)..
When I see a thought (either happy or sad), I have an Insight 
(sankhara)..
When I see an angry or happy feeling in me, I have an Insight 
(sankhara)..
When I feel comfortable or uncomfortable physically, I have an 
Insight (vedana).. 

The "Levels of Insight", which I know and mentioned in my previous 
posts, are just it, Experience and Insight, as I explained above.. 
Nothing fancy.. Nothing saintly.. Just Experience.. :-))

I have learned few terms (very few, indeed), but each term I use is 
related to my direct experience and Insight some time during my 
practice.. Each term I use has a true meaning to me, through 
experience.. 

I tend to forget terms I learn for the sake of learning a 
term/concept, but I remember terms which I have direct experience.. 

I'm grateful that you have supported me by trying to relate my layman 
terms to the correct terms, and that you have shared with me concepts 
and terminologies, learned from books and Tipitaka.. 

With metta,

Theresa.

 
504 From: amara chay   
Date: Fri Jun 16, 2000 0:56pm
Subject: Re: metta to metta

 
  --- Robert Kirkpatrick 
 wrote:
> good points again Shin,
> Yesterday the postings were coming in so thick and
> fast that I rushed through a few of the replies in
> between classes and other duties. As you note this is
> not developing khanti. Better I write less but be more
> careful about what I write.
> Robert


Robert, 

I must protest for the sake of all your readers that a few mistakes 
does not warrant the deprivation of our opportunity to read your 
writings!  I argue with respect to maranasati that we should all do 
the best we can while we still can and we never know how much time we 
have left to study the dhamma on this earth, so that each word of 
wisdom is invaluable.  Thanks for all your messages and we appreciate 
the great effort you put into your correspondance, and please keep it 
up as much as possible, we look forward to reading and learning from 
them,

Amara

 
505 From: shinlin 
Date: Fri Jun 16, 2000 2:07pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: metta to metta

 
  Dear Mr.Bonk,
    If you would like to receive the mail which the dhammastudy group are discussing about, you have to send one of your mail to  mailto:dhammastudygroup@eGroups.com so in the future the mail will automatically send to your mail.
        How are you doing with the books, I gave you ?If there is any questions or anything you would like to understand or share, pls feel free to contact all the dhamma friends or me in this group discussion.
      To stress again, I am Chaichan's wife.
 
best regards,
Shin


 
 
506 From: amara chay   
Date: Fri Jun 16, 2000 2:09pm
Subject: Re: Guidelines ?

 
  > It seems that, out of metta for me, Sarah, Robert and Amara, have 
had 
> a concern that I am attached to "attainment".. 

Theresa, 

Thanks for including me in this list, but I have never been concerned 
about your attachment to 'attainment': according to the Tipitaka
there can be none, if one has reached it, but without real knowledge 
of what it is there can be lobha for it to arise.  Nor does the 
person in whom it arises need anyone to tell him that he has attained 
something, it is much too extraordinary to miss, and each level of 
knowledge is permanent, never to be questioned again.  Nor does one 
need anyone else to confirm the knowledge, it is real according to 
the Tipitaka.

> When a mosquitoe stings, I get an experience.. 
> When I see a vedana, I get an experience..
> When I see the beginning of a thought, I get an experience..
> When I see the end of a thought, I get an experience..
> When I see an angry or happy feeling in me, I get an experience.. 
> When I feel comfortable or uncomfortable physically, I get an 
> experience.. 

May I suggest you be even more conscientious and not just experience 
the beginnings and endings of the trains of thoughts?  While you are 
thinking there were millions of citta functioning in their 
infinitely swift opperations, your were probably seeing and hearing 
things while you were thinking, also, and there must have been bodily
experiences:- the sight, sound, heat or cold, softness or hardness, 
motion or tension are all paramatthadhamma.  They can all be studied 
to accumulate panna about the true characteristics of nama and rupa.  
Right now you are in front of the computer screen, is there no sight? 
 Is it not completely different from sound, seeing from hearing?  
All this in turn are completely different in nature from touch, from 
smell, and especially from thoughts.  These realities do not even
have to be named or called anything in any language, at the level of 
sati, language and terminologies are useless, seeing realities as 
they really are is what accumulates real panna.

The citta is the element that knows, which makes it hard for it to 
know itself.  It is a marvelous reality that only the complex 
accumulations of the citta can create, and only the panna accumulated 
through the citta can extinguish.  You are  a programmer, and I can 
see that your typing is way above average, so I can't conceive that 
you are such a slow reader, perhaps rather you do not have the 
patience to read other's writings?  But I really recommend you find 
a little time each day to read the advanced section of 
<http://www.dhammastudy.com/> especially the 'Summary of 
Paramatthadhamma', which to me is the key to the Tipitaka as well as 
sati and panna and through the later, enlightenment.  It is the most 
important book in the world to me, for the neccessary solid basics on 
dhamma studies.
 
> Insight (panna) is my own direct experience of what Buddha 
> taught/mentioned..
> 
> When I see the beginning of a thought, I have an Insight (the 
rise)..
> When I see the end of a thought, I have an Insight (the fall)..
> When I see a thought (either happy or sad), I have an Insight 
> (sankhara)..
> When I see an angry or happy feeling in me, I have an Insight 
> (sankhara)..
> When I feel comfortable or uncomfortable physically, I have an 
> Insight (vedana).. 

When you have sati arising, it is the reality not the concept that is 
studied, but in the meantime, the 'I' covers everything up as I do 
this and that whereas it is the citta doing its function.  And the 
study of  citta and their objects never intrude in daily life, not 
only did people attain knowledge while listening or reading or 
discussing the dhamma, but in the Tipitaka they did while they were 
working (one was a slave woman who attained when the pot boiled
over!) and leaning down to rest, and lots of other situations, such 
as seeing a beautiful woman dancing or something to that effect, as 
well.  Sati is as swift as the citta because it is a cetasika that 
arises with the citta, when there are conditions for it to arise.  
One of the main conditions is the study on the intellectual level of 
what everything is, and for this you need the terminologies to get a 
clear understanding, and again the 'Summary' is of incomparable 
value.  But no one can study no matter what for you, you must do it 
yourself, otherwise with his unlimitted powers the Buddha would have 
made us all bahusutta, so he wouldn't have had to spend 45 yrs.  
teaching this intricate path and setting up Buddhism for us.

Amara

 
507 From: shinlin 
Date: Fri Jun 16, 2000 2:23pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Guidelines ?

 
  Good Explanation ! Pi Joy ! I No one can be concern with anyone's attainment and there is no attainment to be attach to anyway.
 
shin
----- Original Message ----- 
From: amara chay 
To: dhammastudygroup@egroups.com 
Sent: Friday, June 16, 2000 1:09 PM
Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Guidelines ?


> It seems that, out of metta for me, Sarah, Robert and Amara, have 
had 
> a concern that I am attached to "attainment".. 

Theresa, 

Thanks for including me in this list, but I have never been concerned 
about your attachment to 'attainment': according to the Tipitaka
there can be none, if one has reached it, but without real knowledge 
of what it is there can be lobha for it to arise.  Nor does the 
person in whom it arises need anyone to tell him that he has attained 
something, it is much too extraordinary to miss, and each level of 
knowledge is permanent, never to be questioned again.  Nor does one 
need anyone else to confirm the knowledge, it is real according to 
the Tipitaka.

> When a mosquitoe stings, I get an experience.. 
> When I see a vedana, I get an experience..
> When I see the beginning of a thought, I get an experience..
> When I see the end of a thought, I get an experience..
> When I see an angry or happy feeling in me, I get an experience.. 
> When I feel comfortable or uncomfortable physically, I get an 
> experience.. 

May I suggest you be even more conscientious and not just experience 
the beginnings and endings of the trains of thoughts?  While you are 
thinking there were millions of citta functioning in their 
infinitely swift opperations, your were probably seeing and hearing 
things while you were thinking, also, and there must have been bodily
experiences:- the sight, sound, heat or cold, softness or hardness, 
motion or tension are all paramatthadhamma.  They can all be studied 
to accumulate panna about the true characteristics of nama and rupa.  
Right now you are in front of the computer screen, is there no sight? 
 Is it not completely different from sound, seeing from hearing?  
All this in turn are completely different in nature from touch, from 
smell, and especially from thoughts.  These realities do not even
have to be named or called anything in any language, at the level of 
sati, language and terminologies are useless, seeing realities as 
they really are is what accumulates real panna.

The citta is the element that knows, which makes it hard for it to 
know itself.  It is a marvelous reality that only the complex 
accumulations of the citta can create, and only the panna accumulated 
through the citta can extinguish.  You are  a programmer, and I can 
see that your typing is way above average, so I can't conceive that 
you are such a slow reader, perhaps rather you do not have the 
patience to read other's writings?  But I really recommend you find 
a little time each day to read the advanced section of 
<http://www.dhammastudy.com/> especially the 'Summary of 
Paramatthadhamma', which to me is the key to the Tipitaka as well as 
sati and panna and through the later, enlightenment.  It is the most 
important book in the world to me, for the neccessary solid basics on 
dhamma studies.
 
> Insight (panna) is my own direct experience of what Buddha 
> taught/mentioned..
> 
> When I see the beginning of a thought, I have an Insight (the 
rise)..
> When I see the end of a thought, I have an Insight (the fall)..
> When I see a thought (either happy or sad), I have an Insight 
> (sankhara)..
> When I see an angry or happy feeling in me, I have an Insight 
> (sankhara)..
> When I feel comfortable or uncomfortable physically, I have an 
> Insight (vedana).. 

When you have sati arising, it is the reality not the concept that is 
studied, but in the meantime, the 'I' covers everything up as I do 
this and that whereas it is the citta doing its function.  And the 
study of  citta and their objects never intrude in daily life, not 
only did people attain knowledge while listening or reading or 
discussing the dhamma, but in the Tipitaka they did while they were 
working (one was a slave woman who attained when the pot boiled
over!) and leaning down to rest, and lots of other situations, such 
as seeing a beautiful woman dancing or something to that effect, as 
well.  Sati is as swift as the citta because it is a cetasika that 
arises with the citta, when there are conditions for it to arise.  
One of the main conditions is the study on the intellectual level of 
what everything is, and for this you need the terminologies to get a 
clear understanding, and again the 'Summary' is of incomparable 
value.  But no one can study no matter what for you, you must do it 
yourself, otherwise with his unlimitted powers the Buddha would have 
made us all bahusutta, so he wouldn't have had to spend 45 yrs.  
teaching this intricate path and setting up Buddhism for us.

Amara



508 From: amara chay   
Date: Fri Jun 16, 2000 7:32am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Guidelines ?

 
  Hi! Shin,

We missed you at the English discussions!  See you this Saturday?

Amara

 
509 From: shinlin 
Date: Fri Jun 16, 2000 2:37pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Guidelines ?

 
  Last Saturday, I was attacked by food poisoning. So I was in the hospital for 6 days. 6 days in the hospital is a good retreat for me to contemplate dhamma and the teachings. Sometimes Akusula Vipaka can allow us to think about dhamma and teachings too, if we are not overwhelmed by the Dukkha Vedana, as in your Dukkha Dukkha.
 
shin
----- Original Message ----- 
From: amara chay 
To: dhammastudygroup@egroups.com 
Sent: Friday, June 16, 2000 1:32 PM
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Guidelines ?


Hi! Shin,

We missed you at the English discussions!  See you this Saturday?

Amara

 
510 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Fri Jun 16, 2000 2:47pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: About practices/teachings

 
  >Let the Truths speak for themselves..
>Buddha taught the unshakable Truths..
>Should we doubt Buddha's teaching ?
>
>Experience is subjective.. Yes !!


Theresa,

You suggest that the truths taught by the Buddha can be experienced for 
themselves.  Of course they can.  But (and it’s a big but) only by 
developing the understanding of realities exactly as taught by the Buddha 
also.

This means that if the practice is not correct from the beginning, the 
experiences that follow will not be those of the Buddha’s teaching, no 
matter how similar they may appear to be.  So just because we have 
experiences that seem to be confirmed by the teachings, this should not be 
taken as meaning that our practice has been correct.  Our lack of 
understanding and wrong view (not to mention our conceit) is bound to colour 
our judgement.

In the Buddha’s time, the practice began with listening (at length) to the 
teachings.  Why should it be any different today?

And next time you read a sutta, you might like to question whether the 
Buddha was really instructing his listeners to go and do a special 
meditation practice.

Jonothan
PS  I have enjoyed and benefited from our recent exchanges.  But I won't be 
able to respond for the next 2 weeks or so, as I'll be away.  I'll miss the 
discussion!


 
511 From: amara chay   
Date: Fri Jun 16, 2000 2:47pm
Subject: Re: Guidelines ?

 
  --- "shinlin"  wrote:
> Last Saturday, I was attacked by food poisoning. So I was in the 
hospital for 6 days. 6 days in the hospital is a good retreat for me 
to contemplate dhamma and the teachings. Sometimes Akusula Vipaka can 
allow us to think about dhamma and teachings too, if we are not 
overwhelmed by the Dukkha Vedana, as in your Dukkha Dukkha.
> 
> shin


I'm glad you were able to seize in the dukkha dukkha the opportunity 
to study!  A true student of the dhamma to make such a sorry vipaka 
the object of knowledge.  Do take care til tomorrow, though, 

Amara

 
512 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Fri Jun 16, 2000 3:17pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Dukkha vs Anicca

 
  Amara,

Thanks for your encouraging reminders.  I will do my best to keep them in 
mind!

Jonothan
(signing off)




 
513 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Fri Jun 16, 2000 4:55pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: metta to metta

 
  Shin,

A person wishing to receive the mail or post to the list must first join the 
group by sending a (blank) message to-

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/post?protectID=114015113213038031090057228208100015039145163254024027013117194194210025154176117182195013035049209110050229241215

He/she will then be asked to go through the usual registration formalities.

Alternatively, he/she may browse the archives by going to-

http://www.egroups.com/group/dhammastudygroup

Jonothan




 
514 From: shinlin 
Date: Fri Jun 16, 2000 5:27pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: metta to metta

 
  Dear Bonk,
    Jonothan has sent the following method to join the group.
 
regards,
Shin
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Jonothan Abbott 
To: dhammastudygroup@egroups.com 
Sent: Friday, June 16, 2000 3:55 PM
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: metta to metta


Shin,

A person wishing to receive the mail or post to the list must first join the 
group by sending a (blank) message to-

dhammastudygroup-subscribe@eGroups.com

He/she will then be asked to go through the usual registration formalities.

Alternatively, he/she may browse the archives by going to-

http://www.egroups.com/group/dhammastudygroup

Jonothan



 
515 From: amara chay   
Date: Fri Jun 16, 2000 5:26pm
Subject: Changes in the schedule

 
  Dear friends in the dhamma,

Khun Sujin has just called to tell me the time of the next English 
discussion, tomorrow at 1:30 at the foundation building.  She has 
changed the programming in that when there are English speakers who 
are interested, they would not have to wait for a certain day to hear 
the dhamma, but would be able to contact her and set up the 
discussions as needed.  This of course cancels the every other 
Saturday schedules, although I think that it is a pity... So if
anyone is visiting Bangkok, please set up your meetings with her
ahead 
of time, to avoid disappointments.

Betty, do you think you can find the foundation building?  May I 
invite you to lunch (my turn!) tomorrow?  Please give me a call,

Amara

 
516 From: Theresa   
Date: Fri Jun 16, 2000 10:35pm
Subject: Fwd: danger is friend

 
  Hello,

I copied from another dhamma listthe following message (and excerpts 
from Suttas) .. I hope you like it and find it useful to you..

With metta,

Theresa.
========================

Dear m.,

There are ideas relating to the Buddhadhamma, and there is the 
Buddhadhamma. Where do you think the danger is friend?

What and Who is the "I AM" "obsessed  with ideas relating to the
Buddhadharma?

Is deliberately turning thoughts, even to the Buddhadhamma 
mindfulness? Perhaps it might be beneficial to see if mindfulness is 
something more than concepts, turning thoughts, and mere cognitive-
rational mental modifications. Bare attention is not necessarily part 
of cenceptualization.

Yes, danger is seen in this.

Here is why:

Anguttara Nikaya VIII.30
Anuruddha Sutta
To Anuruddha
For free distribution only, as a gift of Dhamma

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Once the Blessed One was staying among the Bhaggas in the Deer Park at
Bhesakala Grove, near Crocodile Haunt. And at that time Ven. 
Anuruddha was living among the Cetis in the Eastern Bamboo Park. 
Then, as he was alone in seclusion, this line of thinking arose in 
Ven. Anuruddha's awareness: "This Dhamma is for one who is modest, 
not for one who is self-aggrandizing. This Dhamma is for one who is 
content, not for one who is discontent. This Dhamma is for one who is 
reclusive, not for one who is entangled. This Dhamma is for one whose 
persistence is aroused, not for one who is lazy. This Dhamma is for 
one whose mindfulness is established, not for one whose mindfulness 
is confused. This Dhamma is for one whose mind is centered, not for ne
whose mind is uncentered. This Dhamma is for one endowed with 
discernment, not for whose discernment is weak."

Then the Blessed One, realizing with his awareness the line of 
thinking in Ven. Anuruddha's awareness -- just as a strong man might 
extend his flexed arm or flex his extended arm -- disappeared from 
among the Bhaggas in the Deer Park at Bhesakala Grove, near Crocodile 
Haunt, and re-appeared among the Cetis in the Eastern Bamboo Park, 
right in front of Ven. Anuruddha.

There he sat down on a prepared seat. As for Ven. Anuruddha, having 
bowed down to the Blessed One, he sat to one side. As he was sitting 
there the Blessed One said to him, "Good, Anuruddha, very good. It's 
good that you think these thoughts of a great person: 'This Dhamma is 
for one who is modest, not for one who is self-aggrandizing. This 
Dhamma is for one who is content, not for one who is discontent. This 
Dhamma is for one who is reclusive, not for one who is entangled. 
This Dhamma is for one whose persistence is aroused, not for one who 
is lazy. This Dhamma is for one whose mindfulness is established, not 
for one whose mindfulness is confused. This Dhamma is for one whose 
mind is centered, not for one whose mind is uncentered. This Dhamma 
is for one endowed with discernment, not for one whose discernment is 
weak.' Now then, Anuruddha, think the eighth thought of a great 
person: 'This Dhamma is for one who enjoys non-complication, who 
delights in non-complication, not for one who enjoys & delights in 
complication.'

"Anuruddha, when you think these eight thoughts of a great person, 
then -- whenever you want -- quite withdrawn from sensuality, 
withdrawn from unskillful qualities, you will enter & remain in the 
first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by 
directed thought & evaluation. When you think these eight thoughts of 
a great person, then -- whenever you want -- with the stilling of 
directed thought and evaluation, you will enter & remain in the 
second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of composure, unification of 
awareness free from directed thought & evaluation -- internal 
assurance...with the fading of rapture, you will remain in equanimity,
mindful & alert, physically sensitive to pleasure. You will enter & 
remain in the third jhana, of which the Noble Ones 
declare, 'Equanimous and mindful, he has a pleasurable abiding.' When 
you think these eight thoughts of a great person, then -- whenever 
you want -- with the abandoning of pleasure & pain, as with the 
earlier disappearance of elation & distress, you will enter & remain 
in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither-
pleasure-nor-pain.

"Now, when you think these eight thoughts of a great person and 
become a person who can attain at will, without trouble or 
difficulty, these four jhanas -- heightened mental states providing a 
pleasant abiding in the here & now -- then your robe of cast-off rags 
will seem to you to be just like the clothes chest of a householder 
or householder's son, full of clothes of many colors. As you live 
contented, it will serve for your delight, for a comfortable abiding, 
for non-agitation, & for alighting on Unbinding.

"When you think these eight thoughts of a great person and become a 
person who can attain at will, without trouble or difficulty, these 
four jhanas -- heightened mental states providing a pleasant abiding 
in the here & now -- then your meal of almsfood will seem to you to 
be just like the rice & wheat of a householder or householder's son, 
cleaned of black grains, and served with a variety of sauces & 
seasonings...your dwelling at the foot of a tree will seem to you to 
be just like the gabled mansion of a householder or householder's 
son, plastered inside & out, draft-free, bolted, and with its 
shutters closed...your bed on a spread of grass will seem to you like 
the couch of a householder or householder's son, spread with long-
haired coverlets, white woolen coverlets, embroidered coverlets, 
antelope-hide & deer-skin rugs, covered with a canopy, and with red 
cushions for the head & feet...

"When you think these eight thoughts of a great person and become a 
person who can attain at will, without trouble or difficulty, these 
four jhanas -- heightened mental states providing a pleasant abiding 
in the here & now -- then your medicine of strong-smelling urine will 
seem to you to be just like the various tonics of a householder or 
householder's son: ghee, fresh butter, oil, honey, and molasses 
sugar. As you live contented, it will serve for your delight, for a 
comfortable abiding, for non-agitation, & for alighting on Unbinding.

"Now, then, Anuruddha, you are to stay right here among the Cetis for 
the coming Rains Retreat."

"As you say, venerable sir," Ven. Anuruddha replied.

Then, having given this exhortation to Ven. Anuruddha, the Blessed 
One -- as a strong man might extend his flexed arm or flex his 
extended arm -- disappeared from the Eastern Bamboo Park of the Cetis 
and reappeared among the Bhaggas in the Deer Park at Bhesakala Grove, 
near Crocodile Haunt. He sat down on a prepared seat and, as he was 
sitting there, he addressed the monks: "Monks, I will teach you the 
eight thoughts of a great person. Listen & pay close attention. I 
will speak."

"Yes, lord," the monks responded.

The Blessed One said, "Now, what are the eight thoughts of a great 
person? This Dhamma is for one who is modest, not for one who is self-
aggrandizing. This Dhamma is for one who is content, not for one who 
is discontent. This Dhamma is for one who is reclusive, not for one 
who is entangled. This Dhamma is for one whose persistence is 
aroused, not for one who is lazy. This Dhamma is for one whose 
mindfulness is established, not for one whose mindfulness is 
confused. This Dhamma is for one whose mind is centered, not for one 
whose mind is uncentered. This Dhamma is for one endowed with 
discernment, not for one whose discernment is weak. This Dhamma is 
for one who enjoys non-complication,who delights in non-complication, 
not for one who enjoys & delights in complication.

"'This Dhamma is for one who is modest, not for one who is
self-aggrandizing.' Thus was it said. With reference to what was it 
said? There is the case where a monk, being modest, does not want it 
to be known that 'He is modest.' Being content, he does not want it 
to be known that 'He is content.' Being reclusive, he does not want 
it to be known that 'He is reclusive.' His persistence being aroused, 
he does not want it to be known that 'His persistence is aroused.' 
His mindfulness being established, he does not want it to be known 
that 'His mindfulness is established.' His mind being centered, he 
does not want it to be known that 'His mind is centered.' Being 
endowed with discernment, he does not want it to be known that 'He is
endowed with discernment.' Enjoying non-complication, he does not 
want it to be known that 'He is enjoying non-complication.' 'This 
Dhamma is for one who is modest, not for one who is self-
aggrandizing.' Thus was it said. And with reference to this was it 
said.

"'This Dhamma is for one who is content, not for one who is 
discontent.' Thus was it said. With reference to what was it said? 
There is the case where a monk is content with any old robe cloth at 
all, any old almsfood, any old lodging, any old medicinal requisites 
for curing sickness at all.

'This Dhamma is for one who is content, not for one who is 
discontent.' Thus was it said. And with reference to this was it said.

"'This Dhamma is for one who is reclusive, not for one who is 
entangled.' Thus was it said. With reference to what was it said? 
There is the case where a monk, when living in seclusion, is visited 
by monks, nuns, lay men, lay women, kings, royal ministers,sectarians 
& their disciples. With his mind bent on seclusion, tending toward 
seclusion, inclined toward seclusion, aiming at seclusion, relishing 
renunciation, he converses with them only as much is necessary for 
them to take their leave. 'This Dhamma is for one who is reclusive, 
not for one in entanglement.' Thus was it said. And with reference to 
this was it said.

"'This Dhamma is for one whose persistence is aroused, not for one 
who is lazy.' Thus was it said. With reference to what was it said? 
There is the case where a monk keeps his persistence aroused for 
abandoning unskillful mental qualities and taking on skillful mental 
qualities. He is steadfast, solid in his effort, not shirking his 
duties with regard to skillful mental qualities. 'This Dhamma is for 
one whose persistence is aroused, not for one who is lazy.' Thus was 
it said. And with reference to this was it said. 

"'This Dhamma is for one whose mindfulness is established, not for 
one whose mindfulness is confused.' Thus was it said. With reference 
to what was it said? There is the case where a monk is mindful, 
highly meticulous, remembering & able to call to mind even things 
that were done & said long ago. 'This Dhamma is for one whose 
mindfulness is established, not for one whose mindfulness is 
confused.' Thus was it said. And with reference to this was it said.

"'This Dhamma is for one whose mind is centered, not for one whose 
mind is uncentered.' Thus was it said. With reference to what was it 
said? There is the case where a monk, quite withdrawn from 
sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental qualities, enters & 
remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, 
accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. With the stilling of 
directed thought & evaluation, he enters & remains in the second 
jhana: rapture & pleasure born of composure, unification of awareness 
free from directed thought & evaluation -- internal assurance. With 
the fading of rapture he remains in equanimity, mindful & alert, and 
physically sensitive of pleasure. He enters & remains in the third  
jhana, of which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has 
a pleasurable abiding.' With the abandoning of pleasure & pain -- as 
with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress -- he enters & 
remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, 
neither pleasure nor pain. 'This Dhamma is for one whose mind is 
centered, not for one whose mind is uncentered.' Thus was it said. 
And with reference to this was it said.

"'This Dhamma is for one endowed with discernment, not for one whose
discernment is weak.' Thus was it said. With reference to what was it 
said? There is the case where a monk is discerning, endowed with 
discernment of arising & passing away -- noble, penetrating, leading 
to the right ending of stress. 'This Dhamma is for one endowed with 
discernment, not for one whose discernment is weak.' Thus was it 
said. And with reference to this was it said.

"'This Dhamma is for one who enjoys non-complication, who delights in
non-complication, not for one who enjoys & delights in complication.' 
Thus was it said. With reference to what was it said? There is the 
case where a monk's mind leaps up, grows confident, steadfast, & is 
firm in the cessation of complication. 'This Dhamma is for one who 
enjoys non-complication, who delights in non-complication, not for 
one who enjoys & delights in complication.' Thus was it said. And 
with reference to this was it said."

Now, during the following Rains Retreat, Ven. Anuruddha stayed right 
there in the Eastern Bamboo Park among the Cetis. Dwelling alone, 
secluded, heedful, ardent, & resolute, he in no long time reached & 
remained in the supreme goal of the holy life for which clansmen 
rightly go forth from home into homelessness, knowing & realizing it 
for himself in the here & now. He knew: "Birth is ended, the holy 
life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for the sake 
of this world." And thus Ven. Anuruddha became another one of the 
arahants. Then, on attaining arahantship, he uttered this verse:

Knowing my thoughts,
the Teacher, unexcelled in the cosmos,
came to me through his power
in a body made of mind.
He taught in line with my thoughts,
        and then further.
The Buddha,
    delighting in non-complication,
    taught non-complication.
Knowing his Dhamma,
I kept delighting in his bidding.
    The three knowledges
    have been attained;
    the Buddha's bidding,
        done.

And to reinforce the above:

Samyutta Nikaya XLVIII.10
Indriya-vibhanga Sutta
Analysis of the Mental Faculties
For free distribution only, as a gift of Dhamma

----------------------------------------------------------------------
------
----
"Monks, there are these five faculties. Which five? The faculty of
conviction, the faculty of persistence, the faculty of mindfulness, 
the faculty of concentration, the faculty of discernment.
"Now what is the faculty of conviction? There is the case where a 
monk, a noble disciple, has conviction, is convinced of the 
Tathagata's Awakening:
'Indeed, the Blessed One is worthy and rightly self-awakened, 
consummate in knowledge & conduct, well-gone, an expert with regard 
to the world, unexcelled as a trainer for those people fit to be 
tamed, the Teacher of divine & human beings, awakened, blessed.' This 
is called the faculty of conviction.

"And what is the faculty of persistence? There is the case where a 
monk, a noble disciple, keeps his persistence aroused for abandoning 
unskillful mental qualities and taking on skillful mental qualities. 
He is steadfast, solid in his effort, not shirking his duties with 
regard to skillful mental qualities. He generates desire, endeavors, 
arouses persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the 
non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet 
arisen...for the sake of the abandoning of evil, unskillful qualities 
that have arisen...for the sake of the arising of skillful qualities 
that have not yet arisen...(and) for the maintenance, non-confusion, 
increase, plenitude, development, & culmination of skillful qualities 
that have arisen. This is called the faculty of persistence.

"And what is the faculty of mindfulness? There is the case where a 
monk, a noble disciple, is mindful, highly meticulous, remembering & 
able to call to mind even things that were done & said long ago. He 
remains focused on the body in & of itself -- ardent, alert, & 
mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to the 
world. He remains focused on feelings in & of themselves...the mind 
in & of itself...mental qualities in & of themselves -- ardent, 
alert, & mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to 
the world. This is called the faculty of mindfulness.

"And what is the faculty of concentration? There is the case where a 
monk, a noble disciple, making it his object to let go, attains 
concentration, attains singleness of mind. Quite withdrawn from 
sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental qualities, he enters & 
remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, 
accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. With the stilling of 
directed thought & evaluation, he enters & remains in the second 
jhana: rapture & pleasure born of composure, unification of awareness 
free from directed thought & evaluation -- internal assurance. With 
the fading of rapture he remains in equanimity, mindful & alert, and 
physically sensitive of pleasure. He enters & remains in the third 
jhana, of which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has
a pleasurable abiding.' With the abandoning of pleasure & pain -- as 
with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress -- he enters & 
remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, 
neither pleasure nor pain. This is called the faculty of 
concentration.

"And what is the faculty of discernment? There is the case where a 
monk, a noble disciple, is discerning, endowed with discernment of 
arising & passing away -- noble, penetrating, leading to the right 
ending of stress. He discerns, as it is actually present: 'This is 
stress...This is the origination of stress...This is the cessation of 
stress...This is the path of practice leading to the cessation of 
stress.' This is called the faculty of discernment.

"These are the five faculties."

As to danger specifically:

Majjhima Nikaya 105
Sunakkhatta Sutta
To Sunakkhatta
For free distribution only, as a gift of Dhamma

----------------------------------------------------------------------
I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near 
Vesali in the Great Forest, at the Peaked Pavilion. Now at that time 
a large number of monks had declared final gnosis in the Blessed 
One's presence: "We discern that 'Birth is ended, the holy life 
fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for the sake of 
this world.'"  Sunakkhatta the Licchavin heard that "A large number 
of monks, it seems, have declared final gnosis in the Blessed One's 
presence: 'We discern that "Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, 
the task done. There is nothing further for the sake of this 
world."'" Then Sunakkhatta the Licchavin went to the Blessed One and, 
on arrival, have bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was 
sitting there he said to the Blessed One: "I have heard, lord, that a 
large number of monks have declared final gnosis in the Blessed One's 
presence: 'We discern that "Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, 
the task done. There is nothing further for the sake of this world."' 
Now, have they rightly declared final gnosis, or is it the case that 
some of them have declared final gnosis out of over-estimation?"

"Sunakkhatta, of the monks who have declared final gnosis in my
presence...it is the case that some have rightly declared final 
gnosis, whereas others have declared final gnosis out of over-
estimation. As for those who have rightly declared final gnosis, that 
is their truth. As for those who have declared final gnosis out of 
over-estimation, the thought occurs to the Tathagata, 'I will teach 
them the Dhamma.' But there are cases when the thought has occurred 
to the Tathagata, 'I will teach them the Dhamma,' but there are 
worthless men who come to him having formulated question after 
question, so that his thought, 'I will teach them the Dhamma,'changes 
into something else."

"Now is the time, O Blessed One. Now is the time, O One Well-Gone, 
for the Blessed One to teach the Dhamma. Having heard the Blessed 
One, the monks will remember it."

"Then in that case, Sunakkhatta, listen & pay close attention. I will
speak."

"As you say, lord," Sunakkhatta the Licchavin responded to the 
Blessed One.

The Blessed One said: "Sunakkhatta, there are these five strands of
sensuality. Which five? Forms cognizable via the eye -- agreeable, 
pleasing, charming, endearing, fostering desire, enticing. Sounds 
cognizable via the ear...Aromas cognizable via the nose...Flavors 
cognizable via the tongue...Tactile sensations cognizable the body -- 
agreeable, pleasing, charming, endearing, fostering desire, enticing. 
These are the five strands of sensuality.

"Now there's the possible case where a certain person is intent on 
the baits of the world. When a person is intent on the baits of the 
world, that sort of talk interests him, his thinking & evaluating 
follow along those lines, he feels at home with that sort of person, 
and his mind gets along with that sort of person. But when talk 
concerning the imperturbable [the fourth jhana and the spheres of the 
infinitude of space & the infinitude of consciousness] is going on, 
he does not listen, does not lend ear, and does not exert his mind to 
know. He does not get along with that sort of person; his mind does 
not feel at home with him.

"Suppose that there were a man who had left his home village or town 
a long time ago. And he were to meet with a man who had left the 
village or town only a short time ago. He would ask if the people in 
the village or town were secure, well-fed, & free of disease, and the 
second man would tell him is they were secure, well-fed, & free of 
disease. Now, what do you think, Sunakkhatta. Would the first man 
listen to the second man, lend ear, and exert his mind to know? Would 
he get along with the second man; would his mind feel at home with 
him?"

"Yes, lord."

"In the same way, it is possible that there is the case where a 
certain person is intent on the baits of the world. When a person is 
intent on the baits of the world, that sort of talk interests him, 
his thinking & evaluating follow along those lines, he feels at home 
with that sort of person, and his mind gets along with that sort of 
person. But when talk concerning the imperturbable [the fourth jhana 
and the spheres of the infinitude of space and the infinitude of 
consciousness] is going on, he does not listen, does not lend ear, 
and does not exert his mind to know. He does not get along with that 
sort of person; his mind does not feel at home with him. This is how 
it can be known that 'This person is intent on the baits of the 
world.'

"Now, there's the possible case where a certain person is intent on 
the imperturbable. When a person is intent on the imperturbable, that 
sort of talk interests him, his thinking & evaluating follow along 
those lines, he feels at home with that sort of person, and his mind 
gets along with that sort of person. But when talk concerning the 
baits of the world is going on, he does not listen, does not lend 
ear, and does not exert his mind to know. He does not get along with 
that sort of person; his mind does not feel at home with him.

"Just as a yellow leaf released from its stem is incapable of ever 
again becoming green, in the same way, when a person is intent on the
imperturbable, he is released from the fetter of the baits of the 
world. This is how it can be known that 'This person, disjoined from 
the fetter of the baits of the world, is intent on the imperturbable.'

"Now, there's the possible case where a certain person is intent on 
the sphere of nothingness. When a person is intent on the sphere of 
nothingness, that sort of talk interests him, his thinking & 
evaluating follow along those lines, he feels at home with that sort 
of person, and his mind gets along with that sort of person. But when 
talk concerning the imperturbable is going on, he does not listen, 
does not lend ear, and does not exert his mind to know. He does not 
get along with that sort of person; his mind does not feel at home 
with him.

"Just as a thick rock broken in two cannot be put back together 
again, in the same way, when a person is intent on the sphere of 
nothingness, he has broken the fetter of the imperturbable. This is 
how it can be known that 'This person, disjoined from the fetter of 
the imperturbable, is intent on the sphere of nothingness.'

"Now, there's the possible case where a certain person is intent on 
the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception. When a person is 
intent on the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception, that 
sort of talk interests him, his thinking & evaluating follow along 
those lines, he feels at home with that sort of person, and his mind 
gets along with that sort of person. But when talk concerning the 
sphere of nothingness is going on, he does not listen, does not lend 
ear, and does not exert his mind to know. He does not get along with 
that sort of person; his mind does not feel at home with him.

"Sunakkhatta, suppose that a person, having eaten some delicious 
food, were to vomit it up. What do you think -- would he have any 
desire for that food?"

"No, lord. Why is that? Because he would consider that food to be
disgusting."

"In the same way, when a person is intent on the sphere of neither
perception nor non-perception, he has vomited up the fetter of the 
sphere of nothingness. This is how it can be known that 'This person, 
disjoined from the fetter of the sphere of nothingness, is intent on 
the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception.'

"Now, there's the possible case where a certain person is rightly 
intent on Unbinding. When a person is rightly intent on Unbinding, 
that sort of talk interests him, his thinking & evaluating follow 
along those lines, he feels at home with that sort of person, and his 
mind gets along with that sort of person. But when talk concerning 
the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception is going on, he 
does not listen, does not lend ear, and does not exert his mind to 
know. He does not get along with that sort of person; his mind does 
not feel at home with him.

"Just as a palm tree with its top cut off is incapable of further 
growth, in the same way, when a person is rightly intent on 
Unbinding, he has destroyed the fetter of the sphere of neither 
perception nor non-perception, has destroyed it by the root, like an 
uprooted palm tree deprived of the conditions of existence, not 
destined for future arising. This is how it can be known that 'This 
person, disjoined from the fetter of the baits of the world, is 
intent on Unbinding.'

"Now, there's the possible case where a certain monk thinks, 'Craving 
is said by the Contemplative [the Buddha] to be an arrow. The poison 
of ignorance spreads its toxin through desire, passion, & ill will. I 
have abandoned the arrow. I have expelled the poison of ignorance. I 
am rightly intent on Unbinding.' Because this is not true of him, he 
might pursue those things that are unsuitable for a person rightly 
intent on Unbinding. He might pursue unsuitable forms & sights with 
the eye. He might pursue unsuitable sounds with the ear...unsuitable 
aromas with the nose...unsuitable flavors with the  tongue... 
unsuitable tactile sensations with the body. He might pursue 
unsuitable ideas with the intellect. When he pursues unsuitable forms 
& sights with the eye...pursue unsuitable ideas with the intellect, 
lust invades the mind. With his mind invaded by lust, he incurs death 
or death-like suffering.

"Suppose that a man were wounded with an arrow thickly smeared with 
poison. His friends & companions, kinsmen & relatives would provide 
him with a surgeon. The surgeon would cut around the opening of the 
wound with a knife and then would probe for the arrow with a probe.  
He then would pull out the arrow and extract the poison, leaving a 
residue behind. Knowing that a residue was left behind, he would 
say, 'My good man, your arrow has been pulled out. The poison has 
been extracted, with a residue left behind, but it is not enough to 
do you harm. Eat suitable food. Don't eat unsuitable food, or else 
the wound will fester. Wash the wound frequently, smear it with an 
ointment frequently, so that blood & pus don't fill the opening of 
the wound. Don't walk around in the wind & sun, or else dust & dirt 
may contaminate the opening of the wound. Keep looking after the 
wound, my good man, and work for its healing.'

"The thought would occur to the man: 'My arrow has been pulled out. 
The poison has been extracted, with a residue left behind, but it is 
not enough to do me harm.' He would eat unsuitable food, so the wound 
would fester. He wouldn't wash the wound or smear it with an ointment 
frequently, so blood & pus would fill the opening of the wound. He 
would walk around in the wind & sun, so dust & dirt would contaminate 
the opening of the wound. He wouldn't keep looking after the wound or 
work for its healing. Now, both because of these unsuitable actions 
of his and because of the residue of the dirty poison left behind, 
the wound would swell. With the swelling of the wound he would incur 
death or death-like suffering.

"In the same way, there's the possible case where a certain monk 
thinks, 'Craving is said by the Contemplative to be an arrow. The 
poison of ignorance spreads its toxin through desire, passion, & ill 
will. I have abandoned the arrow. I have expelled the poison of 
ignorance. I am rightly intent on Unbinding.' Because this is not 
true of him, he might pursue those things that are unsuitable for a 
person rightly intent on Unbinding. He might pursue unsuitable forms 
& sights with the eye. He might pursue unsuitable sounds with the 
ear...unsuitable aromas with the nose...unsuitable flavors with the 
tongue...unsuitable tactile sensations with the body. He might pursue 
unsuitable ideas with the intellect. When he pursues unsuitable forms 
& sights with the eye...pursue unsuitable ideas with the intellect, 
lust invades the mind. With his mind invaded by lust, he incurs death 
or death-like suffering. For this is death in the discipline of the 
noble ones: when one renounces the training and returns to the lower
life. And this is death-like suffering: when one commits a defiled 
offense.

"Now, there's the possible case where a certain monk thinks, 'Craving 
is said by the Contemplative to be an arrow. The poison of ignorance 
spreads its toxin through desire, passion, & ill will. I have 
abandoned the arrow. I have expelled the poison of ignorance. I am 
rightly intent on Unbinding.' Because he is rightly intent on 
Unbinding, he wouldn't pursue those things that are unsuitable for a 
person rightly intent on Unbinding. He wouldn't pursue unsuitable 
forms & sights with the eye. He wouldn't pursue unsuitable sounds 
with the ear...unsuitable aromas with the nose...unsuitable flavors 
with the tongue...unsuitable tactile sensations with the body. He  
wouldn't pursue unsuitable ideas with the intellect. When he doesn't 
pursue unsuitable forms & sights with the eye...doesn't pursue 
unsuitable ideas with the intellect, lust doesn't invade the mind. 
With his mind not invaded by lust, he doesn't incur death or death-
like suffering.

"Suppose that a man were wounded with an arrow thickly smeared with 
poison. His friends & companions, kinsmen & relatives would provide 
him with a surgeon. The surgeon would cut around the opening of the 
wound with a knife and then would probe for the arrow with a probe. 
He then would pull out the arrow and extract the poison, leaving no 
residue behind. Knowing that no residue was left behind, he would 
say, 'My good man, your arrow has been pulled out. The poison has 
been extracted, with no residue left behind, so it is not enough to 
do you harm. Eat suitable food. Don't eat unsuitable food, or else 
the wound will fester. Wash the wound frequently, smear it with an 
ointment frequently, so that blood & pus don't fill the opening of
the wound. Don't walk around in the wind & sun, or else dust & dirt 
may contaminate the opening of the wound. Keep looking after the 
wound, my good man, and work for its healing.'

"The thought would occur to the man: 'My arrow has been pulled out. 
The poison has been extracted with no residue left behind, so it is 
not enough to do me harm.' He would eat suitable food, so the wound 
wouldn't ester. He would wash the wound and smear it with an ointment 
frequently, so blood & pus wouldn't fill the opening of the wound. He 
would not walk around in the wind & sun, so dust & dirt wouldn't 
contaminate the opening of the wound. He would keep looking after the 
wound and would work for its healing. Now, both because of these 
suitable actions of his and because of there being no residue of the 
poison left behind, the wound would heal. With the healing of the 
wound and its being covered with skin, he wouldn't incur death or 
death-like suffering. 

"In the same way, there's the possible case where a certain monk 
thinks, 'Craving is said by the Contemplative to be an arrow. The 
poison of ignorance spreads its toxin through desire, passion, & ill 
will. I have abandoned the arrow. I have expelled the poison of 
ignorance. I am rightly intent on Unbinding.' Because he is rightly 
intent on Unbinding, he wouldn't pursue those things that are 
unsuitable for a person rightly intent on Unbinding. He wouldn't 
pursue unsuitable forms & sights with the eye. He wouldn't pursue 
unsuitable sounds with the ear...unsuitable aromas with the nose... 
unsuitable flavors with the tongue...unsuitable tactile sensations 
with the body. He wouldn't pursue unsuitable ideas with the 
intellect. When he doesn't pursue unsuitable forms & sights with the 
eye...doesn't pursue unsuitable ideas with the intellect, lust 
doesn't invade the mind. With his mind not invaded by lust, he 
doesn't incur death or death-like suffering.

"I have given this simile to convey a meaning. The meaning is this: 
the wound stands for the six internal sense media; the poison, for 
ignorance; the arrow, for craving; the probe, for mindfulness; the 
knife, for noble discernment; the surgeon, for the Tathagata, worthy 
& rightly self-awakened.

"Now, when a monk -- maintaining restraint over the six spheres of 
contact, knowing that 'Acquisition is the root of stress' -- is free 
from acquisition, released in the total ending of acquisition, it's 
not possible that, with regard to acquisition, he would stir his body 
or arouse his mind.

"Suppose there were a beverage in a bronze cup -- consummate in its 
color, smell, & flavor -- but mixed with poison. And suppose a man 
were to come along, wanting to live, not wanting to die, desiring 
pleasure, & abhorring pain. What do you think, Sunakkhatta -- would 
he drink the beverage in the bronze cup knowing that 'Having drunk 
this, I will incur death or death-like suffering'?"

"No, lord."

"In the same way, when a monk -- maintaining restraint over the six 
spheres of contact, knowing that 'Acquisition is the root of stress' -
- is free from acquisition, released in the total ending of 
acquisition, it's not possible that, with regard to acquisition, he 
would stir his body or arouse his mind. 

"Suppose there were a deadly poisonous viper, and a man were to come 
along, wanting to live, not wanting to die, desiring pleasure, & 
abhorring pain. What do you think, Sunakkhatta -- would he give his 
hand or finger to the snake knowing that 'Having been bitten by this, 
I will incur death or death-like suffering'?"

"No, lord."

"In the same way, when a monk -- maintaining restraint over the six 
spheres of contact, knowing that 'Acquisition is the root of stress' -
- is free from acquisition, released in the total ending of 
acquisition, it's not possible that, with regard to acquisition, he 
would stir his body or arouse his mind."

That is what the Blessed One said. Gratified, Sunakkhatta the 
Licchavin delighted in the Blessed One's words.

*****************

Dhammapada III : The Mind

33-37:
Quivering, wavering,
hard to guard,
to hold in check:
    the mind.
The sage makes it straight --
like a fletcher,
the shaft of an arrow.
Like a fish
pulled from its home in the water
& thrown on land:
this mind flips & flaps about
    to escape Mara's sway.


Hard to hold down,
    nimble,
alighting wherever it likes:
    the mind.
Its taming is good.
The mind well-tamed
    brings ease.

So hard to see,
so very, very subtle,
alighting wherever it likes:
    the mind.
The wise should guard it.
The mind protected
    brings ease.


Wandering far,
going alone,
bodiless,
lying in a cave:
    the mind.
Those who restrain it:
    from Mara's bonds
    they'll be freed.

38:

For a person of unsteady mind,
not knowing true Dhamma,
    serenity
    set         adrift:
discernment doesn't grow full.



39:

For a person of unsoddened mind,
            unassaulted awareness,
abandoning merit & evil,
    wakeful,
there is no danger
        no fear.



40:

Knowing this body
    is like a clay jar,
securing this mind
    like a fort,
        attack Mara
    with the spear of discernment,
then guard what's won
    without settling there,
    without laying claim.



41:

All too soon, this body
will lie on the ground
    cast off,
bereft of consciousness,
like a useless scrap
    of wood.



42-43:

Whatever an enemy might do
to an enemy,
or a foe to a foe,
the ill-directed mind
can do to you
    even worse.
Whatever a mother, father
or other kinsman
might do for you,
the well-directed mind
can do for you
    even better.

Be well, be kind, and be gentle with yourself.

With Metta,

Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo

 
517 From: Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala   
Date: Fri Jun 16, 2000 11:17pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Changes in the schedule

 
  Dear Amara,
By all means, lets meet for lunch tomorrow before heading over to the
center. It is rather easy to get onto the expressway from this area and then
go on to the Yommaraj part of the expressway to the Rama IX bridge. Would it
be too much trouble for you to come out to Central Plaza Hotel? We could eat
there (a nice Italian restaurant), and then get onto the highway directly
from the hotel.

But will call you tomorrow morning to confirm. I opened this too late
tonight to call you.

With metta,
Betty
----- Original Message -----
From: amara chay 
Sent: Friday, June 16, 2000 4:26 PM
Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Changes in the schedule


>
> Dear friends in the dhamma,
>
> Khun Sujin has just called to tell me the time of the next English
> discussion, tomorrow at 1:30 at the foundation building.  She has
> changed the programming in that when there are English speakers who
> are interested, they would not have to wait for a certain day to hear
> the dhamma, but would be able to contact her and set up the
> discussions as needed.  This of course cancels the every other
> Saturday schedules, although I think that it is a pity... So if
> anyone is visiting Bangkok, please set up your meetings with her
> ahead
> of time, to avoid disappointments.
>
> Betty, do you think you can find the foundation building?  May I
> invite you to lunch (my turn!) tomorrow?  Please give me a call,
>
> Amara
>

 
518 From: Theresa   
Date: Fri Jun 16, 2000 11:54pm
Subject: Re: Guidelines ?

 
  Hello Amara, 

<< -----
... each level of knowledge is permanent, never to be questioned 
again ... it is much too extraordinary to miss ... Nor does one need 
anyone else to confirm the knowledge, it is real according to the 
Tipitaka ...
-------- >>

I agree.. Thank you.. There is no need to look for or acknowledge 
attainment.. It will be obvious.. 

<< ------
May I suggest you be even more conscientious and not just experience 
the beginnings and endings of the trains of thoughts?  While you are 
thinking there were millions of citta functioning in their 
infinitely swift opperations, your were probably seeing and hearing 
things while you were thinking, also, and there must have been bodily
experiences:- the sight, sound, heat or cold, softness or hardness, 
motion or tension are all paramatthadhamma.  They can all be studied 
to accumulate panna about the true characteristics of nama and rupa.  
Right now you are in front of the computer screen, is there no sight? 
Is it not completely different from sound, seeing from hearing?  
All this in turn are completely different in nature from touch, from 
smell, and especially from thoughts.  These realities do not even
have to be named or called anything in any language, at the level of 
sati, language and terminologies are useless, seeing realities as 
they really are is what accumulates real panna.
-------- >>

I have been doing exactly what you suggested for at least two years 
now.. Changes are seen without names or terms.. Just changes.. 

About <<millions of citta functioning in their infinitely swift 
opperations>>, it is determined by Paramitta/Kamma, and it is "I" who 
can decide or change what it is seen in each moment of mindfulness.. 
Therefore, anything "I" can see, "I" must be mindful of it.. 

Amara, I am going to try to explain the best I can, and ask that you 
help me by trying to understand my thoughts behind the writing.. :-)) 

You wrote : 
<<millions of citta...in their infinitely swift opperations, your 
were probably seeing and hearing things *WHILE* you were thinking.. >>

When we have Concentration in the moment of Mindfulness, there can 
never be such thing as *WHILE* (ie, concurrent cittas).. When 
Concentration accompanies MIndfulness, we can only "see" (one citta), 
and there is no thinking, no vedana, no hearing, or nothing else 
going on besides "seeing".. 

I have moments of Mindfulness and moments of non-Mindfulness.. I have 
moment of Concentration and moments of non-Concentation.. I have 
moments of Effort and moments of non-Effort.. I recognize the moments 
when I "see" while thinking, hearing, etc.. I recognize the moments 
when I "see" and there is nothing else going on in my mind.. The 
difference is extremely clear.. I also recognize the moments when 
from lack of Effort, Effort comes in and I can see clearer.. 

Seeing the rise and fall.. Impermanence.. As far as I understand 
through my own practice, Mindfulness gets faster and faster with time 
and practice.. If Effort and Concentration continue to exist thus 
support Mindfulness, we can see the beginning and the ending of 
aggregates, and so, the rise and fall of Cittas, the rise and fall of 
sankhara, the rise and fall of vedana, etc.. There are moments I can 
see Cittas as "one event".. There are moments I can see the Rise of 
Cittas and the Fall of Cittas.. 

I only use some experience (like seeing, vedana) as examples to help 
me express my thoughts.. In practice, many times there is no term, no 
name, but there is a clear knowledge of the event is either Nama or 
Rupa.. 

By the way, when we are mindful of Cittas, the distinction (meaning) 
of touch, seeing, hearing, etc. is not important, because Mindfulness 
is busy with keeping up with Cittas as much as possible.. 

<< -----
The citta is the element that knows, which makes it hard for it to 
know itself.  It is a marvelous reality that only the complex 
accumulations of the citta can create, and only the panna accumulated 
through the citta can extinguish.  
-------- >>

When Mindfulness, Effort, Concentration and Insight work together in 
balance, cittas will be known and immediately ended from moment to 
moment.. 

<< -----
You are  a programmer, and I can see that your typing is way above 
average, so I can't conceive that you are such a slow reader, perhaps 
rather you do not have the patience to read other's writings?  But I 
really recommend you find a little time each day to read the advanced 
section of <http://www.dhammastudy.com/> especially the 'Summary of 
Paramatthadhamma', which to me is the key to the Tipitaka as well as 
sati and panna and through the later, enlightenment.  It is the most 
important book in the world to me, for the neccessary solid basics on 
dhamma studies.
-------- >>

Yes, I am an ex-programmer trying to come back, and yes, I type 
pretty fast.. Please do not think further that what I told you.. 
Please do not assume that my fast typing suggests my fast reading.. 
I simply need more time to read.. :-)) 

<< -----
And the study of  citta and their objects never intrude in daily 
life, not only did people attain knowledge while listening or reading 
or discussing the dhamma, but in the Tipitaka they did while they 
were working (one was a slave woman who attained when the pot boiled
over!) and leaning down to rest, and lots of other situations, such 
as seeing a beautiful woman dancing or something to that effect, as 
well.  ...
-------- >>

I heard that Tipitaka mentioned that there were people who attained 
Sainthood during the time they washed their feet, or listened to half 
of a Buddha's saying.. Paramitta !! (or is it Parami ??) 

I do things as much as I can, and have not wished to have someone 
else's Paramitta.. If Kamma gives me so much time to read and finish 
a book, I am happy with it.. It took me, off and on, about 2-3 years 
to finish one book, "Buddha and His Teachings".. I don't feel odd or 
underpriviledged in my ability to read, because I digested each word 
with Piti, practiced as I read, and finally, forgot most of what I 
read, except how to be mindful of my body and mind.. Years ago, I 
took Effective Reading (or speed reading), but I would not allow 
myself to scan through Tipitaka and other meditation books.. 
Practicing and Reading come together, and so, reading must take 
time.. :-)) Sometimes, simple words like "relax your mind and body" 
put me directly into Piti or sometimes strong Concentration (Jhana or 
whatever it is) when my eyes were open, and then a series of 
Mindfulness so Cittas and other stuffs were clearly experienced and 
known.. I read Suttas for my own meditation benefits, first and 
foremost, and for communication to dhamma friends, second.. :-)) 

With metta,

Theresa.

 
519 From: Theresa   
Date: Sat Jun 17, 2000 0:24am
Subject: About Reading and Practicing

 
  Hello Jonothan,

<< -----
You suggest that the truths taught by the Buddha can be experienced 
for themselves.  Of course they can.  But (and it's a big but)
only 
by developing the understanding of realities exactly as taught by the 
Buddha also.
 
This means that if the practice is not correct from the beginning, 
the experiences that follow will not be those of the Buddha's 
teaching, no matter how similar they may appear to be.  So just 
because we have experiences that seem to be confirmed by the 
teachings, this should not be taken as meaning that our practice has 
been correct.  Our lack of understanding and wrong view (not to 
mention our conceit) is bound to colour our judgement.
-------- >> 

If Buddha mentioned Mindfulness and we practice until we have it, we 
don't have Wrong View.. If Buddha mentioned Concentration and we 
practice it until we have it, we don't have Wrong Concentration.. 
etc. 

*  If we read Buddha's teaching with an open mind of a child, without 
fear, without worry, without doubt; 
*  if we read Tipitaka with an unshakable Faith that Buddha's Dhamma 
is our safety net, 
and
*  if we learn Dhamma by practicing exactly as taught, step by step, 
---- nothing can go wrong ---- 

Wrong View, Wrong Understanding, Wrong Concentration, or whatever 
else might be wrong can only happen because of our expectation 
(lobha) and our fear/worry/doubt (Dosa).. 

If we practice Dhamma step by step, Dhamma is the light to guide us 
forward in the jungle of Moha.. 

<< -----
In the Buddha's time, the practice began with listening (at
length) 
to the teachings.  Why should it be any different today?

And next time you read a sutta, you might like to question whether 
the Buddha was really instructing his listeners to go and do a 
special meditation practice.
-------- >>

Here's how I read Tipitaka, commentaries, or meditation books.. 

I forget everything else, read a word/sentence/paragraph at a time, 
and try to understand what it taught by experiencing it immediately 
right after finishing reading it.. If I don't understand it, I will 
re-read it many times until I understand it enough to practice it 
immediately.. If after re-reading it many times for 2-3 days or few 
weeks, I will contact my teacher or a nun by phone and ask for their 
explanations and layman terms, and then, I practiced immediately what 
I just learned and understood from reading.. I will not read any 
further until I can practice whatever Dhamma I just read.. 

I read and practice at my own pace, according to my own 
kamma/paramitta.. I am happy with whatever I have and ask nothing 
more.. Nibbana ??  It's something I don't know right now.. It's not 
mine until I am qualified for it with perfection (Paramitta) of 
mental qualities taught by Buddha.. I'm more concerned with 
developing and perfecting mental qualities (ie, the Noble Path).. :-))

This is how I read and learn Buddha's Dhamma, and so, I have no fear, 
no doubt, no worry for the possibility that I might be in the wrong 
path.. 

Let us be mindful of our body and mind as much as we can..

With metta,

Theresa.

 
520 From: amara chay   
Date: Sat Jun 17, 2000 1:35am
Subject: Re: Guidelines ?

 
  > About <<millions of citta functioning in their infinitely swift 
> opperations>>, it is determined by Paramitta/Kamma, and it is "I" 
who 
> can decide or change what it is seen in each moment of
mindfulness.. 
> Therefore, anything "I" can see, "I" must be mindful of it.. 

Theresa, 

Not even the Buddha can change the nature of realities, nor control 
them, or 'decide or change what is seen in each moment'.  One might 
think that one can, but they arise and fall away according to 
conditions and can only be known.  There is no I, no atta to do this, 
it is ignorance to believe there is anyone in control.  


> By the way, when we are mindful of Cittas, the distinction
(meaning) 
> of touch, seeing, hearing, etc. is not important, because 
Mindfulness 
> is busy with keeping up with Cittas as much as possible.. 


This is not true, sati does not arise in a continuous stream, but as 
instants of knowledge of the precise object or the precise citta.  
Otherwise it is just thinking that you have sati.  Read about the
true nature of sati if you wish in the Summary.  It is also the key 
to the understanding of the Sutta which are only stories about 
different nama and rupa in diverse situations.  Talking about your 
misunderstandings without learning what is right or wrong according 
to the Buddha's teachings seems a pity to me, if I were you I would 
take the time to read more, even if it took me a century I would try 
to read the summary, it would make your writings ever so much more 
interesting!
=^_^=
Amara

 
521 From: Mike Potter   
Date: Sat Jun 17, 2000 10:40am
Subject: Re: About practices/teachings (was re: About Concentration)

 
  Dear Theresa,

--- "Theresa "  
wrote:
> Would you please explain the "link" (similarities?) between the 
> Vipassana practice as I have known, learned and practiced, and 
> the "teaching" (wrong term?) of Sujin Boriharnwanaket.. I ask for 
your 
> explanations, because it seems that you, Mike, have knowledge of 
both 
> practices/teachings: Sujin's and Mahasi's "techniques/teachings" 
> (terms?).. 

I have read a few of Kuhn Sujin's writings and several of the books 
written by one of her students, Nina van Gorkom.  I have found them
to be quite helpful in explaining the practical aspects and 
applications of the Abhidhamma - the interplay of the various 
conditioned realities.  Such study and reflection helps one recognize 
such realities when they present themselves - both in daily
activities and during meditation - to see phenomena in its true state 
of impermanence, unsatisfactoriness and selflessness.

The similarities are many.  However, they are different "techniques". 
Yet they are both grounded in scripture and arrive at the very same 
place: Insight into reality.  So the difference in them seems to lie 
in the manner in which the teachings are applied in one's experience. 

Due to my own accumulations, the Mahasi approach resonates better for 
me.  I find the other to be more "intellectual" and less
experiential" than the Mahasi approach.  Yet for others, this may not 
be so.  What I have learned from the exchanges here is that my mind 
has a tendency to become intellectual. This has actually been a 
teaching in itself.  When this happens, I notice a mental 
"constriction", so to speak; so I just sign off for a while, and let 
my awareness move from "my head" back to "my heart"  :-)  So it is 
merely my own way of keeping the five spiritual faculties (faith, 
discernment, mindfulness, energy, and concentration) in balance.

> As I know, there is only one Buddha's teaching.. 

While there is only one Dhamma, it is my understanding that the
Buddha taught in different ways to different people depending on
their own accumulations.  To those of quick intellect, he taught one 
way; and for those of slow intellect he taught another.  So the method
that is best suited will vary among individuals.  

> Q # 1 : Why do discussions on this list seem to stress on 
> the "differences in views", whereas it seems to me that there is no 
> difference ??
> 
> Sitting is one of the four natural postures of a human being, and
so 
> Sitting Meditation is an off-course.. During Sitting Meditation,
the 
> body is not moving and the eyes are probably closed, and so, the 
> number of distractions reduces drastically.. The benefits of
Sitting 
> Meditation is appreciated because the reduced number of 
> distractions.. Sitting Meditation is a good condition for the arise 
> of Concentration.. I have followed the Vipassana practice taught by 
> Venerable Mahasi, and meditated in all 4 postures (ie, sitting, 
> standing, walking, and lying-down).. If we are mindful, we should
be 
> able to know when "Self" is present and when "Self-less" is 
present.. 
> When Mindfulness is continuous, there is no chance for "Self".. 

Good question.  I've wondered the same thing; and I concur with your 
response.  Views are of the mind - intellectual - while Insight is a 
non-cognative realization of realities.  There's a big difference.

> Q # 2 : Is there a belief that Sitting Meditation is needless or 
> useless ?? (( I believe that it is crucial to not miss Sitting 
> Meditation as part of our practice, because we sit many times
during 
> the day, in a car, on a chair, in bed, on the floor, on the 
> meditation cushion, at work, at home, on a stool, in the yard, 
> etc. )) 

I concur with your response.

> Q # 3 : What does your own personal experience tell you about the 
> suggestion that meditators should not bother with Sitting
Meditation 
> at all but they should simply carry on their lives as life goes ??  
> (( My own experience tells me that Sitting Meditation helps 
condition 
> my mind so that Concentration and Mindfulness would be more 
> continuous and gained much easier during my normal-living daily 
> practice.. 

My experience is the same.

> Q # 4 : Have you found a good way to communicate your experiences 
> (realities) as dana to dhamma friends, if they have not experienced 
> the same realities as you did ??

Not any better ways than you have done on this list by sharing yours. 
You are a wonderful teacher, Theresa.  I am grateful for your many 
contributions.

With metta,

Mike

 
522 From: Mike Potter   
Date: Sat Jun 17, 2000 11:54am
Subject: Re: About Concentration (was: re: abhidhamma in daily life)

 
  Dear Robert,

Thank you for your comments.  It's good to hear from you again.

>  Mike I notice already some changes in your thinking-
> you lean a little more towards anatta now....
>
> I think you said that you have been studying
> abhidhamma a little over a year – perhaps you can
> remember your views before you started. Perhaps now
> there is better understanding? But no you who made it
> happen.

>  But now your views are modified, It wasn't by sitting
> and concentrating - it happened because you heard (by
> conditions) And reflected (by conditions) on the
> Buddhas teaching TO SOME EXTENT.

Yes, reflection is important.  And I don't mean to minimize it.  It
is critical to the awakening process.  But reflection is still
thinking. If done skillfully, with an intention to "let go" of
thinking and just rest in the moment (no-mind), conditions for wisdom
can arise.

What is YOUR experience of Insight?  How would you describe it? Are
you reflecting at that precise moment?  Are you reflecting just
before it or just after it, but not at that moment?  Is that "knowing"
you've experienced really a conative process ("connecting the dots")
or something that is simply an awareness of reality that wasn't there
a moment before (just "dots") due to causes and conditions?

For me, it was by sitting and concentrating (vipassana, not samadhi)
that sufficient conditions were brought about to support the arising
of many deep Insights into anicca, dukkha, and anatta.  Reflections
may have occurred before and/or afterward (proximate or remote), but
at the precise moment of the experience of Insight there was no
thought at all . . .

And it is that same sitting and concentrating that carries over into
daily life and provides appropriate conditions - through a mind that
is more open, vulnerable, sensative, and alert - to see things as
they really are.

So it was TO SOME EXTENT by reflection on the Buddha's teachings and
TO SOME EXTENT by merely being present in the moment without
thinking. One cannot cling to anything at all, including reflections.
. .  :-)

While knowlege of the Dhamma is necessary in one's practice, it is my
experience that too much "thinking" can be a hindrance? ;-)

With metta,

Mike

 
523 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Sat Jun 17, 2000 0:03pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: About practices/teachings (was re: About Concentration)

 
  Dear GROUP
 Theresa sent us some translations of  some suttas 
(see posting danger and friend). Thank you Theresa.
Studying the Titipika – the Vinaya, the Suttanta, the
Abhidhamma is the only way to learn what it was that
the Buddha taught. If we don't know what he taught how
can we practice correctly? We might be practicing
something different from the Buddha's teaching.

But how do we study? 
 Every word in the Tipitika is worth investigating.
Every sentence has deep meaning.
Let us consider the word “complication”. This was 
In the Anguttara Nikaya VIII.30
Anuruddha Sutta
One of the suttas  that Theresa emailed, in one
sentence the Buddha told Anuruddha
“This Dhamma is for one who 
enjoys non-complication, who delights in
non-complication, not for 
one who enjoys & delights in complication.”'I looked
up the pali of this sentence: “nippapancaramassayam
dhammo nippapancaratino nayam dhammo papancaramassa
papancarintino”

What do you think the Buddha meant by complication and
non-complication? I once heard someone –referring to
this sutta- say this meant people should not think too
much because this complicates things and takes people
away from the present moment. And in a superficial way
there is something in this. But we can always learn
more. 

Complication in this sutta is the English translation
for papanca. There are three papanca – tanha (desire),
ditthi(view) and mana (conceit). (see netti pakarana
paragraph 203, 204).These three are said to prolong
samasara vata , the round of births and deaths. 
And now  we may want to understand what  the Buddha
mean by tanha, for example? Is tanha something we have
only when we want sex or get hungry or go shopping? Or
is there more to it? So we study a little more - we
learn that the Buddha said tanha was samudaya sacca
the cause for dukkha. The Patisamabhidhi magga ( I
597) says that wordly life is diversified (another
word for papanca ) by 108 kinds of tanha. Tanha is
also one of the factors in the paticcusamupada. In the
Nidana- Vagga of the Samyutta Nikaya: 
The Buddha said: I will teach you, monks, the origin
of repeated birth and passing away of beings in this
world. What, monks, is the origin of beings? 
On account of the eye base and visible object, eye
consciousness arises. Contact (phassa) is the
conjunction of the three; through contact, feeling
arises; through feeling  desire(TANHA) arises; through
desire attachment (upadana) arises; through attachment
bhava (process of becoming) arises; through becoming
birth arises; through birth decay and death, sorrow,
lamentation.
 The Buddha then repeated this for the other doors of
ear, nose, tongue taste body and mind.  

Then we might wonder – well is this process of
Paticcusamupada happening now, at this moment? Now
there is seeing, there is phassa, there is feeling. Is
there tanha? If one investigates in daily life  just
this question over and over one may learn that even
when the feeling is very neutral tanha may be
present.– For example I am sitting in my office in
Japan and just glanced at the pastel coloured wall- no
particular like or dislike noticeable at that moment
and yet could tanha of some degree, even if it wasn’t
apparent have arisen? Only by studying directly these
moments in daily life can we find out the answers and
really learn just what life is and what the Buddha
taught.  

Do we want to stop this tanha, try and suppress it?
Well that is one way (and in fact it was my early
practice). But we can also understand it; and I think
that is most useful. Then we can study its
characteristic more. We might find that it is very
common indeed. We might learn that when we try to have
sati that tanha can come in and masquerade as sati.
But if we are prepared to study  tanha again  and
again – and of course not neglect the direct study of 
all other realities- we might become wary of its
tricks. We might start to see the difference between
true sati and the manifold counterfeits that are
actually tanha, a papanca, a prolonger of samasara.
Also we might find out that when we thought we had
sati often that this was merely mana, conceit – a
papanca, a prolonger of samsara.  AND we might begin
to realize that when we had the idea that we could
make sati arise by concentrating that this is an idea
of control, of self. That it is ditthi, another
papanca, prolonger of samsara. If we find these things
out we are learning something of immeasurable value.
We are learning what we really are – a skin bag
stuffed with kilesa. Then we are beginning to
comprehend what this path involves. 

This letter started off to discuss one word from a
sutta – papanca .So far we haven’t even scratched the
surface on one aspect of papanca. 
That is to be expected. One aeon is so long – Billions
and billions of years, maybe longer. The Buddha took
four incalculably long periods of time  plus one
hundred thousand aeons to develop the wisdom to become
a Buddha .  We don’t have to develop parami to the
extent of a Buddha but it still takes a long, long
time. We might hope that we are the developed ones who
have so much parami already but this is just tanha,
one of the papanca, or we may be sure we are ones who
already have great parami, but this is mana, another
papanca, a prolonger of samasara. During these many
aeons in countless lives the Buddha was firm to keep
investigating. It says in the Madhuratthavilisini, the
commentary to the Buddhavamsa (chapter on sumedha IIA
p155) that the Bodhisatta at the time of Dipankara
Buddha, 24 Buddhas ago, was investigating the parami
of wisdom. He realized what needed to be done and made
this aspiration that “questioning discerning people
all the time (he would) go on to the perfection of
wisdom’.

 But how did he question wise people? Certainly not in
a careless way. He must  have evaluated the answers so
rigorously and then considered how to ask even more
discerning questions.  Nor did he ask in a way that
wanted to show off his wisdom. He sincerely wanted to
learn. Developing this skill in questioning is part of
the path. Some are not yet ready even for this. This
too depends on accumulations. This skill might sound
trivial but it takes time, in fact lifetimes to
develop. If it is not developed then one could discuss
with many helpful people but get nothing from it.

It is our attitude when investigating that is
important. One could be intent on learning about
papanca, for example, but be unaware of the cittas
while studying and not even realize that sometimes it
was papanca motivating the study. If that is the case
then no great benefit comes from such research. We
need to bear in mind that the purpose of study, the
purpose of discussion is to help us better understand
this moment. 
SO  I write all this just as much for myself as anyone
else. I need to develop more listening skills, more
questioning skills . I need to  study much more ,
countless times more the characteristics of tanha and
mana and ditthi. I need to consider more, much more
the words in the Tipitika.
 
Robert


 
524 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Sat Jun 17, 2000 0:41pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: About Concentration (was: re: abhidhamma in daily life)

 
  Dear Mike,
Basically I agree with what you said.
> 
> "Yes, reflection is important.  And I don't mean to
> minimize it.  It
> is critical to the awakening process.  But
> reflection is still
> thinking. If done skillfully, with an intention to
> "let go" of
> thinking and just rest in the moment (no-mind),
> conditions for wisdom
> can arise."

Reflection is not the same as direct insight but we
must be very careful not to assume that merely because
there is no thinking and one feels calm that this
means we are experincing realities with sati and
panna. There can still be subtle delusion present -
even the "intention to let go" as you put it can still
be hiding the ditthi, view that there is somebody to
let go.


> 
> What is YOUR experience of Insight?  How would you
> describe it? Are
> you reflecting at that precise moment?  Are you
> reflecting just
> before it or just after it, but not at that moment? 
> Is that "knowing"

The Buddha said that the path is so gradual that one
can hardly notice the development. It doesn't
necesarily knock one on the head. Refer to the
comments about the tapes earlier this week on the
discussion group. However, on occasion it does seem
that awareness is  vivid. (But then was it really
awareness or just an imitation?)Sometimes this happens
during or after a time of reflection, or even during a
Dhamma talk but sometimes it just comes totally out of
the blue - even when one is so tired and apparently
distracted - it is like a bolt of lightening - it can
surprise. It happens like that too. But these are not,
for me anyway, common occurences- mostly it is just a
very gradual understanding that separates the 6 doors,
that separates paramattha dhamma from concept in daily
life. While I am talking to people, for example, there
is sometimes a process of dissection going on:
studying the different moments of sound, of color, of
seeing. 
And of course most of the time I am just carried away
by the stream of defilements - but that is ok because
defilements are real. It is just the way things must
be. 

I have found that awareness itself can be clung to.
One wants more and more. One wants it to be clearer
and clearer - but this is just tanha. The idea is to
reduce all idea of self, of getting something for
self. People are so keen to have awareness; but why?
True awareness gradually takes away everything until
we see more and more that there is nothing. How many
people are ready to see that? I am happy to go slowly.

> "While knowlege of the Dhamma is necessary in one's
> practice, it is my
> experience that too much "thinking" can be a
> hindrance? ;-")
>
 Certainly Mike you are right here. In thailand there
are Abhidhamma experts (even a few students of Khun
Sujins) who fit this description. It is a good warning
for me too. I am inclined to overevaluate intellectual
understanding and neglect direct study of realities.
> 
Robert
> 
> 
> 



 
525 From: Mike Potter   
Date: Sun Jun 18, 2000 3:42am
Subject: Re: About Concentration (was: re: abhidhamma in daily life)

 
  Dear Robert,

Basically I agree with what you said in response.

> Reflection is not the same as direct insight but we
> must be very careful not to assume that merely because
> there is no thinking and one feels calm that this
> means we are experincing realities with sati and
> panna. There can still be subtle delusion present -
> even the "intention to let go" as you put it can still
> be hiding the ditthi, view that there is somebody to
> let go.

Yes.  The delusion of the conceit "I am" is not totally eradicated 
until the level of Arahant, even though the grosser form (view of 
self) is eliminated at the level of Stream-winner.  So this view is 
very deep rooted.  The perception that there is somebody to let go is 
so very subtle.  One must be diligent in seeing it's characteristics, 
which often manifest as some form of pride of accomplishment.
 
> I have found that awareness itself can be clung to.
> One wants more and more. One wants it to be clearer
> and clearer - but this is just tanha. The idea is to
> reduce all idea of self, of getting something for
> self. People are so keen to have awareness; but why?
> True awareness gradually takes away everything until
> we see more and more that there is nothing. How many
> people are ready to see that?

Yes, it's like peeling an onion until there is nothing left - not 
even a center!  People are reluctant to see "nothing" because they 
think that "they" (i.e., the self) will disappear.  Great fear often 
arises when one first realizes the emptiness of conditioned
phenomena. In truth, emptiness is full.  But until one can see it
from a perspective of anatta, which is itself empty, emptiness has
the appearance of a void.

> I am happy to go slowly.

I want to be sure that I understand what you mean.

Some go slowly along the Path in comparison with others, while others 
go more quickly.  It all depends on one's accumulations.  I'm sure
you are familiar with the simile of the musical instrument.  See AN 
VI.55 at http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an6-55.html

One's efforts must be like the string of a fine instrument.  Too 
much effort (over-tightening the string) to "progess" quickly does
not produce a melodeous sound, since it is not in tune with the
instrument as a whole.  Too little effort leads to slakening and lack 
of resolve, which is also unskilful.  The right amount of effort 
produces a harmoneous sound that allows the instrument to reach it's 
full potential.

Whether one is slow or fast can only be measured by comparison with 
the "progress" of others.  Such a practice of "comparing mind" leads 
to feelings of separation and conceit, which is unskilful.  What is 
"just right" for you may be slow or fast in relation to someone else. 
Since each person is unique, comparisons are irrelevant.  The key is 
the application of Right Effort (along with the other seven factors
of the Noble Eightfold Path) that is attuned to your own unique 
accumulations.

With that said, do you mean that you are content not to go more 
quickly than would be so with the application of Right Effort?  Or is 
it something else?

With metta,

Mike

 
526 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Sun Jun 18, 2000 8:02am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: About Concentration (was: re: abhidhamma in daily life)

 
  When I said I am happy to go slow I meant I am
perfectly content with understanding to arise
gradually as it must. I am patient to let true insight
arise by conditions. When I began to learn about
Buddhism I was so excited to think I was having stages
of insight. So pleased if a teacher told me that "I"
was making progress. So sad if "stages" didnt come. It
was all just more Tanha (desire) mana(conceit) and
ditthi(view). I separated daily life form the times
when I was making "real " efforts. This is delusion -
at all times there are nama and rupa only.

I see that it is very difficult for people to
understand what sati is. That sati of satipatthana
comes with detachment. It is quite different from
samadhi. Until this distinction is understood one will
see the path as a matter of trying and getting
something.  
I used to put in great effort - but it was done with
the hope of getting something. Getting some 'sign" or
something. Wanting something within 5 years, 20 years
, this life. It is very different now - my interest is
always to understand just one moment. I don't think
much about making effort or balancing faculties or
whatever - I find these things take care of themself
provided "I" am not in the way. I see more and more
clearly how common tanha is and that it cannot be
eradicated quickly. I know that any moment is a chance
for understanding to grow. 

In the early years I was afraid of defilements- I
thought they hindered progress. Now I welcome them as
objects for insight. Thus the practice is so relaxing
now. Life becomes just one moment and then another.
Patience and detachment gradually develop alongside
understanding. It is completely different from how I
used to think the path was or would be. 

Robert
> 
> > I am happy to go slowly.
> 
> I want to be sure that I understand what you mean.
> 
> Some go slowly along the Path in comparison with
> others, while others 
> go more quickly.  It all depends on one's
> accumulations.  I'm sure
> you are familiar with the simile of the musical
> instrument.  See AN 
> VI.55 at
>
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an6-55.html
> 
> One's efforts must be like the string of a fine
> instrument.  Too 
> much effort (over-tightening the string) to
> "progess" quickly does
> not produce a melodeous sound, since it is not in
> tune with the
> instrument as a whole.  Too little effort leads to
> slakening and lack 
> of resolve, which is also unskilful.  The right
> amount of effort 
> produces a harmoneous sound that allows the
> instrument to reach it's 
> full potential.
> 
> Whether one is slow or fast can only be measured by
> comparison with 
> the "progress" of others.  Such a practice of
> "comparing mind" leads 
> to feelings of separation and conceit, which is
> unskilful.  What is 
> "just right" for you may be slow or fast in relation
> to someone else. 
> Since each person is unique, comparisons are
> irrelevant.  The key is 
> the application of Right Effort (along with the
> other seven factors
> of the Noble Eightfold Path) that is attuned to your
> own unique 
> accumulations.
> 
> With that said, do you mean that you are content not
> to go more 
> quickly than would be so with the application of
> Right Effort?  Or is 
> it something else?
> 
> With metta,
> 
> Mike
> 
> 
> 



 
527 From: Mike Potter   
Date: Sun Jun 18, 2000 10:13am
Subject: Re: About Concentration (was: re: abhidhamma in daily life)

 
  Dear Robert,

Just as I thought.  My experience has been much the same.  Thank you 
for sharing, my friend.

With metta,

Mike


--- Robert Kirkpatrick 
 wrote:
> 
> When I said I am happy to go slow I meant I am
> perfectly content with understanding to arise
> gradually as it must. I am patient to let true insight
> arise by conditions. When I began to learn about
> Buddhism I was so excited to think I was having stages
> of insight. So pleased if a teacher told me that "I"
> was making progress. So sad if "stages" didnt come. It
> was all just more Tanha (desire) mana(conceit) and
> ditthi(view). I separated daily life form the times
> when I was making "real " efforts. This is delusion -
> at all times there are nama and rupa only.
> 
> I see that it is very difficult for people to
> understand what sati is. That sati of satipatthana
> comes with detachment. It is quite different from
> samadhi. Until this distinction is understood one will
> see the path as a matter of trying and getting
> something.  
> I used to put in great effort - but it was done with
> the hope of getting something. Getting some 'sign" or
> something. Wanting something within 5 years, 20 years
> , this life. It is very different now - my interest is
> always to understand just one moment. I don't think
> much about making effort or balancing faculties or
> whatever - I find these things take care of themself
> provided "I" am not in the way. I see more and more
> clearly how common tanha is and that it cannot be
> eradicated quickly. I know that any moment is a chance
> for understanding to grow. 
> 
> In the early years I was afraid of defilements- I
> thought they hindered progress. Now I welcome them as
> objects for insight. Thus the practice is so relaxing
> now. Life becomes just one moment and then another.
> Patience and detachment gradually develop alongside
> understanding. It is completely different from how I
> used to think the path was or would be. 
> 
> Robert
> > 
> > > I am happy to go slowly.
> > 
> > I want to be sure that I understand what you mean.
> > 
> > Some go slowly along the Path in comparison with
> > others, while others 
> > go more quickly.  It all depends on one's
> > accumulations.  I'm sure
> > you are familiar with the simile of the musical
> > instrument.  See AN 
> > VI.55 at
> >
> http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an6-55.html
> > 
> > One's efforts must be like the string of a fine
> > instrument.  Too 
> > much effort (over-tightening the string) to
> > "progess" quickly does
> > not produce a melodeous sound, since it is not in
> > tune with the
> > instrument as a whole.  Too little effort leads to
> > slakening and lack 
> > of resolve, which is also unskilful.  The right
> > amount of effort 
> > produces a harmoneous sound that allows the
> > instrument to reach it's 
> > full potential.
> > 
> > Whether one is slow or fast can only be measured by
> > comparison with 
> > the "progress" of others.  Such a practice of
> > "comparing mind" leads 
> > to feelings of separation and conceit, which is
> > unskilful.  What is 
> > "just right" for you may be slow or fast in relation
> > to someone else. 
> > Since each person is unique, comparisons are
> > irrelevant.  The key is 
> > the application of Right Effort (along with the
> > other seven factors
> > of the Noble Eightfold Path) that is attuned to your
> > own unique 
> > accumulations.
> > 
> > With that said, do you mean that you are content not
> > to go more 
> > quickly than would be so with the application of
> > Right Effort?  Or is 
> > it something else?
> > 
> > With metta,
> > 
> > Mike
> > 
> > 
> > 

 
528 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Sun Jun 18, 2000 11:31am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: About Concentration (was: re: abhidhamma in daily life)

 
  Dear Mike,
Thanks for the feedback and let me apologize for not
thanking you for the question in the first place. I
got involved with writing my reply to you and then
sent it off forgetting that I hadn't even put Dear
Mike at the beginning. 

I will try to add some more comments about effort and
the path during future postings to this list. It is a
fine subject but so subtle. Discussing it can be
helpful. Did you read the posting I made yesterday
about papanca? I wanted to show that even at the level
of study there has to be the correct attitude and that
it needs viriya (effort)too. 

When trying to explain Dhamma to others I find that
the times are such that I am always having to sound a
note of caution: Auntie Robert who is always saying
"be careful". In another age I might be saying almost
the opposite: "strive harder in satipatthana, you have
studied enough already". Indeed to those who have
listened a lot  Khun sujin stresses effort to
understand the present moment.

By and large I find most people are looking for quick
results these days and few are ready to put in the
effort to find out what the Buddha really taught. They
want to practice only but don't really know what it is
all about. People are very impressed by the charisma
of Buddhist teachers and are looking for improvements
in their character more than seeing that it is
detachment from all ideas of self that must be
developed.
Thanks again
Robert
--- Mike Potter  wrote:
> Dear Robert,
> 
> Just as I thought.  My experience has been much the
> same.  Thank you 
> for sharing, my friend.
> 
> With metta,
> 
> Mike
> 
> 


 
530 From: amara chay   
Date: Mon Jun 19, 2000 3:22am
Subject: 'Asoka' by Nina

 
  Alan,

May I ask you to confirm your permission to take things from your 
site?  I would like to add Nina's book on her trip to India to DS, so 
would it be possible for you to send me the files in another format 
besides the Adobe Acrobat, I have not been able to find a way to 
convert the files other than page by page.  If there is no other 
the way I will do so but if you could send them in any form of 'Word' 
for example, it would make my task so much simpler.  Thank you again 
for all the kindnesses you have shown us from the very start, and 
anumodana for the great kusala in creating the first website for as 
well as the beautiful printing of Nina's and Khun Sujin's writings
and books,

Amara

 
 
531 From: Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala   
Date: Mon Jun 19, 2000 11:29am
Subject: next Saturday

 
  Dear K. Amara, K. Ivan, K. Ell and K. Shin,
What a terrific session we had on Saturday and am truly looking forward to
next Saturday as well. Many thanks for all your patience with my ignorance.

Have spoken with K. Jeed since Achaan Suchin is up country, but may we keep
next week's session at 2pm like we did last time? I must have gotten my
dates mixed up because the ordination is on Sunday and Sat. I will be free
during the afternoon. Sorry for inconveniencing everyone.

With metta,
Betty

 
532 From: amara chay   
Date: Mon Jun 19, 2000 3:15pm
Subject: Forwarded posting

 
  Dear all,

I just wanted to share this with you, it's from the venerable Heng 
Shun,

Amara


>From: "Heng Shun" 
>Subject: Dhamma Study Discussion Group
>Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 19:49:27 PDT
>
Amara, 

     Just wanted to let you know that I've had to temporarily 
unsubscribe to the Dhamma Study Discussion Group.  I was
accepted for a full scholarship  for a 6-week seminar at Harvard 
University entitled "World Religions in America," for high
school teachers of World Religions and related fields. The program is 
very intense.  I'll be leaving in a few days.  If there is
anything I can help with, or if you or others in the group need to 
contact me for anything, don't hesitate to contact at my e-mail
address:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/post?protectID=180056234108099125130158203004176222188144238179209171188199  

     Sincerely, in Dharma, 

     Heng Shun

 
533 From: amara chay   
Date: Mon Jun 19, 2000 3:36pm
Subject: Re: next Saturday

 
  Dear M. Betty,

That is so great!  Looking forward to seeing you at the foundation on 
Saturday at 2:00 then, and please say hi to Whiskers for me,

Amara

 
534 From: Mike Potter   
Date: Mon Jun 19, 2000 8:32pm
Subject: The Three Marks of Existence

 
  Dear Friends, 

The Buddha taught that all conditioned things - ourselves included - 
have three characteristics: impermanence (anicca),
unsatisfactoriness (dukkha), and selflessness or nonsubstantiality 
(anatta). When we fail to recognize these three characteristics of 
existence, we regard that which is impermanent as permanent, that 
which is unsatisfactory as pleasurable, and the selfless as
possessing an unchanging self.  In "The Real Facts of Life -
Practical Reflections on the Three Marks of Existence" (The Wheel 
Publication No. 435), Sumano Tong systematically explores these 
characteristics through many examples that can easily be found in 
everyday life. It may be read online at
http://www.geocities.com/ganges_sangha/3char.html#top 

With metta, 

Mike

 
535 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Mon Jun 19, 2000 9:44pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The Three Marks of Existence

 
  Dear Mike,
Thanks for the article which I think is quite helpful
as an introduction for people who want an introduction
to Buddhist ideas. Of course thinking about anicca,
dukkha and anatta in daily life as the author
recommends is not the same as experiencing realities
directly. But this type of thinking can be done with
kusala citta and is therefore beneficial. The best
parts are when he mentions about eye and eye base and
so on under the section about mental phenomena.

One little point Mike. You wrote "that all conditioned
things - ourselves included- have three
characteristics: impermanence..."
It should be noted that only paramattha dhammas have
the tilakkhana, three characteristics. Thus a concept
such as "ourselves" which is entirely non-existent
cannot have the three characteristics of anicca,
dukkha and anatta.  I wouldn't have bothered bringing
this up as I know you understand this Mike, except
that recently I read an article on the net by a
Buddhist teacher who seemed to really confuse exactly
this point.It is a rather subtle but important matter.
So at the risk of sounding pedantic I take the
opprtunity of pointing this out.
If anyone wants more explanations about this please
write and I will try to elaborate
Robert

--- Mike Potter  wrote:
> Dear Friends, 
> 
> The Buddha taught that all conditioned things -
> ourselves included - 
> have three characteristics: impermanence (anicca),
> unsatisfactoriness (dukkha), and selflessness or
> nonsubstantiality 
> (anatta). When we fail to recognize these three
> characteristics of 
> existence, we regard that which is impermanent as
> permanent, that 
> which is unsatisfactory as pleasurable, and the
> selfless as
> possessing an unchanging self.  In "The Real Facts
> of Life -
> Practical Reflections on the Three Marks of
> Existence" (The Wheel 
> Publication No. 435), Sumano Tong systematically
> explores these 
> characteristics through many examples that can
> easily be found in 
> everyday life. It may be read online at
>
http://www.geocities.com/ganges_sangha/3char.html#top
> 
> 
> With metta, 
> 
> Mike 
>   

 
536 From: amara chay   
Date: Mon Jun 19, 2000 9:46pm
Subject: The three meanings of dukkha

 
  Dear friends in the dhamma, 

During last Saturday's discussion we discussed dukkha, of which there 
are three (I had forgotten one of them when I said two earlier).

1.  Dukkha-dukkha, the vedana that is not sukkha or upekha, 
2.  Viparinama-dukkha, when pleasant feeling falls away or changes,
3.  Sankhara-dukkha, any instant of arising and falling away of 
sankhara-dhamma, impermanence, the characteristic of all sankkhara.

I have had to change all the translations I did where the incorrect 
word had been used in the Summary on the web as well as in our 
documents, so if anyone finds any mistakes that escaped my notice, 
could they please tell me.  We also discussed the fact that most 
Thais have long confused dukkha for dukkha dukkha and most
translators 
make the same mistakes.

Robert, could you please elaborate the three meanings of dukkha a 
little for us, when you could find the time?

Amara

 
537 From: amara chay   
Date: Mon Jun 19, 2000 10:00pm
Subject: Re: The Three Marks of Existence

 
  --- "Mike Potter"  wrote:
> Dear Friends, 
> 
> The Buddha taught that all conditioned things - ourselves included
- 
> have three characteristics: impermanence (anicca),
> unsatisfactoriness (dukkha), and selflessness or nonsubstantiality 
> (anatta). When we fail to recognize these three characteristics of 
> existence, we regard that which is impermanent as permanent, that 
> which is unsatisfactory as pleasurable, and the selfless as
> possessing an unchanging self.  In "The Real Facts of Life -
> Practical Reflections on the Three Marks of Existence" (The Wheel 
> Publication No. 435), Sumano Tong systematically explores these 
> characteristics through many examples that can easily be found in 
> everyday life. It may be read online at
> http://www.geocities.com/ganges_sangha/3char.html#top 
> 
> With metta, 
> 
> Mike


Mike,

Thank you for telling us about your new article, I will look at it 
right away.  I am glad you found a bigger place for your website,
your collection of dhamma writings must have grown quite a bit by
now. 
 
Anumodana with all your kusala cetana,

Amara

 
538 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Tue Jun 20, 2000 0:08am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The three meanings of dukkha

 
  Robert, could you please elaborate the three
> meanings of dukkha a 
> little for us, when you could find the time

	Dear amara,
I will write a little.Please correct me if you see any
errors. There is really no end to what we could say
about dukkha - it is happening continually in all
realms of existence.

You wrote that dukkha can be classified in the
following three ways
1
“Dukkha-dukkha, the vedana that is not sukkha or
upekha, 
2.  Viparinama-dukkha, when pleasant feeling falls
away or changes,
3.  Sankhara-dukkha, any instant of arising and
falling away of 
sankhara-dhamma, impermanence, the characteristic of
all sankkhara.”

Yes. that is how I understand it.
The first, dukkha-dukkha includes all painful feeling.
In the human realm we experience this regularly as
either painful bodily feeling or as painful mental
feeling associated with dosa. Both are vedana and
nama. The Brahama gods experience no dukkha-dukkha
during their aeons as gods. When they are reborn in
lower realms painful feeling will arise again. In the
hell realms dukkha-dukkha is extreme.

The second, viparinama dukkha can be understood by
considering the 6doors: when  visible object comes
into contact with the eye-sense and seeing
consciousness arises. If the object is pleasant a
process will arise whereby pleasurable feeling arises.
 When the visible object goes the sense pleasure to
the eye disappears.  The same with all the other doors
of ear, nose tongue, body mind. Thus all beings are 
forced to do all kinds of things good and bad to try
to ensure a continual supply of pleasant objects for
these doors. The truly pathetic, miserable nature of
samasara can be gauged by how often we indulge in
activities (designed to bring us these pleasurable
objects) that as akusala kamma, can only give
unpleasant results . Thus deep is ignorance.

And as I understand it the third, sankhara-dukkha –
the continual  rising and ceasing of dhammas is the
deepest meaning of dukkha. All conditioned phenomena,
all dhammas are in such an extraordinary flux that to
say they exist is an extreme. This is the meaning of
dukkha ariya-sacca, the first noble truth, so hard to
comprehend. Anyone can reason and  understand the
first two aspects of dukkha. We all know about pain,
dukkha dukkha,  and we can all see to some extent
change occurring at the 6doors. But to penetrate the
aspect of sankhara-dukkha is only possible by the
correct, gradual development of  satipatthana thereby
fulfilling the 37 bodhipakkhyadhamma and the
eightfactored path.

The Buddha often said  “Birth is suffering old age is
suffering, death is suffering…….In short the five
aggregates of clinging are dukkha.”  The deep meaning
of the last part of the phrase becomes clear if we
consider the Samyutta-Nikaya, Khandha-Vagga where it
says “Corporeality is a murderer, as are vedana,
sanna, sankhara and vinnana”.  Yes, we are so attached
to these khandas but this is only because we can’t see
that at every moment they are breaking up.
This dukkha-ariya-sacca is deep.

Robert
 



 
539 From: Theresa   
Date: Tue Jun 20, 2000 5:37am
Subject: Re: The three meanings of dukkha

 
  Hello Amara,

<< -----
During last Saturday's discussion we discussed dukkha, of which there 
are three (I had forgotten one of them when I said two earlier).

1.  Dukkha-dukkha, the vedana that is not sukkha or upekha, 
2.  Viparinama-dukkha, when pleasant feeling falls away or changes,
3.  Sankhara-dukkha, any instant of arising and falling away of 
sankhara-dhamma, impermanence, the characteristic of all sankkhara.
-------- >>

Thank you for sharing.. 

About Sankhara-dukkha or Viparinama-dukkha, we need to see 
the "arising" (the Rise) and the "falling away" (the Fall) of 
<<sankhara-dhamma, impermanence, the characteristic of all 
sankkhara.>> This is exactly what I mean, in my earlier posts, 
about "Dukkha", "Impermanence" and "Anatta", and about the Rise and 
the Fall of Sankharas (ie, what we see/experience from moment to 
moment with Mindfulness.. I referred to my practical experience..) 

This post is my attempt to compare terms and point out that you and I 
have been spoken about the exact same thing.. 

with metta,

Theresa.

 
540 From: Theresa   
Date: Tue Jun 20, 2000 5:54am
Subject: Re: The three meanings of dukkha

 
  Hello Robert and Amara,

<< -----
You wrote that dukkha can be classified in the following three ways
1."Dukkha-dukkha, the vedana that is not sukkha or upekha,
2.  Viparinama-dukkha, when pleasant feeling falls away or changes,
3.  Sankhara-dukkha, any instant of arising and falling away of
sankhara-dhamma, impermanence, the characteristic of all
sankkhara."

Yes. that is how I understand it.
The first, dukkha-dukkha includes all painful feeling. In the human
realm we experience this regularly as either painful bodily feeling
or as painful mental feeling associated with dosa. Both are vedana and
nama. The Brahama gods experience no dukkha-dukkha during their aeons
as gods. When they are reborn in lower realms painful feeling will
arise again. In the hell realms dukkha-dukkha is extreme.

The second, viparinama dukkha can be understood by considering the
6doors: when..object comes into contact with the ..sense
and..consciousness arises. If the object is pleasant a process will
arise whereby pleasurable feeling arises.  When the ..object goes the
sense pleasure to the eye disappears. ...

And as I understand it the third, sankhara-dukkha – the continual

rising and ceasing of dhammas is the deepest meaning of dukkha. All
conditioned phenomena, all dhammas are in such an extraordinary flux
that to say they exist is an extreme. This is the meaning of dukkha
ariya-sacca, the first noble truth, so hard to comprehend. ...We all
know about pain, dukkha dukkha,  and we can all see to some extent
change occurring at the 6doors. But to penetrate the aspect of
sankhara-dukkha is only possible by the correct, gradual development
of  satipatthana thereby fulfilling the 37 bodhipakkhyadhamma and the
eightfactored path.
--------- >>

Please double-check with Khun Sujin on my behalf about what I write
here :

(1) Dukkha-Dukkha is directly linked to the physical matter (our
body)..

(2) viparinama dukkha .. I don't quite understand your explanations
for this term.

(3) " sankhara-dukkha – the continual  rising and ceasing of
dhammas
is the deepest meaning of dukkha. "   This is exactly what I have
tried to explain with my layman terms for weeks now, but I didn't
know how to express my thoughts.. This type of Dukkha is what I have
experienced off and on and known by practice.. This is the first
Noble Truth; it can only be experienced through practical experience,
and there is no way anyone can understand it intellectually.. It is
understood only when there is a "continual rising and ceasing of
dhammas" (ie, sankharas being known directly with Mindfulness);
therefore, CONTINUOUS MINDFULNESS, the RISE, and the FALL of
aggregates are not merely "concepts" or "terms", but are actual
practical experience that meditators can experience when applying
Buddha's Dhamma from moment to moment...  In term of practice, how do
Continuous Mindfulness and Impermanence fit into the idea of Self-
less ??  Please ask Khun Sujin this question, and share her answer
with us, me included..

Please tell Khun Sujin that I bow deeply to her and have great
respect for her as a wonderful teacher..

With metta,

Theresa.

 
541 From: Theresa   
Date: Tue Jun 20, 2000 8:35am
Subject: Re: The Three Marks of Existence

 
  Hello Robert,

<< -----
You [Mike] wrote "that all conditioned things - ourselves included- 
have three characteristics: impermanence..." It should be noted that 
only paramattha dhammas have the tilakkhana, three characteristics. 
Thus a concept such as "ourselves" which is entirely non-existent 
cannot have the three characteristics of anicca, dukkha and anatta.  
-------- >>

"Self" is non-existent... 
Yes, if we really see so through Lakkhanas..
No, otherwise...

How do anyone convince people, who hold a strong belief in 
a "permanent Soul", that "Self" is non-existent and nothing but a 
concept ??..  They see "Self" as reality, and they might think we are 
out of our mind to speak of "Self-less"...  

How do meditators see "Self is non-existent" as reality ??
If by listening to Dhamma talks or learning from books, it's 
debatable, because it based on pure Faith... 
If by practicing Dhamma and experiencing Lakkhanas with Continuous 
Mindfulness, it's an unshakable belief...

"Self" is a conditioned thing !!!
A thought is a conditioned thing..
A pain is a conditioned thing..
A vedana is a conditioned thing..
A consciousness is a conditioned thing..
A Mindfulness moment is a conditioned thing..
All sankharas are conditioned things.. 
Mindfulness is a conditioned thing..
Concentration is a conditioned thing.. 
etc. etc. etc.
Therefore, Self is a conditioned thing.. 

Except Nibbana, what is not a conditioned thing ??

Pain is non-existent because it is a conditioned thing..
Hurt is non-existent because it is a conditioned thing..
A thought is non-existent because it is a conditioned thing..
Walking is non-existent because it is a conditioned thing..
Talking is non-existent because it is a conditioned thing..
etc. etc. etc.
Therefore, "Self" is non-existent..

"Self" lasts long as one instant thought, one instant pain, one 
instant hurt, etc. etc...

Many thoughts, many pain, many hurt, combined into many instances 
of "Self"..

Therefore, "Self" has all three Lakkhanas.. ie, by seeing Lakkanas 
directly and continuously, the concept of "Self" is understood as non-
existent.. Without Lakkhanas, "Self" seems to be existent and 
permanent.. :-))

With metta,

Theresa.

 
542 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Tue Jun 20, 2000 10:14am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The Three Marks of Existence

 
  Dear Theresa,
You wrote
---"Self" is non-existent... 
> Yes, if we really see so through Lakkhanas..
> No, otherwise...
> 
> How do anyone convince people, who hold a strong
> belief in 
> a "permanent Soul", that "Self" is non-existent and
> nothing but a 
> concept ??..  They see "Self" as reality, and they
> might think we are 
> out of our mind to speak of "Self-less"...  

Yes, this true. But understanding into the tilakkhanas
(anicca, dukkha, anatta) doesn't suddenly arise . We
have to have someone explain it to us and then we may
gradually develop deeper insight by studying
paramattha dhammas directly.

you then wrote.
"How do meditators see "Self is non-existent" as
> reality ??
> If by listening to Dhamma talks or learning from
> books, it's 
> debatable, because it based on pure Faith..."

In the Kitagiri sutta; sutta 70 of the Majjihima
nikaya the Buddha said
"And how bhikkhus does the attainment of profound
knowledge come by means of a gradual training...?
As to this bhikkhus, one who has faith draws close;
drawing close, he sits down nearby; sitting down
nearby he lends ear; lending ear, he hears Dhamma;
having heard Dhamma he remembers it; he tests the
meaning of the things he has borne in mind; while
testing the meaning, the things are approved of; there
being approval of the things, chanda  is born; with
chanda born he makes an effort; having made the
effort, he weighs it up; having weighed it up, he
strives; being self-resolute, he realises with his
person the highest truth itself and, penetrating it by
means of wisdom, he sees. But, bhikkhus had there not
been that faith, there would not have been that
drawing near; there would not have been that sitting
down..."
These days so many people are very convinced they are
already at the later stages of this gradual training.
But this gradual training takes a long time. We may
need to go back again and again to the very earliest
stages. If we try to test Dhamma before we even know
what it is we may pass tests that are merely an
imitation. 



You said
> "If by practicing Dhamma and experiencing Lakkhanas
> with Continuous 
> Mindfulness, it's an unshakable belief..."

Thinking you can have continual mindfulness is an
illusion, a delusion that exists through a  belief in
self. Instead of trying to have continual mindfulness
why not start to see that everything including
mindfulness depends on complex conditions, that
mindfulness is very broken up and non-continuous
indeed.

You wrote

"Self" is a conditioned thing !!!
> A thought is a conditioned thing..
> A pain is a conditioned thing..
> A vedana is a conditioned thing..
> A consciousness is a conditioned thing..
> A Mindfulness moment is a conditioned thing..
> All sankharas are conditioned things.. 
> Mindfulness is a conditioned thing..
> Concentration is a conditioned thing.. 
> etc. etc. etc.
> Therefore, Self is a conditioned thing.."

You are mixing concept, (samutti) with paramattha
dhammas (absolute realities.) The thinking process is
composed of paramattha dhammas, pain is aparamattha
dhamma, vedana, consciousness,
mindfulnes,concentration and all sankharas are
paramattha dhammas but self is merely concept, an
idea.  


> "Pain is non-existent because it is a conditioned
> thing..
> Hurt is non-existent because it is a conditioned
> thing..
> A thought is non-existent because it is a
> conditioned thing..
> Walking is non-existent because it is a conditioned
> thing..
> Talking is non-existent because it is a conditioned
> thing.."

It is another extreme to say that paramattha dhammas
such as pain do not exist. The Buddha takes the middle
path between existence and non- existence by teaching
the conditioned nature of phenomena. Walking is
concept - it comes about because of the idea of a
whole. The realities are only citta, cetasika and
rupa.

Robert

 > Hello Robert,
> 
> << -----
> You [Mike] wrote "that all conditioned things -
> ourselves included- 
> have three characteristics: impermanence..." It
> should be noted that 
> only paramattha dhammas have the tilakkhana, three
> characteristics. 
> Thus a concept such as "ourselves" which is entirely
> non-existent 
> cannot have the three characteristics of anicca,
> dukkha and anatta.  
> -------- >>
> 
> "Self" is non-existent... 
> Yes, if we really see so through Lakkhanas..
> No, otherwise...
> 
> How do anyone convince people, who hold a strong
> belief in 
> a "permanent Soul", that "Self" is non-existent and
> nothing but a 
> concept ??..  They see "Self" as reality, and they
> might think we are 
> out of our mind to speak of "Self-less"...  
> 
> > 
> "Self" is a conditioned thing !!!
> A thought is a conditioned thing..
> A pain is a conditioned thing..
> A vedana is a conditioned thing..
> A consciousness is a conditioned thing..
> A Mindfulness moment is a conditioned thing..
> All sankharas are conditioned things.. 
> Mindfulness is a conditioned thing..
> Concentration is a conditioned thing.. 
> etc. etc. etc.
> Therefore, Self is a conditioned thing.. 
> 
> Except Nibbana, what is not a conditioned thing ??
> 
> Pain is non-existent because it is a conditioned
> thing..
> Hurt is non-existent because it is a conditioned
> thing..
> A thought is non-existent because it is a
> conditioned thing..
> Walking is non-existent because it is a conditioned
> thing..
> Talking is non-existent because it is a conditioned
> thing..
> etc. etc. etc.
> Therefore, "Self" is non-existent..
> 
> "Self" lasts long as one instant thought, one
> instant pain, one 
> instant hurt, etc. etc...
> 
> Many thoughts, many pain, many hurt, combined into
> many instances 
> of "Self"..
> 
> Therefore, "Self" has all three Lakkhanas.. ie, by
> seeing Lakkanas 
> directly and continuously, the concept of "Self" is
> understood as non-
> existent.. Without Lakkhanas, "Self" seems to be
> existent and 
> permanent.. :-))
> 
> With metta,
> 
> Theresa.
> 
> 
> 
> 



 
543 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Tue Jun 20, 2000 10:21am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The three meanings of dukkha

 
  > --------- >>
> dear Theresa,

> You wrote
> (1) "Dukkha-Dukkha is directly linked to the
physical
> matter (our
> body).."

I think (but please check, I do this from memory)
Dukkha-Dukkha can be classified under two headings. It
is dukkha vedana. The first is indeed dependent on the
body. It is a type of akusala vipaka, the result of
unwholesome kamma, arising at the body door. It needs
body object and body door to arise, both of which are
rupa, physical phenomena but is itself nama, mental
phenomena. The other type of Dukkha Dukkha arises with
any type of dosa, aversion. We can be merely bored and
the unpleasnt feeling arising simultaneously is also
dukkha vedana but different from the first type.
.


You wrote:
> (3) " sankhara-dukkha – the continual  rising and
> ceasing of
> dhammas
> is the deepest meaning of dukkha. "   This is
> exactly what I have
> tried to explain with my layman terms for weeks now,
> but I didn't
> know how to express my thoughts.. This type of
> Dukkha is what I have
> experienced off and on and known by practice.. This
> is the first
> Noble Truth; "

With respect I again suggest that what you have
experienced is not this direct level of understanding.
I understand that it appears to you that your
experiences in meditation are so dramatic and that
change is seen much more than before you started to do
this practice but this is still not experiencing
dukkha-ariya-sacca. I think if you continue to learn
and discuss more this will become apparent sooner or
later. As Sarah said to you it takes great courage to
give up the idea that we have attained special
insight, to go back to kindergarten.. I respect very
much that you keep writing and at the same time you
consider what we are saying to you. 
 I lot of Buddhists these days if they hear anyone
doubting them will never speak or listen to this
person again. It takes enormous honesty and other
parami to swallow our pride and hopes and listen to
others. It is very easy to find teachers and friends
who will tell us "yes, you have attained, yes you are
on the right path" Those who will tell us differently
are very rare.

I stayed with a friend of Khun Sujins in Thailand
years ago. He has a property with many small huts
scattered around it where anyone can come and stay and
study and apply the Dhamma. I stayed there for 6weeks
and he told me his story. He was a meditation teacher
with many students. His own teacher was rather famous
and my friend was one of his assistant teachers. One
day he was staying at the temple of his teacher and
heard the teacher listening to a radio program on
Dhamma. When he asked who the speaker was the teacher
became evasive and said not to bother. The next few
days he noticed his teacher listening to the radio
again at the same times and he was able to listen a
little. When he got home he was able to find the
program and so he started to listen to khun Sujin.
After several months he was able to meet with Khun
sujin and he realized his old way of practice was a
little twisted. He went to his teacher and explained
what he had learnt. They had several meetings. 

Basically his teachers position was that "yes, the way
Achrn Sujin teaches is entirely correct but by doing
the practice that we do the path is faster". I have
heard this said by others also. Indeed the teacher
admitted relying on Khun Sujins program for some of
the theory he used in his teaching. In the end they
parted ways. When my friend announced his decision  to
his large number of students there were few who could
accept it. One of his old students who did  told me
that she couldn't understand what he was talking about
at all but that she followed his new path merely out
of devotion. She had thought that concentrating on the
breath was the way to have insight. Now, more than a
decade later her understanding of Dhamma is admired by
many.

However we don't need to think that we will become
followers of Khun Sujin.  Khun sujin once told me that
there was only ever one teacher - the Buddha.
We must rely on ourselves and, as Mike noted,
everyones accumulations are different. No one can tell
us exactly how to have true awareness but by relying
on the Dhamma taught by the Buddha and transmitted so
accurately by the long line of monks we will gradually
build up the conditions for real insight.
Robert



 
544 From: amara chay   
Date: Tue Jun 20, 2000 2:06pm
Subject: Re: The three meanings of dukkha

 
  > About Sankhara-dukkha or Viparinama-dukkha, we need to see 
> the "arising" (the Rise) and the "falling away" (the Fall) of 
> <<sankhara-dhamma, impermanence, the characteristic of all 
> sankkhara.>> This is exactly what I mean, in my earlier posts, 
> about "Dukkha", "Impermanence" and "Anatta", and about the Rise and 
> the Fall of Sankharas (ie, what we see/experience from moment to 
> moment with Mindfulness.. I referred to my practical experience..) 
> 
> This post is my attempt to compare terms and point out that you and 
I 
> have been spoken about the exact same thing.. 
> 
> with metta,
> 
> Theresa.

Theresa,

I would have to tell you again that sankhara-dukkha or 
viparinama-dukkha are not the same, but I see from what you wrote to 
Robert that you said you did not understand the first terminology.  
Since this is a very intricate matter that requires real 
understanding, I doubt we were speaking about the same thing.  

The Buddha taught about rupa, which is a much less complicated matter 
than the nama, in the days where there were no modern instruments to 
test his words, in a way that we are still witnessing, with the help 
of modern equipment, the verification of: solids liquids gasses and 
combustion, the seven stages of the a star's life through billions of 
years, other planetary systems, the infinite variety of life forms in 
the universe, the division of the first cells of a human being, our 
six senses.  In fact Einstien once said if ever there was a religion 
that fits in with modern science, Buddhism is.

However even now there are no methods or laboratories that can test 
his teachings about nama, which is much more complex, except for 
ourselves.  Luckily what he taught about us can be proven by 
conscientious study of his teachings, it is not as if one can think 
it up, or that one sits and wait and all will become clear suddenly. 
All the Buddhas had to study millions of lifetimes and accumulate 
myriad parami to perfection before attaining this extremely rare 
knowledge, which, once people do not study and it is completely 
forgotten, will be gone for billions of billions of years before the 
next Buddha would come again.

This is why each word is so precious and should be carefully and 
respectfully considered, never to be corrupted and used frivolously.

Amara

 
545 From: Jim Gough   
Date: Tue Jun 20, 2000 10:47pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The Three Marks of Existence

 
  Robert Kirkpatrick wrote:

"Instead of trying to have continual mindfulness why not start to see that everything
including mindfulness depends on complex conditions, that mindfulness is very broken
up and non-continuous indeed."
---
Robert, doesn't this exhortation require continuous mindfulness?
Jim

 
 
546 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Wed Jun 21, 2000 4:47am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The Three Marks of Existence

 
  Dear Jim,
Welcome to the discussion. 
Interesting counterpoint that you wrote. There are
many different levels of understanding both in theory
and experiently. 
I think we first need to see what the characteristics
of sati is. It is rather easy to mistake samadhi for
mindfulness. Someone may think they have sati when
they don't. 
Robert
> 
> 
> Robert Kirkpatrick wrote:
> 
> "Instead of trying to have continual mindfulness why
> not start to see that everything
> including mindfulness depends on complex conditions,
> that mindfulness is very broken
> up and non-continuous indeed."
> ---
> Robert, doesn't this exhortation require continuous
> mindfulness?
> Jim
> 
> 

 
547 From: Jim Gough   
Date: Wed Jun 21, 2000 6:13am
Subject: The characteristics of mindfulness (was dharma study group)

 
  Robert,
What are the characteristics of mindfulness and how are they developed?
Jim



Robert Kirkpatrick wrote:

> Dear Jim,
> Welcome to the discussion.
> Interesting counterpoint that you wrote. There are
> many different levels of understanding both in theory
> and experiently.
> I think we first need to see what the characteristics
> of sati is. It is rather easy to mistake samadhi for
> mindfulness. Someone may think they have sati when
> they don't.
> Robert
> >
> >
> > Robert Kirkpatrick wrote:
> >
> > "Instead of trying to have continual mindfulness why
> > not start to see that everything
> > including mindfulness depends on complex conditions,
> > that mindfulness is very broken
> > up and non-continuous indeed."
> > ---
> > Robert, doesn't this exhortation require continuous
> > mindfulness?
> > Jim
> >
--
Dr James Gough
Dept Pathology
Foothills Medical Centre
1403 29th St NW
Calgary
Alberta T2N 2T9
Canada

(403) 670 1326 (office).
(403) 289 6899 (home).
(403) 670 4748 (fax).
(403) 213 1047 (pager/messages).

 
548 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Wed Jun 21, 2000 5:57am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The characteristics of mindfulness (was dharma study group)

 
  Dear Jim,
Thanks for the question. I had an exchange of letters
about 4 years ago with a friend  that I edited and put
on the net. It gives an introduction to this area:
http://www.dhammastudy.com/corr.html . It is not too
long so perhaps you could read it and comment.
Robert
--- Jim Gough  wrote:
> 
> 
> Robert,
> What are the characteristics of mindfulness and how
> are they developed?
> Jim
> 
> 
> 
> Robert Kirkpatrick wrote:
> 
> > Dear Jim,
> > Welcome to the discussion.
> > Interesting counterpoint that you wrote. There are
> > many different levels of understanding both in
> theory
> > and experiently.
> > I think we first need to see what the
> characteristics
> > of sati is. It is rather easy to mistake samadhi
> for
> > mindfulness. Someone may think they have sati when
> > they don't.
> > Robert
> > >
> > >
> > > Robert Kirkpatrick wrote:
> > >
> > > "Instead of trying to have continual mindfulness
> why
> > > not start to see that everything
> > > including mindfulness depends on complex
> conditions,
> > > that mindfulness is very broken
> > > up and non-continuous indeed."
> > > ---
> > > Robert, doesn't this exhortation require
> continuous
> > > mindfulness?
> > > Jim
> > >
> > >

 
549 From: Theresa   
Date: Wed Jun 21, 2000 8:11am
Subject: Fwd : Mindfulness

 
  =======================

From:   <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/post?protectID>  
Date: Tue Jun 20, 2000 11:36am  
Subject: mindfulness  


The words of Sister Ayya Khema:

Our old friend, dukkha, arises in the mind as dissatisfaction caused 
by all sorts of triggers. It can be triggered by bodily discomfort, 
but more often it is caused by the mind's own aberrations and 
convolutions. The mind creates dukkha, and that's why we must really 
watch and guard our minds..... The greatest support we can have is 
mindfulness, which means being totally present in each moment. If the 
mind remains centered then it can't make up stories about the 
injustice of the world or one's friends, or about one's desires, or 
one's lamentations. All these mind-made stories would fill many 
volumes, but when we are mindful such verbalizations stop. "Mindful" 
is being fully absorbed in the moment, leaving no room for anything 
else. We are filled with the momentary happening, whether that may be 
standing or sitting or lying down, being comfortable or 
uncomfortable, feeling pleasant or unpleasant. Whichever it may be, 
it is a non-judgmental awareness, "knowing only," without evaluation. 

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/modern/khema/allofus.html

metta,
sue

 
550 From: Theresa   
Date: Wed Jun 21, 2000 8:13am
Subject: Fwd : words and practice

 
  ================================

From:   <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/post?protectID>  
Date: Tue Jun 20, 2000 11:27am  
Subject: words and practice  


The words of Sister Ayya Khema:

There is this difference between one who knows and one who practices. 
The one who knows may understand the words and concepts but the one 
who practices knows only one thing, namely, to become that truth. 
Words are an utilitarian means not only for communication, but also 
to solidify ideas. That's why words can never reveal the truth, only 
personal experience can..... 

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/modern/khema/herenow.html

metta,
sue

 
551 From: Theresa   
Date: Wed Jun 21, 2000 8:22am
Subject: fwd : locate quote

 
  =======================

From: atta dubson    
Date: Tue Jun 20, 2000 12:58pm  
Subject: Re: [d-l] Locate quote  


On Tue, 20 Jun 2000, sotujana wrote:

> Hi all -- I recently heard the following but cannot locate it in the
> Dhammapada -- where I am told it is from -- at least, not in the
> translations have on hand. Can anyone offer a specific citation? 
> thanks -- Robert
> 
> "There is no meditation without wisdom no wisdom without meditation.
> One who has both wisdom and meditation is close to peace and
> emancipation."

verse 372. i have three other versions:

There is no meditative concentration for him who lacks insight, and no
insight for him who lacks meditative concentration. He in whom are 
found both meditative concentration and insight, indeed, is close to
Nibbana. 372

There is no meditation without wisdom, and there is no wisdom without
meditation. When a man has both meditation and wisdom, he is indeed
close to nirvana. 372

There's no jhana for one with no discernment, no discernment for one
with no jhana. But one with both jhana & discernment: he's on the 
verge of Unbinding. 372

-atta  

========================

From: Lee Dillion    
Date: Tue Jun 20, 2000 1:01pm  
Subject: Re: [d-l] Locate quote  

. . . 

It is one version of the Dhammapada XXV - 372.  The Access to Insight
has an alternative translation as follows: 

         There's no jhana
         for one with no discernment,
         no discernment for one with no jhana.
         But one with both jhana & discernment:
         he's on the verge of Unbinding. 

-- 
Lee Dillion

 
552 From: Theresa   
Date: Wed Jun 21, 2000 0:37pm
Subject: Re: The Three Marks of Existence

 
  Hello Robert,

> In the Kitagiri sutta; sutta 70 of the Majjihima
> nikaya the Buddha said
> "And how bhikkhus does the attainment of profound
> knowledge come by means of a gradual training...?
> As to this bhikkhus, one who has faith draws close;
> . . . 
> with chanda born he makes an effort; having made the
> effort, he weighs it up; 
> . . .
> having weighed it up, he strives; 
> . . .
> being self-resolute, he realises with his
> person the highest truth itself and, penetrating it by
> means of wisdom, he sees. ..."

Have we strived (ie, practiced ) ?? 

If we have strived (practiced), 
is it possible for us to have wisdom ??
is it possible for us to realize the highest truth itself ??
is it possible for us to penetrate it by means of wisdom ??

> Thinking you can have continual mindfulness is an
> illusion, a delusion that exists through a  belief in
> self. Instead of trying to have continual mindfulness
> why not start to see that everything including
> mindfulness depends on complex conditions, that
> mindfulness is very broken up and non-continuous
> indeed.

Everything is an illusion, and yes, Mindfulness is an illusion, too.. 
Therefore, continuous Mindfulness is also an illusion.. 

Complex conditions ??  the make-up of the entire world.. 
I can't see the entire world at the same time, but what my eyes can 
see in each moment is a representation of the entire world ( a 
sample ).. What my eyes see is only an illusion (a copy, a 
perception) of the world.. I can never see the entire world or 
the "reality" of the world.. I can only see a part of the world, one 
part at a time.. I can only see one an "illusion" (my perception) of 
the world but I can never hold the "reality" of the world.. Should I 
close my eyes because the limitation of my seeing ?? .. 

Mindfulness is like our ability to see..
Mindfulness can only see so much at a time.. 
Mindfulness can only see an "illusion" (?!).. 

<<mindfulness is very broken up and non-continuous >>
So, what is continuous ?? What is permanent ?? 

Considering the seven factors of enlightenment...
Each factor is an illusion..
Mindfulness is one of the factor.. 
Each factor is impermanent..
Each factor is subjective..
Yet, when all factors are present and in balance of each other, that 
is the "cause" for enlightenment.. 

Continuous Mindfulness ??
As continuous as possible..
As mindful as possible.. 
If we don't believe that we can continuously see or continuously be 
mindful, we have good reason to end practicing Buddha's Dhamma..

> You are mixing concept, (samutti) with paramattha
> dhammas (absolute realities.) The thinking process is
> composed of paramattha dhammas, pain is aparamattha
> dhamma, vedana, consciousness,
> mindfulnes,concentration and all sankharas are
> paramattha dhammas but self is merely concept, an
> idea.  

We need a good teacher to explain the very meaning of the 
word "concepts" IN PRACTICE.. 

Pain is dhamma, if Mindfulness and Insight are present..
Vedana is dhamma, if Mindfulness and Insight are present.. 

> It is another extreme to say that paramattha dhammas
> such as pain do not exist. The Buddha takes the middle
> path between existence and non-existence by teaching
> the conditioned nature of phenomena. Walking is
> concept - it comes about because of the idea of a
> whole. The realities are only citta, cetasika and rupa.

Does the word "middle" of the Middle Path ( the Noble Path ) refer to 
something falling between existence and non-existence ?? Or does it 
refer to something else ??  We need a good teacher to explain it for 
PRACTICAL PURPOSE.. 

Existence, namely permanent existence, is when there is no change..

Pain changes and is impermanent, therefore, pain is an "illusion", 
thus, "non-existent".. When we practice Buddha's Dhamma so that it 
shows and proves how Pain is formed, then we will understand why Pain 
is an "illusion", a self-created concept.. Without practice of 
Buddha's Dhamma, Pain is pain, Dukkha.. 

Prince Siddharta with Dukkha, and then, Lord Buddha with Nibbana; 
both resided in one living person.. So, where is Dhamma ? So where is 
Dukkha ? So where is Nibbana ?.. 
Dukkha is impermanent and conditional.. 
Nibbana is permanent and unconditional..
Nibbana resides where Dukkha does.. 

Have we identified or realized or experienced these three : Citta, 
Cetasika and Rupa yet ??  and their interactions ??  and their 
independence or interdependence ??  We must be the witness (by 
practice) of them existing in us.. Otherwise, Buddha's Dhamma does 
not get a chance to soak deeply in us.. 

With metta,

Theresa.

 
553 From: amara chay   
Date: Wed Jun 21, 2000 0:51pm
Subject: Re: Fwd : Mindfulness

 
  "Mindful" 
> is being fully absorbed in the moment, leaving no room for anything 
> else. We are filled with the momentary happening, whether that may 
be 
> standing or sitting or lying down, being comfortable or 
> uncomfortable, feeling pleasant or unpleasant. Whichever it may be, 
> it is a non-judgmental awareness, "knowing only," without 
evaluation. 


Theresa,
 
The study of 'the momentary happening, whether that may be standing 
or sitting or lying down' is still not mindfulness of the 
paramatthadhamma, which is the study of the six senses and their 
objects:  seeing and sight, hearing and sound, smelling and smells, 
tasting and tastes, body-sense contact and temperature, softness or 
hardness, tension or motion that is appearing to a specific citta at 
a specific instant;  in no matter which posture, not only the four 
most common ones but bending down, climbing a cliff or whatever.  
However, at the moment of recognition of a bodily position or of 
feeling pleasant or unpleasant it is already the mind at work, 
thinking, which is a different reality arising through the mind door.
The citta is so fast that between times of sati and the thought of 
standing or sitting, there were already many bhavanga citta as well
as other types of citta in between.

Amara

 
554 From: amara chay   
Date: Wed Jun 21, 2000 0:56pm
Subject: Re: Fwd : words and practice

 
  > The one who knows may understand the words and concepts but the one 
> who practices knows only one thing, namely, to become that truth. 

Theresa,

There can be no 'becoming' anything, one either is or isn't.  I 
repeat that even the Buddha cannot change the nature of things, only 
know it and eradicate it.

Amara

 
555 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Wed Jun 21, 2000 2:08pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The Three Marks of Existence

 
  Dear Theresa,
You asked

"Have we strived (ie, practiced ) ?? 
If we have strived (practiced), 
is it possible for us to have wisdom ??
is it possible for us to realize the highest truth
itself ??
is it possible for us to penetrate it by means of
wisdom ??"


Certainly it is possible to have wisdom if there has
been enough wise attention to the Dhamma and correct
application of the teachings. If there is not this
basis we will merely be developing attachment to
whatever idea we have of what practice is. 
“Realize the highest truth”: that is too far for me
now. That is just speculation, wanting, tanha. 
My concerns are more with this moment. Now you are
reading this reply. But “you” is a concept. Sati of
Satipatthana cannot be aware of a concept. But there
are paramattha dhammas arising: seeing, color,
eyebase, hardness, body base, feeling, the thinking
process, desire or aversion and many others. Was there
any understanding of them in the last few seconds? If
not too late, they have gone completely never to arise
again.
 But now there are new ones arising. They oppress us
again and again. Everyone experiences paramattha
dhammas continually but until understanding develops
sufficiently they are taken  as lasting, as
controllable, as pleasurable. 



"Everything is an illusion, and yes, Mindfulness is an
illusion, too.. 
Therefore, continuous Mindfulness is also an
illusion.." 

What do you mean “Mindfulness is an illusion”? What do
you mean by "Everything" in this sentence.


You wrote "We need a good teacher to explain the very
meaning of the 
word "concepts" IN PRACTICE.." 
 
Did you read the book I sent you “Realities and
Concepts” by Sujin Boriharnwanaket? This is rather
short but gives us a good introduction to this topic.
Understanding the theory will help us to see these
things in daily life. By the way if anyone else
reading this wants a copy please let me know and I
will post it.
Robert




 
556 From: amara chay   
Date: Wed Jun 21, 2000 5:29pm
Subject: Re: fwd : locate quote

 
  > On Tue, 20 Jun 2000, sotujana wrote:
> 
> > Hi all -- I recently heard the following but cannot locate it in 
the
> > Dhammapada -- where I am told it is from -- at least, not in the
> > translations have on hand. Can anyone offer a specific citation? 
> > thanks -- Robert
> > 
> > "There is no meditation without wisdom no wisdom without 
meditation.
> > One who has both wisdom and meditation is close to peace and
> > emancipation."


Robert,

Was it you who made this posting or a namesake?

Since this passage is mentioned, could you please explain it to us?  
What was it in the original Pali and how does it apply to 
satipatthana? 

Amara

 
557 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Wed Jun 21, 2000 5:53pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: fwd : locate quote

 
  Dear Amara,
You refer to a posting that Theresa sent:

”On Tue, 20 Jun 2000, sotujana wrote:

> Hi all -- I recently heard the following but cannot
locate it in the
> Dhammapada -- where I am told it is from -- at
least, not in the
> translations have on hand. Can anyone offer a
specific citation? 
> thanks -- Robert
> 
> "There is no meditation without wisdom no wisdom
without meditation.
> One who has both wisdom and meditation is close to
peace and
> emancipation."

… other versions:

There is no meditative concentration for him who lacks
insight, and no
insight for him who lacks meditative concentration. He
in whom are 
found both meditative concentration and insight,
indeed, is close to
Nibbana. 372”

The Robert who asked this question is another person,
not me.
Interesting quote and indeed the Dhammapada has
several verses where meditation is mentioned. All
these verses are very pithy though, so it is useful to
consult with the ancient commentary. I use the
translation by Carter and Palihawadana (1987, Oxford
university press). Another  verse in the Dhammapada
#23 says “those meditators, persevering, Forever firm
of enterprise, those steadfast ones  touch Nibbana,
Incomparable release from bonds”
Those meditators is the English translation of te
jhayino and the commentary (p111) says “They, the wise
who have awareness, are meditators by virtue of the
two-fold meditation- namely 1. the contemplation
concerned with objects constituted by the eight
attainments and 2 the contemplation concerned with the
characteristics of existence constituted by the Paths
and the fruits of insight.”
The first one refers to samattha meditation using one
of the 38 suitable objects such as earth kasina. And
the second one insight into the tilakkhana, the three
characteristics.
Robert.


--- amara chay  wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, 20 Jun 2000, sotujana wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi all -- I recently heard the following but
> cannot locate it in 
> the
> > > Dhammapada -- where I am told it is from -- at
> least, not in the
> > > translations have on hand. Can anyone offer a
> specific citation? 
> > > thanks -- Robert
> > > 
> > > "There is no meditation without wisdom no wisdom
> without 
> meditation.
> > > One who has both wisdom and meditation is close
> to peace and
> > > emancipation."
> 
> 
> Robert,
> 
> Was it you who made this posting or a namesake?
> 
> Since this passage is mentioned, could you please
> explain it to us?  
> What was it in the original Pali and how does it
> apply to 
> satipatthana? 
> 
> Amara
> 
> 


 
558 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Wed Jun 21, 2000 9:09pm
Subject: anatta and no control

 
  Dear group,
Someone said to me recently that we should not say
that there was no-self or no control as this would
lead to despair; we would conclude we could do
nothing. Another wrote that by striving with right
effort we could have continuos right mindfulness. I
suggested that this idea of being able to keep
mindfulness comes about because of belief in a self
who can control. This friend replied that if we
thought that we could not have constant mindfulness
that we would lose all interest in Buddhist practice. 

I think this matter is very difficult indeed.
Developing insight into the characteristic of anatta
is in essence what Buddhism is about. It is so
important that we should feel ‘as if our head is on
fire”, we should strive to understand it.

Why is it so difficult to comprehend? It is explained
that the tilakkha –the three characteristics- anicca,
dukkha, and anatta are the nature of all paramattha
dhammas, past, present and future. And paramattha
dhammas (absolute realities) include all the common
things that we experience every day such as pain,
pleasant feeling, seeing, hearing tasting touching,
sound. You would think that as it is is such a
fundamental essence of nature that it should be
apparent- all we have to do is observe. However, it is
far more difficult than that. Delusion clouds our
vision. Trying to observe this process can easily be
done with wrong effort, wrong mindfulness, wrong
concentration and so lead nowhere. 

 It is difficult because of accumulations. We have had
countless trillions of aeons during which we have
listened to all sorts of teachers tell us all sorts of
things. Although we have, according to the scrptures
in countless numbers of lives developed high levels of
jhana, and have lived for billions of aeons as Brahma
gods. But these very pure states do not uproot the
idea of self. If they are grasped wrongly they can
even enforce the idea of atta. 
According to the Buddhist scriptures it is only rarely
that a Buddha comes into the world and can explain in
detail about no-self. Thus rarely have we listened to
Buddhas and even when we did we may have
misunderstood.  There are pacceka-buddhas who arise at
other times who can understand this for themselves but
they cannot teach the details of it to others. It is
deep. 

What can be done? 
I quoted the Kitagiri sutta recently:
"And how bhikkhus does the attainment of profound
knowledge come by means of a gradual training...?
.... he hears Dhamma;
having heard Dhamma he remembers it; he tests the
meaning of the things he has borne in mind; while
testing the meaning, the things are approved of; there
being approval of the things, chanda  is born; with
chanda born he makes an effort; having made the
effort, he weighs it up; having weighed it up..."

 Perhaps we think of this gradual training as a
straight line? I think it is more accurate to think of
it like a spiral. We hear, we test, we apply, we
approve of the meaning.. we make an effort and then we
listen again, test again, we apply again, we
approve…and then back again for more listening, more
testing, more application, again and again and again. 
Where is the practice and where is the theory? I don’t
think we can draw a line between the two. They are
closely connected, they build on each other. 

As understanding grows there is less belief that any
dhammas can be controlled. Does this mean there is
despair and lack of interest in Buddhism? I don’t
think so. I think we find that there are less worries
about the problems in life let alone despair. We
despair  because we believe in a self. I find that as
long as “I” am not in the way that the “practice” (if
we call it a practice) goes smoothly. It is up and
down and all around but to me that is going smoothly.
It doesn’t go fast but that is just the way it goes. 

What are we in essence? I like the simile of a
bonfire. A large fire is burning. All day long someone
keeps adding more fuel to the fire. The fire never
stops; generation after generation some one keeps
tending it. Sometimes the person feeding the fire 
works very hard to control the fire, it looks tidy and
attractive. At other times it rages out of control.
But always they keep adding more fuel. 

In this simile we ourselves are the fire. The three
papanca, tanha(desire), ditthi(view) and mana(conceit)
are the fuel. The lives when it is under control are
when we develop high levels of kusala such as jhana.
The times when it is dangerous and raging are the
lives we neglect kusala. When we hear and consider and
apply the deep teachings about anatta, about the
khandas, the ayatanas, the dhatus, the paticusamupada,
the 24 paccaya and so on we start to  slowly turn away
from feeding  this unceasing toil of adding fuel to
the fire. If we continue to develop understanding one
day the process of adding fuel will stop. Soon after
that the fire will burn out forever.
Robert



 
559 From: amara chay   
Date: Fri Jun 23, 2000 11:30pm
Subject: Re: anatta and no control

 
  > Someone said to me recently that we should not say
> that there was no-self or no control as this would
> lead to despair; we would conclude we could do
> nothing. Another wrote that by striving with right
> effort we could have continuos right mindfulness. I
> suggested that this idea of being able to keep
> mindfulness comes about because of belief in a self
> who can control. This friend replied that if we
> thought that we could not have constant mindfulness
> that we would lose all interest in Buddhist practice.


Dear friends in the Dhamma,

When I was young there was a popular phrase, the incurable optimist,
and I am afraid I am one, even after years of sobering studies of
Buddhism.  I am especially full of mana that I have begun to catch
glimpses of the truth about myself, whereas for an eternity I had
lived in ignorance.  Whether I knew it or not, there is no self,
there never have been any in the incalculably long time I have lived,
with or without Buddhas, with or without Dhamma.  I just didn't know
it.  Frightening as reality might be, I still prefer to know about it
rather than ignore it and suffer the endless rounds of rebirths, from
which there is no escape, no matter the hardest practices and the
purest jhana.

Then the teachings of the Buddha made me comprehend how this all came
about, and especially how to get out of it, something no one else
taught, something so logical as to be easy and so intricate as to be
extremely demanding.  The intellectual knowledge must be precise and
withstand tests in the present moment, but once applied, can be so
full of 'fringe benefits' it tempts one to develop lobha and cling to
every tiny acheivement.  Yet the path is so long, and we do have fire
burning on our heads because the moment we are born, we are on our
way towards death; each minute occasion to have sati should not be
disregarded.

I cannot help but wonder at being able to find the way out at all,
that even an eternity of ignorance and akusala, (though also with
kusala, otherwise one would not be able to find the dhamma at all;)
that with the Dhamma that the Buddha had left us we could still find
the cure to all the ignorance and the infinitely greater danger of
wandering through samsara, to heaven and hell and back, over and over
and to die again and again willingly or not, clinging to the
infinitely demanding senses, believing in a non existant self.

As long as one does not see the danger of samsara, whether there is
a self or not, it is impossible to leave it.  Seeing non self just
makes it that much easier to live in this world for me, as well as
see the possibility of more wisdom, and less suffering that result
from all the attachments.  The Buddha exhorts us to be brave and
cheerful in the Dhamma, and to me the world without Dhamma is by far
much more frightening, full of necessities demanded by the self.  I
think I would be much less brave if I didn't have the notion of
selflessness, or of what real Panna is!

My main point is that, to compare the discouraging aspects of
'selflessness' to the infinite danger of samsara, I would welcome
the former any time!

Amara


> I think this matter is very difficult indeed.
> Developing insight into the characteristic of anatta
> is in essence what Buddhism is about. It is so
> important that we should feel `as if our head is on
> fire", we should strive to understand it.
>
> Why is it so difficult to comprehend? It is explained
> that the tilakkha –the three characteristics- anicca,
> dukkha, and anatta are the nature of all paramattha
> dhammas, past, present and future. And paramattha
> dhammas (absolute realities) include all the common
> things that we experience every day such as pain,
> pleasant feeling, seeing, hearing tasting touching,
> sound. You would think that as it is is such a
> fundamental essence of nature that it should be
> apparent- all we have to do is observe. However, it is
> far more difficult than that. Delusion clouds our
> vision. Trying to observe this process can easily be
> done with wrong effort, wrong mindfulness, wrong
> concentration and so lead nowhere.
>
>  It is difficult because of accumulations. We have had
> countless trillions of aeons during which we have
> listened to all sorts of teachers tell us all sorts of
> things. Although we have, according to the scrptures
> in countless numbers of lives developed high levels of
> jhana, and have lived for billions of aeons as Brahma
> gods. But these very pure states do not uproot the
> idea of self. If they are grasped wrongly they can
> even enforce the idea of atta.
> According to the Buddhist scriptures it is only rarely
> that a Buddha comes into the world and can explain in
> detail about no-self. Thus rarely have we listened to
> Buddhas and even when we did we may have
> misunderstood.  There are pacceka-buddhas who arise at
> other times who can understand this for themselves but
> they cannot teach the details of it to others. It is
> deep.
>
> What can be done?
> I quoted the Kitagiri sutta recently:
> "And how bhikkhus does the attainment of profound
> knowledge come by means of a gradual training...?
> .... he hears Dhamma;
> having heard Dhamma he remembers it; he tests the
> meaning of the things he has borne in mind; while
> testing the meaning, the things are approved of; there
> being approval of the things, chanda  is born; with
> chanda born he makes an effort; having made the
> effort, he weighs it up; having weighed it up..."
>
>  Perhaps we think of this gradual training as a
> straight line? I think it is more accurate to think of
> it like a spiral. We hear, we test, we apply, we
> approve of the meaning.. we make an effort and then we
> listen again, test again, we apply again, we
> approve…and then back again for more listening, more
> testing, more application, again and again and again.
> Where is the practice and where is the theory? I don't
> think we can draw a line between the two. They are
> closely connected, they build on each other.
>
> As understanding grows there is less belief that any
> dhammas can be controlled. Does this mean there is
> despair and lack of interest in Buddhism? I don't
> think so. I think we find that there are less worries
> about the problems in life let alone despair. We
> despair  because we believe in a self. I find that as
> long as "I" am not in the way that the "practice"
(if
> we call it a practice) goes smoothly. It is up and
> down and all around but to me that is going smoothly.
> It doesn't go fast but that is just the way it goes.
>
> What are we in essence? I like the simile of a
> bonfire. A large fire is burning. All day long someone
> keeps adding more fuel to the fire. The fire never
> stops; generation after generation some one keeps
> tending it. Sometimes the person feeding the fire
> works very hard to control the fire, it looks tidy and
> attractive. At other times it rages out of control.
> But always they keep adding more fuel.
>
> In this simile we ourselves are the fire. The three
> papanca, tanha(desire), ditthi(view) and mana(conceit)
> are the fuel. The lives when it is under control are
> when we develop high levels of kusala such as jhana.
> The times when it is dangerous and raging are the
> lives we neglect kusala. When we hear and consider and
> apply the deep teachings about anatta, about the
> khandas, the ayatanas, the dhatus, the paticusamupada,
> the 24 paccaya and so on we start to  slowly turn away
> from feeding  this unceasing toil of adding fuel to
> the fire. If we continue to develop understanding one
> day the process of adding fuel will stop. Soon after
> that the fire will burn out forever.
> Robert
>


 
560 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Sat Jun 24, 2000 10:20am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] beneficial places(was anatta and no control

 
  Amara  wrote
“The intellectual knowledge must be precise and 
withstand tests in the present moment, but once
applied, can be so 
full of 'fringe benefits' it tempts one to develop
lobha and cling to 
every tiny acheivement.”

Very true Amara. Understanding of the Dhamma even at
the intellectual level brings so many benefits that it
is easy to rest on our laurels. If there is enough
understanding of anatta one knows that no matter what
problems come in life one will always be able to
reflect about kamma and the different conditions and
so be able to cope. The danger of this is obvious: we
have only a few short years to continue hearing,
refecting and applying the teachings. The goal is not
to have enough understanding to live a happy life
(this is merely a fringe benefit); there is so much
more to do.
  As Amara writes  “the path is so long, and we do
have fire 
burning on our heads because the moment we are born,
we are on our 
way towards death; each minute occasion to have sati
should not be 
disregarded.”

There was an interesting section on the tapes that
Sarah and jonathan made in Bangkok recently. Jonathan
and Ivan mentioned the beneficial places such as going
to India on Dhamma trips or meeting with Khun Sujin in
Bangkok. And that these are of great benefit as one
hears the Dhamma and it seems to condition more
awareness. Khun sujin agreed that they are beneficial
but asked about the attitude. If one just wants more
of this it can be done with lobha. Jonathan commented
that hearing tapes is one thing but hearing it in
person is another. Yet this idea too can hinder  if we
cling to such situations.
 I often look forward to flying as I find that the
little extra tension when one is taking off conditions
reflection and awareness of realities. I like
challenges and problems in life because these give a
chance to test awareness. But this shows a subtle
clinging to awareness and especially it often means
that I neglect the other opportunities in life that
are happening every moment. 
Khun Sujin gave an example that at night just before
going to sleep for busy people is a good time to
reflect on Dhamma. But if one clings to this one is
likely to ignore the much more numerous moments in
life when one is distracted, busy, worried, having
desire, seeing, hearing etc. Time is too short to do
that. 
Robert


 
561 From: amara chay   
Date: Mon Jun 26, 2000 0:36am
Subject: The Aramana of bhavanga citta

 
  Dear friends in the dhamma,

One of the things we discussed on Saturday was about why we could not 
remember the aramana of the bhavanga citta that arise all the time, 
especially while we are sound asleep, dreamlessly, since sanna is one 
of satarana cetasikas that arise with all citta.  Logically it should 
be able to recall something that occurs so often each day, but 
apparently it recalls that aramana uniquely when it is another 
bhavanga arising, and the nature of the bhavanga citta is that its 
aramana is never of this lifetime and never appears through the six 
doorways, not even the manodvara.  Therefore when it is the bhavanga 
citta doing its function, the aramana is always that of the very last 
citta of the previous lifetime before the cuti citta, with no bearing 
on the sanna that memorizes the aramana of the six dvara of this 
lifetime and all the connotations the mind makes in relation to them.

It also follows that if one dies with sati arising with the last 
citta before the cuti citta, one might, even unconciously, have sati 
of whatever level, during instants of bhavanga.  But this would not 
contribute to the panna that arises from the study of the immediate 
aramana appearing through the dvara of this lifetime, I don't think,
this last notion is just my speculation, we didn't get this far.  
(Actually the main topic was the different aspects of hetu in
relation to diverse citta.)

Robert and anyone interested in the subject, would you care to
comment or clarify this for us?

Amara

 
562 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Mon Jun 26, 2000 8:17am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The Aramana of bhavanga citta

 
  Dear Amara,
I followed all you said except about sati with the
bhavanga citta. I have not heard that before. I think
the bhavanga cittas can arise with either pleasant or
neutral feeling in the human realm. But we have no way
of knowing which type our bhavangas are.
Robert
--- amara chay  wrote:
> Dear friends in the dhamma,
> 
> One of the things we discussed on Saturday was about
> why we could not 
> remember the aramana of the bhavanga citta that
> arise all the time, 
> especially while we are sound asleep, dreamlessly,
> since sanna is one 
> of satarana cetasikas that arise with all citta. 
> Logically it should 
> be able to recall something that occurs so often
> each day, but 
> apparently it recalls that aramana uniquely when it
> is another 
> bhavanga arising, and the nature of the bhavanga
> citta is that its 
> aramana is never of this lifetime and never appears
> through the six 
> doorways, not even the manodvara.  Therefore when it
> is the bhavanga 
> citta doing its function, the aramana is always that
> of the very last 
> citta of the previous lifetime before the cuti
> citta, with no bearing 
> on the sanna that memorizes the aramana of the six
> dvara of this 
> lifetime and all the connotations the mind makes in
> relation to them.
> 
> It also follows that if one dies with sati arising
> with the last 
> citta before the cuti citta, one might, even
> unconciously, have sati 
> of whatever level, during instants of bhavanga.  But
> this would not 
> contribute to the panna that arises from the study
> of the immediate 
> aramana appearing through the dvara of this
> lifetime, I don't think,
> this last notion is just my speculation, we didn't
> get this far.  
> (Actually the main topic was the different aspects
> of hetu in
> relation to diverse citta.)
> 
> Robert and anyone interested in the subject, would
> you care to
> comment or clarify this for us?
> 
> Amara
> 
> 



 
563 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Mon Jun 26, 2000 3:08pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The Aramana of bhavanga citta

 
  dear Amara,
as Bhavanga cittas are vipaka - either kusala or
akusala of varying types-I don't think they have sati
associated with them. I think sati arises only with
javanna cittas. But please check. I have been
negecting Abhidhamma studies for quite a while.
Robert
> Dear Amara,
> I followed all you said except about sati with the
> bhavanga citta. I have not heard that before. I
> think
> the bhavanga cittas can arise with either pleasant
> or
> neutral feeling in the human realm. But we have no
> way
> of knowing which type our bhavangas are.
> Robert
> --- amara chay  wrote:
> > Dear friends in the dhamma,
> > 
> > One of the things we discussed on Saturday was
> about
> > why we could not 
> > remember the aramana of the bhavanga citta that
> > arise all the time, 
> > especially while we are sound asleep, dreamlessly,
> > since sanna is one 
> > of satarana cetasikas that arise with all citta. 
> > Logically it should 
> > be able to recall something that occurs so often
> > each day, but 
> > apparently it recalls that aramana uniquely when
> it
> > is another 
> > bhavanga arising, and the nature of the bhavanga
> > citta is that its 
> > aramana is never of this lifetime and never
> appears
> > through the six 
> > doorways, not even the manodvara.  Therefore when
> it
> > is the bhavanga 
> > citta doing its function, the aramana is always
> that
> > of the very last 
> > citta of the previous lifetime before the cuti
> > citta, with no bearing 
> > on the sanna that memorizes the aramana of the six
> > dvara of this 
> > lifetime and all the connotations the mind makes
> in
> > relation to them.
> > 
> > It also follows that if one dies with sati arising
> > with the last 
> > citta before the cuti citta, one might, even
> > unconciously, have sati 
> > of whatever level, during instants of bhavanga. 
> But
> > this would not 
> > contribute to the panna that arises from the study
> > of the immediate 
> > aramana appearing through the dvara of this
> > lifetime, I don't think,
> > this last notion is just my speculation, we didn't
> > get this far.  
> > (Actually the main topic was the different aspects
> > of hetu in
> > relation to diverse citta.)
> > 
> > Robert and anyone interested in the subject, would
> > you care to
> > comment or clarify this for us?
> > 
> > Amara
> > 
> > 

 
564 From: amara chay   
Date: Mon Jun 26, 2000 6:23pm
Subject: Re: The Aramana of bhavanga citta

 
  > as Bhavanga cittas are vipaka - either kusala or
> akusala of varying types-I don't think they have sati
> associated with them. I think sati arises only with
> javanna cittas. But please check. I have been
> negecting Abhidhamma studies for quite a while.
> Robert
> > Dear Amara,
> > I followed all you said except about sati with the
> > bhavanga citta. I have not heard that before. I
> > think
> > the bhavanga cittas can arise with either pleasant
> > or
> > neutral feeling in the human realm. But we have no
> > way
> > of knowing which type our bhavangas are.
> > Robert


Robert,

I am happy to tell you that I had the opportunity this morning to ask 
Khun Sujin about this and she explained that all humans are born with 
kusala patisandhi citta, even though it might be of a very weak kind, 
accompanied by only one of the kusala hetu, which causes birth as a 
cripple or otherwise deformed mentally of physically.  Some are born 
with the patisandhi that is very strong kusala citta accompanied by 
all three kusala hetu, as though there is a 'seed' for panna to grow 
if developed conscientiously.  Since all kusala citta (ones free 
from lobha, dosa or moha) must be accompanied by sati of one level or 
another (most of the time imperceptible, unfortunately) those born 
with kusala patisandhi citta would have sati arising with the 
bhavanga, since the bhavanga are conditioned by the same kamma that 
produced the patisandhi citta as well as know the same aramana as the 
patisandhi.  But because the aramana of both kinds of citta is the 
aramana of the last citta of the preceeding life and never appears 
through the six dvaras of the present one, not even through the mind 
door, one never knows its aramana, and since the patisandhi is, as 
you say, vipaka, and cannot further accumulate anything, it can 
only pass on what is already accumulated in the preceeding citta.

To develop sati therefore depends on the processes of the six dvara, 
namely the javana, as you know.  This is why the ariya puggala who 
has not yet attained arahantship is never reborn as the asannasata 
brahma who have only rupa and no nama, while even the arupa brahma 
who knows the dhamma and how to develop panna could also attain 
arahantship even without eyes and ears to hear or learn about 
satipatthana.  Interesting point: there is no mention in the 
Tripitaka of an ariya puggala ever being reborn in the human world 
either, always the higher planes, so no human can be born an ariya 
puggala from birth.

There, I hope I got everything right, please point out any mistakes 
because it's quite a bit to wrap your mind around, isn't it?

By the way, I have good news for those who worry about Khun Sujin's 
disregard for medical check ups of which she hasn't had any for over 
thirty years, this morning Dr. Yoopadi who is visiting Thailand from 
Fresno has succeeded where so many have failed, in setting up an 
ultrasound session for her, with the docter herself also attending,
with excellent results, even with Tan Acharn's age of seventy four 
years!  Dr. Yoopadi is returning to the States tomorrow a very happy 
lady, as are all dhamma students here.

Amara


 
565 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Mon Jun 26, 2000 7:33pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The Aramana of bhavanga citta

 
  Thank you very much Amara. It is very helpful to hear
these details. Actually I would like to hear more.
Very interesting that there can't be a sotapanna from
birth - I had noticed that there are no examples in
the Tipitika  also.  I think there is not an absolute
rule about this as the commentaries mention the case
that IF there was a sotapanna from birth he could
never even kill an ant even if there was an
executioner holding a sword over his head telling him
to do so. But this is a hypothetical example given to
demonstrate that under no circumstances can a
sotapanna deviate from basic sila. 
If it ever does happen (birth as a human)it is an
extremely unusual case - almost always (and perhaps
always) they go to the deva realm (or Brahma). Perhaps
we will meet some next life and discuss Dhamma ?
--- amara chay  wrote:
> > as Bhavanga cittas are vipaka - either kusala or
> > akusala of varying types-I don't think they have
> sati
> > associated with them. I think sati arises only
> with
> > javanna cittas. But please check. I have been
> > negecting Abhidhamma studies for quite a while.
> > Robert
> > > Dear Amara,
> > > I followed all you said except about sati with
> the
> > > bhavanga citta. I have not heard that before. I
> > > think
> > > the bhavanga cittas can arise with either
> pleasant
> > > or
> > > neutral feeling in the human realm. But we have
> no
> > > way
> > > of knowing which type our bhavangas are.
> > > Robert
> 
> 

 
573 From: amara chay   
Date: Wed Jun 28, 2000 3:14am
Subject: Sorry!

 
  Dear All,

I'm so sorry I must have cluttered up your mailboxes like I did my
own yesterday, I still don't know what happened but will try not to let it 
happen again!

Amara

 
574 From: amara chay   
Date: Tue Jun 27, 2000 2:56pm
Subject: Re: The Aramana of bhavanga citta

 
  Perhaps
>we will meet some next life and discuss Dhamma ?


Robert,

We can always hope!  But perhaps we have already met one this life,
don't you think?  The only way to be sure is of course to become one
ourselves, so shall we give it our best shot?  What is certain to
help are all our discussions and studies here and any reminders to
develop sati,

Amara

 
576 From: amara chay   
Date: Thu Jun 29, 2000 4:39am
Subject: schedule

 
  Dear friends in the dhamma,

We've just uploaded the schedule of dhamma studies both in Bangkok
and in the States in a new section in the English Index called DSSF 
Schedule, <http://www.dhammastudy.com/>, for those interested.

The Web Team

P.S.  I hope this gets through all right, my last posting was the apology 
but a previous posting come up after that one, so it's a bit confusing!

Amara

 
577 From: Kashi Yum   
Date: Fri Jun 30, 2000 9:59pm
Subject: A few Questions

 
  Hello,

I joined this message board about two months ago at the invitation of 
Robert. I have mostly been away from message boards reading suttas 
and other books, plus tending to householder activities :-) so I have 
not been able to participate in the discussions. I  would like to 
take this moment to thank Robert for posting my initial question a 
couple of months ago. I apologize for not thanking you sooner 
for your time and kindness.

I am a beginner, "fresh off the turnip truck" as the saying goes. A 
group that meets online that I belong to is wrapping up discussions 
on the last sutta of the Majjhima Nikaya (sources are pulled from 
Access to Insight website / www.accesstoinsight.org) and this has 
been my main exposure to Dhamma talks on a weekly basis for the last 
year and a half since it began. I am now reading the posts in this 
board (it may take me a while to catch up) and find it very helpful. 
It is very helpful also that participants use Pali words here and 
there, I think this is important and provides a "link" to the 
teachings. 

I would like to pose a few questions: 

1) What is the difference between "contemplation" and "reflection"? 

2) If there are differences, is reflection consumated to reveal 
another level of insight?

3) "Delusion arises when consciousness arises...period and always..." 
is what someone recently said to me. My understanding is that 
delusion manifest primarily through perceptions; though, 
yes...without first having (contact -->) consciousness or "kindling" 
there wouldn't be delusion. Are ALL (if this is to mean "always") 
people born "deluded?" 

Thank you in advance.

w/Metta,
Kashi

 
578 From: amara chay   
Date: Fri Jun 30, 2000 3:02pm
Subject: revised schedule

 
  Dear friends in the dhamma,

Khun Sujin has added more discussions: every Sunday afternoon at the DSSFB, 
instead of once a month.  As to the English discussions, they will be at 
14.00 every Saturday, plus any other day by appointment, except for the 
first Sat. of each month, which will be the all day Thai sessions at 
Khunying Noparatana's.

Please check schedules for further changes: <http://www.dhammastudy.com/>

Betty,

See you at eight tomorrow?

Amara



 
579 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Sat Jul 1, 2000 4:08pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] A few Questions

 
  Dear Kashi,
Great to have your questions and comments. My computer
is getting fixed so I am just looking in on another
one at work and only have  a few minutes to use it.
So, very briefly,
--- "> It is very helpful also that participants use
Pali
> words here and 
> there, I think this is important and provides a
> "link" to the 
> teachings."
Glad you appreciate the pali. The meaning is always
more important than the technical terms but using the
Pali, once we get used to it helps the precision of
meaning. The English translations often have different
connoatations for different people. 
> 
> I would like to pose a few questions: 
> 
> 1) What is the difference between "contemplation"
> and "reflection"? 
> 
> 2) If there are differences, is reflection
> consumated to reveal 
> another level of insight?

There are many, many levels of understanding both at
the theoretical and experiential level. The theory
assists undertsanding at the practical level and also
the practical makes the the theory much clearer. 
> 
> 3) "Delusion arises when consciousness
> arises...period and always..." 
> is what someone recently said to me. My
> understanding is that 
> delusion manifest primarily through perceptions;
> though, 
> yes...without first having (contact -->)
> consciousness or "kindling" 
> there wouldn't be delusion. Are ALL (if this is to
> mean "always") 
> people born "deluded?" 

The asava(latent unwholesome tendencies) are present
in all of us until they are finally eliminated by the
different path consciousness. But when there is kusal
citta at that moment the defilements are not apparent.
The path is a gradual one whereby first wrong view is
gradualy attenuated.
> 
> Keep asking more questions and I am sure others have
comments also.
Best wishes
Robert


 
580 From: amara chay   
Date: Sat Jul 1, 2000 8:34pm
Subject: Re: A few Questions

 
  > I would like to pose a few questions: 
> 
> 1) What is the difference between "contemplation" and "reflection"? 


Kashi,

I don't know if this is logical to you, but to me reflection is when 
I am reminded to study what concerns my own six dvara (sense doors) 
and their aramana (objects), as opposed to studying abstract thoughts 
and the world of pannati (or conventional terms).  Contemplation 
seems to require more time and reasoning, which of course helps with 
understanding the teachings, but not so much the study of the present 
object appearing, whether nama and rupa, in other words the 
application of the theories thought out and understood.  But this is 
just my distinction, other people might not agree with this 
terminology.  Even Reflection might seem lengthy to some people, so 
that perhaps experiencing the reality of the instant to study its 
true characteristics might be more precise.  Whatever terms help you 
distinguish between thoughts and reasonings and understanding on the 
intellectual level from sati itself, in other words, thoughts from 
sati, you have the beginning of the accumulation of panna.  For 
example, we learn that hearing is just a nama, what is heard is just 
sound.  When we hear now do we clearly experience the hearing which 
is so different from the seeing?  That sound is completely different 
from sight?  Yet we see and hear all day long, thnking it is we who 
hear and see, whereas we cannot control one or the other.  Nor can we 
make them last, they appear and disappear according to conditions.

> 2) If there are differences, is reflection consumated to reveal 
> another level of insight?

With panna, the study of realities as they truly are can lead you to 
all levels of knowledge, respectively.

> 3) "Delusion arises when consciousness arises...period and 
always..." 
> is what someone recently said to me. My understanding is that 
> delusion manifest primarily through perceptions; though, 
> yes...without first having (contact -->) consciousness or
"kindling" 
> there wouldn't be delusion. Are ALL (if this is to mean "always") 
> people born "deluded?" 

To  a certain degree, because if panna were strong enough, all ties 
to the next life would be severed and one would not be reborn ever 
again.  The fact that we are born at all shows that we still have 
clinging to life, to seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, feeling 
body sense contact and even pleasant thoughts.  Most people have 
heard that Nibbana is a wonderous thing and want it but few realize 
that complete extinction is not like being born in the heavenly 
planes with all the pleasurable objects and none of the sufferings, 
but something above and beyond that: absolute non-existence, never 
to see anyone you love again, no more beautiful music, delicious 
delicacies, absolutely nothing but perfect peace, nothing to be 
attached to any more: no more delusions in the least.  It is really 
not for everyone, only those who seek the truth and knowledge above 
all things, all pleasures of life.

Amara

 
581 From: amara chay   
Date: Sat Jul 1, 2000 9:07pm
Subject: Re: revised schedule

 
  Dear friends in the dhamma,

We are happy to announce the latest addition to the English 
discussion schedules: every other Wed. at 15.00 at the foundation 
building.  Shin and Kwan, will you be able to make it?

Amara

 
582 From: Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala   
Date: Sat Jul 1, 2000 9:46pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: revised schedule

 
  Hi, Amara,
What a wonderful session it was today. Many many thanks for bringing me over
there. By the way: didn't Achaan say that the Wed. sessions would have to be
every other week, on the alternate weeks that Achaan is in town? Or did you
speak to her later and it is now to be held every Wed. at 3?  That would be
great for us. If that is actually the schedule then, I shall see you at the
center on Wed. at 3.

Betty
----- Original Message -----
From: amara chay 
Sent: Saturday, July 01, 2000 8:07 PM
Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: revised schedule


>
>  Dear friends in the dhamma,
>
> We are happy to announce the latest addition to the English
> discussion schedules: every other Wed. at 15.00 at the foundation
> building.  Shin and Kwan, will you be able to make it?
>
> Amara

 
583 From: amara chay   
Date: Sun Jul 2, 2000 4:17am
Subject: Re: revised schedule

 
  By the way: didn't Achaan say that the Wed. sessions would 
have to be
> every other week, on the alternate weeks that Achaan is in town? Or 
did you
> speak to her later and it is now to be held every Wed. at 3? 

Dear Betty,
I did say every other Wed., (see below) but thank you for the 
precision that it will start the week after, so that we begin Wed. 
July 12th, unless I misunderstand?
Amara

> > We are happy to announce the latest addition to the English
> > discussion schedules: every other Wed. at 15.00 at the foundation
> > building.  Shin and Kwan, will you be able to make it?

 
 
584 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Sun Jul 2, 2000 10:27am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] A few Questions

 
  --- Dear Kashi: 
> > 
> > 1) What is the difference between "contemplation"
> > and "reflection"? 
> > 
> > 2) If there are differences, is reflection
> > consumated to reveal 
> > another level of insight?

>  I wrote:
> There are many, many levels of understanding both at
> the theoretical and experiential level. The theory
> assists undertsanding at the practical level and
> also
> the practical makes the the theory much clearer. 

Even when we are thinking there can be moments of
direct understanding of the characteristics of
different realities. Also when we are studying a
Dhamma book there can be many moments when there is
direct study of realities. This is an important
question because we have to learn how to study
realities directly otherwise our Dhamma study is
merely theoretical. sOEMTIMES I read books by people
who have studied Abhidhamma a great deal but I am
disapointed to see that they cannot relate it directly
to what is hapening at this moment . They think of it
as some sort of technical subject to learn and think
about rather than as a very exact description of life
that should be tested and seen for oneself.

Some people can say things like "there is no self" but
still have no understanding. Thus even when we are
reflecting or contemplating or whatever we call it we
need to develop the ability to see below the surface
and see the realities that are conditioning the
thinking. It can be done and discussions like these
help to encourage. While you are reading this what
dhammas , realities are present? There are colors
contacting the eyebase, which condition seeing, cakkhu
vinnana. These are three different dhammas that we
have to gradually separate and insight.
 There is the thinking process which is composed of
many different realities. And what is the thinking
process rooted inright now? Is it all clear? In that
case it is rooted in amoha, panna, wisdom. Or is there
doubt and confusion? In that case it is rooted in
moha, ignorance. 
Do you like to think about all this? In that case it
could be rooted in either lobha, unwholesome desire or
panna as both can come with pleasant feeling. We must
learn to understand the characteristics of both so
that there they can be distinguished.
If there is confusion or other unwholesome defilements
present that is OK. They are real and they too must be
understood.


> > 
> > 3) "Delusion arises when consciousness
> > arises...period and always..." 
> > is what someone recently said to me. My
> > understanding is that 
> > delusion manifest primarily through perceptions;
> > though, 
> > yes...without first having (contact -->)
> > consciousness or "kindling" 
> > there wouldn't be delusion. 

I mentioned the asava yesterday. Another way the
Buddha classified defilements is by vipallasa, the
perversions of seeing. I use the Patisambhidhimagga
VIII "Bhikkhus there are four perversions of
percep[tion,(sanna) perversions of cita, perversions
of view. What four? Bhikkhus seeing what is
1.impermanent as permenent is a perversion of sanna,
of citta of ditthi. 2.Seeing what is not self  as
selfis...
3.seeing the foul as beautiful is..
4.seeing the painful as pleasnat is a perversion of
.."

The sotappana has completely eliminated forever all
pervesion of view ditthi. He has also eliminated all
perversions at the level of sanna and citta that see
anything as permanent or self. However he still has
the perversions of view at the level of sanna and
citta that see the foul as beautiful and the painful
as pleasant.
It is sometimes thought that the experience of nibbana
is some sort of mystical event whereby someone who was
deluded is meditating and suddenly switches into an
enlightened being. However, even before becoming a
sotapanna there is a gradual diminishment of  wrong
view, ditthi, which is the grossest, most dangerous
defilement. Thus someone may not be enlightened but if
they have considered and tested the teachings and
studied realities directly a lot, they will have only
rarely, if at all, the perversions at the level of
ditthi( those  that see what is not self as self or
what is not permanent as permanent.) They will still
have these perversions at the level of sanna and citta
however, although these will gradually recede as
understanding deepens.
Robert



 
585 From: amara chay   
Date: Sun Jul 2, 2000 11:33am
Subject: Full title

 
  Dear all,

I forgot to tell you that we have changed the section name of DSDG to 
Dhamma Study Internet Discussion Group at 
<http://www.dhammastudy.com/> 
which will please Robert, Jonothan and Rosan, I'm sure.  Sorry for
the delay, I completely forgot about it waiting for more votes but 
yesterday K. Warangkana reminded me about it, thank you Nong Lan.  
If anything else needs fixing please tell me,

Amara

 
586 From: amara chay   
Date: Tue Jul 4, 2000 0:56am
Subject: Q&A3

 
  Dear friends in the dhamma,

We received some questions at DS to which Varee wrote some very good 
answers in Thai, now translated and uploaded in the Q&A section under 
Q&A3, at <http://www.dhammastudy.com/> .  The background is the 
popular Hourglass Nebula by NASA, by the way.

Any comments or corrections most welcome,

Amara

 
587 From: Theresa   
Date: Tue Jul 4, 2000 2:13pm
Subject: Re: A few Questions

 
  Hello Kashi,

<< -----
1) What is the difference between "contemplation" and "reflection"? 
-------- >>

There are three kinds of knowledge :
(1) one learned from meditation books, dhamma talks, and Tipitaka..
(2) one come from "Reasoning" based on past experience, gained 
through Mindfulness.. 
(3) one come from direct experience with Mindfulness, right in the 
moment of Mindfulness.. This is Insight (Panna).. 

I'm not sure how the three kinds of knowledge are comparable to the 
two terms, "contemplation" and "reflection".. 

<< -----
2) If there are differences, is reflection consumated to reveal 
another level of insight?
-------- >>

"Reasoning" can not give Insight..
Insight is direct knowledge.. 


<< -----
3) "Delusion arises when consciousness arises...period and  
always..." is what someone recently said to me. My understanding 
is that delusion manifest primarily through perceptions; though, 
yes...without first having (contact -->) consciousness 
or "kindling" there wouldn't be delusion. Are ALL (if this is to 
mean "always") people born "deluded?" 
-------- >>

"Consciousness" as in Vinnana (the aggregate) ??
"Perception" as in Sanna (the aggregate) ??

The 5 aggregates are all conditional and impermanent.. 
Everything we perceive is based on the 5 aggregates..

Delusion ??  The 5 aggregates..  :-))

With metta,

Theresa.

 
588 From: amara chay   
Date: Tue Jul 4, 2000 5:14pm
Subject: Re: A few Questions

 
  > (3) one come from direct experience with Mindfulness, right in the 
> moment of Mindfulness.. This is Insight (Panna).. 

Theresa,

Panna means knowing realities as they really are, nama as nama and 
rupa as rupa, not as a person experiencing something.  It can be at 
the intellectual level as well as at the level of sati or direct 
experience, or of the level of clearly experiecing a reality as not 
the self, or ultimately of the level that eradicates kilesa, level by 
level.


> "Reasoning" can not give Insight..
> Insight is direct knowledge.. 


Reasoning  with panna can be conditions for sati to arise and dirctly 
experience nama and rupa.  


Amara

 
589 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Tue Jul 4, 2000 5:26pm
Subject: Re: A few Questions

 
  Kashi,

Welcome to the group.  We are glad to have your contribution.


> 1)  What is the difference between "contemplation" and "reflection"?

I don't think its possible to give an answer to this without
knowing the context.  This is because the same word can mean 
different things, depending on the user's intention.  Would you
like to give us more information about what you have in mind, or the 
context in which you came across the terms?


> 3)  "Delusion arises when consciousness arises...period and 
always..."
> is what someone recently said to me.  My understanding is that 
> delusion manifest primarily through perceptions; though, 
> yes...without first having (contact -->) consciousness or 
"kindling" 
> there wouldn't be delusion.  Are ALL (if this is to mean "always") 
> people born "deluded?" 

Delusion (moha, ignorance) is a mental factor (cetasika) that 
accompanies every moment of unwholesome consciousness (akusala 
citta).  We all have many moments of unwholesome consciousness in a 
day.  This is because of our accumulated delusion or, to put it 
another way, our lack of wisdom.  So yes, we are born this way.  But 
delusion does not arise at other moments of consciousness.  So we are 
not deluded all the time, thank goodness!

Jonothan.

 
590 From: Sarah Procter Abbott  
Date: Wed Jul 5, 2000 7:26am
Subject: jetlag realities!

 
  Dear Group,

Yes, we're back and I'd also like to welcome Kashi and other new 'lurking' 
members to the group which is now very international.

I'm delighted to see all the great messages that have come in during our 
holiday and look forward to going through them in due course. Meanwhile i'm 
struggling between jetlag and office work...but how helpful it is to have 
confidence that even when totally 'spaced' out there are realities that can 
be understood at these times...still seeing, hearing, thinking (however 
muddled the concepts maybe), attachment, aversion and all the others we 
discuss on this list. It's a bit like when one loses one's memory....still 
realities which awareness can be aware of.

In this context I remember once asking Khun Sujin about if one suffers from 
Alzheimer's disease whether awareness can arise and develop. Her answer was 
that there are different moments. In other words there isn't loss of memory 
at every moment and for awareness of thinking to arise, it doesn't matter 
what the concepts are that thinking thinks about. In the same way, it seems 
to me one can be spaced out one moment and with or without awareness and 
thinking 'clearly' the next, with or without awareness. But what about when 
someone appears to have lost all memory and not even recognise those around 
them. Can there be any awareness? I'm not sure. I would think it certainly 
would need to have been accumulated beforehand.

I'm beginning to ramble....

Sarah





 
591 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Wed Jul 5, 2000 9:03am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] jetlag realities!

 
  Dear Sarah,
Welcome back. 
Interesting question about Alzheimers.
"> In this context I remember once asking Khun Sujin
> about if one suffers from 
> Alzheimer's disease whether awareness can arise and
> develop. Her answer was 
> that there are different moments. In other words
> there isn't loss of memory 
> at every moment and for awareness of thinking to
> arise, it doesn't matter 
> what the concepts are that thinking thinks about. In
> the same way, it seems 
> to me one can be spaced out one moment and with or
> without awareness and 
> thinking 'clearly' the next, with or without
> awareness."

Excellent comments

 "But what about when 
> someone appears to have lost all memory and not even
> recognise those around 
> them. Can there be any awareness? I'm not sure. I
> would think it certainly 
> would need to have been accumulated beforehand."

My grandmother started to lose her memory when she was
about 89 and it got worse and worse until her death at
93years. My mother was very worried by this. I pointed
out that granny was still in good spirits and that all
her accumulations from the past were not wasted. 

We cling to memory as self. But the fleeting realities
that make up the process of memories are part of the
5khandhas. They are alien, not "us".

 One might forget even the Dhamma one has learnt but
this does not mean that there is never any sati after
that. It is like when we die and start a new life.
This is far more extreme -we remember nothing of the
old yet accumulations of panna are not lost. However
if our understanding is only book learning then the
wisdom is superficial and flows away.
Robert
> 
> 

 
592 From: Theresa   
Date: Wed Jul 5, 2000 11:04am
Subject: fwd : The Buddha's Emphasis on Practice

 
  ===== forwarded message starts here =======

From: Ken and Visakha Kawasaki  
Date: Mon Jul 3, 2000 5:32pm
Subject: The Buddha's Emphasis on Practice



The Buddha's Emphasis on Practice

	Incidentally there is a story illustrative of the importance
the Buddha attached to the practice of the Dhamma.  One day, the
Buddha came out of the Jetavana monastery with the bhikkhus to go on
tour.  King Kosala, the merchant Anathapindika, and other lay
disciples requested the Buddha not to go on tour, but it was in
vain.  The merchant was unhappy because he would not be able to hear
the Buddha's teaching or to make offerings to the Lord and the
bhikkhus.  His slave girl, Punna by name, said that she would ask the
Buddha to come back.  The merchant promised to free her from bondage
if she could make the Buddha return to the monastery.

	Then Punna followed the Buddha quickly and implored the Lord
to come back. The Buddha asked her what she could do for him.  She
replied that she had nothing to offer, but that she would take refuge
in the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha and observe the five
precepts if the Lord spent the lent in Savatthi city. Saying, "Sadhu
–
sell said", the Buddha blessed her and returned to Jetavana monastery.

	The news spread and the merchant set Punna free and adopted
her as his daughter.  She was no free to do what she liked, free to
shape her own destiny.  For this reason and by virtue of her parami
(kammic potential) in her previous lives, she joined the holy order.
She practiced vipassana and when she developed insight into the
impermanence of nama-rupa, the Buddha exhorted her thus: "My
daughter, just as the moon is full and complete on the fifteenth day,
so also you should practice vipassana to the end.  When your
vipassana insight is complete, you will attain the end of suffering."

	After hearing this exhortation, Punna theri attained the last
stage on the holy path and became an Arahat.  The Buddha had of
course foreseen Punna's destiny and it was his concern for her
spiritual welfare that prompted him to cancel the projected tour and
turn back in response to her appeal.  This is an example of the high
regard for the practice of Dhamma that Gotama Buddha had in common
with other Buddhas.

– A Discourse on Paticcasamuppada by the Venerable Mahasi Sayadaw
of
Burma, translated by U Aye Maung, 1982 pp 79-80


http://home.earthlink.net/~brelief

 
593 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Wed Jul 5, 2000 1:44pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The Buddha's Emphasis on Practice

 
  >	Incidentally there is a story illustrative of the importance
>the Buddha attached to the practice of the Dhamma.  One day, the
>Buddha came out of the Jetavana monastery with the bhikkhus to go on
>tour.  ...  This is an example of the high
>regard for the practice of Dhamma that Gotama Buddha had in common
>with other Buddhas.


Theresa,

Thank you for posting this summary of one of the suttas.  It inspires me to 
look up the sutta itself when I get home.

In fact, the whole of the Buddha’s life following his enlightenment was 
devoted to urging people to realize for themselves the truths that he 
himself had realized.  So it is not just one particular sutta that shows the 
importance of the practice of the Dhamma.

The crucial question however is, What exactly is the practice of vipassana 
as taught by the Buddha?  I suggest that without a detailed study of and 
reflection on the teachings our practice cannot be correct.  I would be 
interested to know whether you find in this sutta support for any different 
view.

Jonothan


 
594 From: Sarah Procter Abbott  
Date: Thu Jul 6, 2000 1:25am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: About practices/teachings (was re: About Concentration)

 
  Robert,

I really appreciated this post of yours and especially appreciate your 
consideration and investigation of the teachings. To me, this is the real 
meaning of reflection and consideration. For this, inevitably as you and 
Amara keep reminding us, we have to see what is really meant by the Pali 
words. I like the idea of complication being used to refer to tanha, ditthi 
and mana (see below).

Don't we really complicate our lives all day long by following the greeds, 
wrong views and conceits?

Thanks,
Sarah

>
>Dear GROUP
>  Theresa sent us some translations of  some suttas
>(see posting danger and friend). Thank you Theresa.
>Studying the Titipika – the Vinaya, the Suttanta, the
>Abhidhamma is the only way to learn what it was that
>the Buddha taught. If we don't know what he taught how
>can we practice correctly? We might be practicing
>something different from the Buddha's teaching.
>
>But how do we study?
>  Every word in the Tipitika is worth investigating.
>Every sentence has deep meaning.
>Let us consider the word “complication”. This was
>In the Anguttara Nikaya VIII.30
>Anuruddha Sutta
>One of the suttas  that Theresa emailed, in one
>sentence the Buddha told Anuruddha
>“This Dhamma is for one who
>enjoys non-complication, who delights in
>non-complication, not for
>one who enjoys & delights in complication.”'I looked
>up the pali of this sentence: “nippapancaramassayam
>dhammo nippapancaratino nayam dhammo papancaramassa
>papancarintino”
>
>What do you think the Buddha meant by complication and
>non-complication? I once heard someone –referring to
>this sutta- say this meant people should not think too
>much because this complicates things and takes people
>away from the present moment. And in a superficial way
>there is something in this. But we can always learn
>more.
>
>Complication in this sutta is the English translation
>for papanca. There are three papanca – tanha (desire),
>ditthi(view) and mana (conceit). (see netti pakarana
>paragraph 203, 204).These three are said to prolong
>samasara vata , the round of births and deaths.
>And now  we may want to understand what  the Buddha
>mean by tanha, for example? Is tanha something we have
>only when we want sex or get hungry or go shopping? Or
>is there more to it? So we study a little more - we
>learn that the Buddha said tanha was samudaya sacca
>the cause for dukkha. The Patisamabhidhi magga ( I
>597) says that wordly life is diversified (another
>word for papanca ) by 108 kinds of tanha. Tanha is
>also one of the factors in the paticcusamupada. In the
>Nidana- Vagga of the Samyutta Nikaya:
>The Buddha said: I will teach you, monks, the origin
>of repeated birth and passing away of beings in this
>world. What, monks, is the origin of beings?
>On account of the eye base and visible object, eye
>consciousness arises. Contact (phassa) is the
>conjunction of the three; through contact, feeling
>arises; through feeling  desire(TANHA) arises; through
>desire attachment (upadana) arises; through attachment
>bhava (process of becoming) arises; through becoming
>birth arises; through birth decay and death, sorrow,
>lamentation.
>  The Buddha then repeated this for the other doors of
>ear, nose, tongue taste body and mind.
>
>Then we might wonder – well is this process of
>Paticcusamupada happening now, at this moment? Now
>there is seeing, there is phassa, there is feeling. Is
>there tanha? If one investigates in daily life  just
>this question over and over one may learn that even
>when the feeling is very neutral tanha may be
>present.– For example I am sitting in my office in
>Japan and just glanced at the pastel coloured wall- no
>particular like or dislike noticeable at that moment
>and yet could tanha of some degree, even if it wasn’t
>apparent have arisen? Only by studying directly these
>moments in daily life can we find out the answers and
>really learn just what life is and what the Buddha
>taught.
>
>Do we want to stop this tanha, try and suppress it?
>Well that is one way (and in fact it was my early
>practice). But we can also understand it; and I think
>that is most useful. Then we can study its
>characteristic more. We might find that it is very
>common indeed. We might learn that when we try to have
>sati that tanha can come in and masquerade as sati.
>But if we are prepared to study  tanha again  and
>again – and of course not neglect the direct study of
>all other realities- we might become wary of its
>tricks. We might start to see the difference between
>true sati and the manifold counterfeits that are
>actually tanha, a papanca, a prolonger of samasara.
>Also we might find out that when we thought we had
>sati often that this was merely mana, conceit – a
>papanca, a prolonger of samsara.  AND we might begin
>to realize that when we had the idea that we could
>make sati arise by concentrating that this is an idea
>of control, of self. That it is ditthi, another
>papanca, prolonger of samsara. If we find these things
>out we are learning something of immeasurable value.
>We are learning what we really are – a skin bag
>stuffed with kilesa. Then we are beginning to
>comprehend what this path involves.
>
>This letter started off to discuss one word from a
>sutta – papanca .So far we haven’t even scratched the
>surface on one aspect of papanca.
>That is to be expected. One aeon is so long – Billions
>and billions of years, maybe longer. The Buddha took
>four incalculably long periods of time  plus one
>hundred thousand aeons to develop the wisdom to become
>a Buddha .  We don’t have to develop parami to the
>extent of a Buddha but it still takes a long, long
>time. We might hope that we are the developed ones who
>have so much parami already but this is just tanha,
>one of the papanca, or we may be sure we are ones who
>already have great parami, but this is mana, another
>papanca, a prolonger of samasara. During these many
>aeons in countless lives the Buddha was firm to keep
>investigating. It says in the Madhuratthavilisini, the
>commentary to the Buddhavamsa (chapter on sumedha IIA
>p155) that the Bodhisatta at the time of Dipankara
>Buddha, 24 Buddhas ago, was investigating the parami
>of wisdom. He realized what needed to be done and made
>this aspiration that “questioning discerning people
>all the time (he would) go on to the perfection of
>wisdom’.
>
>  But how did he question wise people? Certainly not in
>a careless way. He must  have evaluated the answers so
>rigorously and then considered how to ask even more
>discerning questions.  Nor did he ask in a way that
>wanted to show off his wisdom. He sincerely wanted to
>learn. Developing this skill in questioning is part of
>the path. Some are not yet ready even for this. This
>too depends on accumulations. This skill might sound
>trivial but it takes time, in fact lifetimes to
>develop. If it is not developed then one could discuss
>with many helpful people but get nothing from it.
>
>It is our attitude when investigating that is
>important. One could be intent on learning about
>papanca, for example, but be unaware of the cittas
>while studying and not even realize that sometimes it
>was papanca motivating the study. If that is the case
>then no great benefit comes from such research. We
>need to bear in mind that the purpose of study, the
>purpose of discussion is to help us better understand
>this moment.
>SO  I write all this just as much for myself as anyone
>else. I need to develop more listening skills, more
>questioning skills . I need to  study much more ,
>countless times more the characteristics of tanha and
>mana and ditthi. I need to consider more, much more
>the words in the Tipitika.
>
>Robert
>


 
595 From: Kashi Yum   
Date: Thu Jul 6, 2000 8:21pm
Subject: Re: A few Questions

 
  Hello All,

Thank you everyone for your replies, it will take me some time to 
investigate. I will try my best to describe how I came about asking 
my questions. I do not have a meditation teacher nor have yet read 
the Abhidhamma (only its definition), so I lack knowledge of many
terminologies in describing my experiences, please bear with me. 

I am currently reading the "Seven Contemplations of Insight" prepared 
under the guidance of Venerable Matara Sri Nanarama Mahathera. As I 
read through the series of contemplations, it became evident that I 
have gone through some of the experiences described in this book but 
am careful whether this is really through direct experience or if it 
is just "book learning." This is what I'm working on---figuring out 
what is what, which is which. 

Jonathon, to answer your question as to how my initial questions came 
about (their context)---they were partly due to taking time off from 
reading and going over what I just read vs. what I remember 
experiencing (with regards to what I just read). During this 
investigation, I remembered reading the word "reflection" and was not 
sure if there were any differences between it and contemplation.(Does 
this make sense?) What word would best render "reflection?"  ---
anupassana (the Pali word for "contemplation"?) I realize that there 
is this tendency in my thinking to "over-investigate," am never quite 
sure how far to investigate. I've adopted a rule where if the gut 
feeling is to pursue---then I pursue. (I don't know what other 
English word there is to "gut feeling", I suppose it is the same as 
"intuitiveness.") If I do not understand something after an applied 
investigation, I do not see it as wasted effort but that I have come 
across something that is not yet apparent/developed or not yet truly 
and directly experienced---so I make a mental note, let go of the 
investigation and go on to other things.

From everyone's replies, I see pieces to the puzzle. For example, 
Theresa mentioned the 3 kinds of knowledge which I have not 
thoroughly investigated; Amara's reply to my 3rd question made me 
realized that I was not delving into dependent origination deeply to 
understand why there was delusion at the moment of consciousness, but 
at the same token the gut feeling was to pursue investigation into 
perceptions in order to get into the workings of delusion. Dependent 
origination seems so basic, yet here I was puzzled over why there was 
delusion when we are born. Sarah then posted Robert's writings on 
concentration in which he wrote about papanca, which I recently read 
about and perhaps that was the context of why I wrote that my 
understanding was that "delusion primarily manifests in perceptions." 

I appreciate all replies, as you can see there is much for me to 
investigate and reinvestigate. To me, it is all new (even though it's 
been around for a couple of thousand years). I am glad to have been 
invited here because of the focus on meditation reinforced by Pali---
it helps tremendously! 

May all be well and happy,
Kashi


P.S. I realized that I use the words "I" and "my" a lot, this is 
another thing I've got to work on...I do mean them to represent the 
aggregates.

 
596 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Thu Jul 6, 2000 10:06pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: A few Questions

 
  --- Dear kashi,
Good to see you investigating. As you have heard me
say before there are many levels of understanding at
both the experiential and theoretical level. 
> 
> > 
> I am currently reading the "Seven Contemplations of
> Insight" prepared 
> under the guidance of Venerable Matara Sri Nanarama
> Mahathera. As I 
> read through the series of contemplations, it became
> evident that I 
> have gone through some of the experiences described
> in this book but 
> am careful whether this is really through direct
> experience or if it 
> is just "book learning." 
I think this book may be a summary of the seven stages
of insight based on a section in the Vissudhimagga- an
ancient commentary. I am glad you are carefully
considering whether this is just book learning or
direct experience. A problem is that people read these
descriptions and are all too ready to decide that they
have gone through them. You see we can fit, somehow,
almost any experience into any system that anyone
describes if we are led by tanha, ditthi or mana. The
development of understanding comes with real
detachment from the idea of self - it leads away from
trying to prove to ourself that we are wise or we are
right or whatever. And if wisdom develops to the
degree that vipassana nana are experienced any idea of
control is absent. I meet and correspond from time to
time with people who think they have experienced this
or that stage who are clearly deluded. If I think I
can help I will try to gently point out this out but
it depends on the amount of attachment they have to
their "attainments' (and also accumulations from
previous lives) whether they will listen. I have met
many people who overestimate their spiritual progress
but very, very few who underestimate. Why is that? The
answer is papanca.

 Usually the hardest to help are those who are most
dedicated- they are making such monumental efforts and
giving up so much, making so many sacrifices that they
naturally feel very changed when they think about
their old self.  They assume this must be what the
path is and find it very hard to see that wisdom is
quite invisible, that it is a gradual dropping away of
view and a deeper understanding into dhammas. So
subtle. 

. 
> 
I've adopted a rule
> where if the gut 
> feeling is to pursue---then I pursue. (I don't know
> what other 
> English word there is to "gut feeling", I suppose it
> is the same as 
> "intuitiveness.") If I do not understand something
> after an applied 
> investigation, I do not see it as wasted effort but
> that I have come 
> across something that is not yet apparent/developed
> or not yet truly 
> and directly experienced---so I make a mental note,
> let go of the 
> investigation and go on to other things.

This is as good a way as any other to study. You see
there really and truly is no self, no Robert, no
Kashi. There is no one who can decide to develop
understanding, who can make effort, or do anything.
Effort arises because of conditions and effort can
arise with kusala or akusala. We think we decided to
learn about Buddhism but it happened by conditions: 
We cannot suddenly decide to think differently or have
deep understanding, it is all conditioned. The
Patthana, the last and most important book of the
Abhidhamma, goes into enormous detail about the 24
paccaya (conditions).
Some of which are past and some present. But even the
present ones do not
simply arise out of nothing. Nor do they arise because
"I" want them to. The
processes of mind are happening at enormous speed and
there is no "person"
who can do anything to stop them or change them. Even
the cittas that are
arising at this moment are conditioned by previous
cittas as well as well as
by other conditions that are present at the same time.
This is not the place
to go into details but it is well worth studying the
Patthana. It gives us a
glimpse of the profundity of the path and the wisdom
of the Buddha.

 Hearing the teachings of Buddhism - especially the
deep teachings on anatta,
are a condition for understanding. This understanding
leads to energy of the right sort:
energy to hear more, and energy to carry on with the
study and practice of
vipassana. It leads to the type of determination that
will gladly keep
developing understanding moment after moment, life
after life, aeon after
aeon, no matter how long it takes. And if
understanding grows then there
will be detachment from the idea of self and  control.
Then there is not much worry about the path or about
where we are on it - because "I" have been taken out
of the
equation. The "I" that we love so much, the "I" that
we want to be happy,
get enlightened, whatever. Then, as the Vissudhimagga
says,
there is a path but no one on the path. 

P.S. I realized that I use the words "I" and "my" a
> lot, this is 
> another thing I've got to work on...I do mean them
> to represent the 
> aggregates.
> 
This is not a problem - even the Buddha used I and my
as terms. It is the understanding behind the terms
that counts. 
Anyone can say things like " there is no self, there
are only the aggregates (khandas)" but what is the
understanding? Are we saying these words but still
believing that we can control something, somehow?



Robert


--- Kashi Yum  wrote:
> Hello All,
> 
> Thank you everyone for your replies, it will take me
> some time to 
> investigate. I will try my best to describe how I
> came about asking 
> my questions. I do not have a meditation teacher nor
> have yet read 
> the Abhidhamma (only its definition), so I lack
> knowledge of many
> terminologies in describing my experiences, please
> bear with me. 
> 
> I am currently reading the "Seven Contemplations of
> Insight" prepared 
> under the guidance of Venerable Matara Sri Nanarama
> Mahathera. As I 
> read through the series of contemplations, it became
> evident that I 
> have gone through some of the experiences described
> in this book but 
> am careful whether this is really through direct
> experience or if it 
> is just "book learning." This is what I'm working
> on---figuring out 
> what is what, which is which. 
> 
> Jonathon, to answer your question as to how my
> initial questions came 
> about (their context)---they were partly due to
> taking time off from 
> reading and going over what I just read vs. what I
> remember 
> experiencing (with regards to what I just read).
> During this 
> investigation, I remembered reading the word
> "reflection" and was not 
> sure if there were any differences between it and
> contemplation.(Does 
> this make sense?) What word would best render
> "reflection?"  ---
> anupassana (the Pali word for "contemplation"?) I
> realize that there 
> is this tendency in my thinking to
> "over-investigate," am never quite 
> sure how far to investigate. I've adopted a rule
> where if the gut 
> feeling is to pursue---then I pursue. (I don't know
> what other 
> English word there is to "gut feeling", I suppose it
> is the same as 
> "intuitiveness.") If I do not understand something
> after an applied 
> investigation, I do not see it as wasted effort but
> that I have come 
> across something that is not yet apparent/developed
> or not yet truly 
> and directly experienced---so I make a mental note,
> let go of the 
> investigation and go on to other things.
> 
> From everyone's replies, I see pieces to the puzzle.
> For example, 
> Theresa mentioned the 3 kinds of knowledge which I
> have not 
> thoroughly investigated; Amara's reply to my 3rd
> question made me 
> realized that I was not delving into dependent
> origination deeply to 
> understand why there was delusion at the moment of
> consciousness, but 
> at the same token the gut feeling was to pursue
> investigation into 
> perceptions in order to get into the workings of
> delusion. Dependent 
> origination seems so basic, yet here I was puzzled
> over why there was 
> delusion when we are born. Sarah then posted
> Robert's writings on 
> concentration in which he wrote about papanca, which
> I recently read 
> about and perhaps that was the context of why I
> wrote that my 
> understanding was that "delusion primarily manifests
> in perceptions." 
> 
> I appreciate all replies, as you can see there is
> much for me to 
> investigate and reinvestigate. To me, it is all new
> (even though it's 
> been around for a couple of thousand years). I am
> glad to have been 
> invited here because of the focus on meditation
> reinforced by Pali---
> it helps tremendously! 
> 
> May all be well and happy,
> Kashi
> 
> 
> P.S. I realized that I use the words "I" and "my" a
> lot, this is 
> another thing I've got to work on...I do mean them
> to represent the 
> aggregates.
> 
> 



 
597 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Thu Jul 6, 2000 11:16pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] fwd : The Buddha's Emphasis on Practice

 
  Theresa,

Further to your posting about emphasis on the practice, the Pali Dictionary 
of Proper Names gives the story of the slave-woman Punna.  (It is not from a 
sutta, but is given in one of the commentaries to the suttas - ie, as 
background explanation).

According to this source, Punna was already a Sotapanna when she heard the 
exhortation from the Buddha (and as such, of course, she already knew full 
well the value of the practice of the Dhamma.)  She became an Arahata on 
hearing the exhortation.

Another translation of the words spoken to Punna by the Buddha is available 
at http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/khuddaka/therigatha/thig1.html#3.  
It reads as follows-

"Punna, grow full with good qualities
like the moon on the fifteenth day.
With discernment at total fullness,
burst the mass of darkness."

Jonothan.




 
598 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Fri Jul 7, 2000 0:02pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: A few Questions

 
  Kashi,

>…………………………… I am glad to have been
>invited here because of the focus on meditation reinforced by Pali---
>it helps tremendously!

The question of meditation is an ongoing topic on this list.  As in the case 
of your previous posting, “meditation” is a word that has different meanings 
depending on how it is used.  Some people use it as a translation of the 
Pali word “bhavana”, so that “vipassana bhavana” becomes “insight 
meditation”.  However, a better translation of bhavana would be “mental 
development”.  Thus, samatha bhavana means simply the development of 
concentration (of a certain level), and vipassana bhavana means the 
development of insight or understanding (of a certain level).  Exactly how 
these qualities are to be developed is what the teachings are all about.  To 
use the term meditation, which to most people suggests some kind of a formal 
practice such a sitting, gives bhavana a slant that it does not actually 
carry in the original texts.

I am sure that everyone on this list is interested in developing more kusala 
(wholesomeness) of every kind – dana (generosity), sila (moral conduct) and 
bhavana.  But our focus is mostly on vipassana bhavana, which is the only 
level of kusala that leads to release.  This is the aspect of the teaching 
that was unique to the Buddha.  And to this end we find discussion and study 
of the original texts very useful, because we understand that the teaching 
is very subtle and very deep and cannot be realised simply by applying a 
technique that someone else has taught us.

So in a sense I would prefer to say that our focus is or should be on the 
understanding of the teachings, because this necessarily leads to the 
gradual realisation of those teachings.

I hope you continue to find the list useful.  Please keep up the comments 
and questions.

Jonothan



 
599 From: Sarah Procter Abbott  
Date: Sat Jul 8, 2000 3:25am
Subject: Dhammapada quote

 
  Dear Robert, Amara & Theresa & Group!

You have all encouraged me to pull out some of my dusty Dhammapada texts 
too! I have a question at the end.

>Dear Amara,
>You refer to a posting that Theresa sent:
>
>
> > "There is no meditation without wisdom no wisdom
>without meditation.
> > One who has both wisdom and meditation is close to
>peace and
> > emancipation."
>
>… other versions:
>
>There is no meditative concentration for him who lacks
>insight, and no
>insight for him who lacks meditative concentration. He
>in whom are
>found both meditative concentration and insight,
>indeed, is close to
>Nibbana. 372”
>

I'll just quote the pali to save everyone checking:

Natthi jhanam apannassa
panna natthi ajhayato
yamhi jhanan ca pannan ca
sa ve nibbanasantike

>Interesting quote and indeed the Dhammapada has
>several verses where meditation is mentioned. All
>these verses are very pithy though, so it is useful to
>consult with the ancient commentary. I use the
>translation by Carter and Palihawadana (1987, Oxford
>university press). Another  verse in the Dhammapada
>#23 says “those meditators, persevering, Forever firm
>of enterprise, those steadfast ones  touch Nibbana,
>Incomparable release from bonds”
>Those meditators is the English translation of te
>jhayino and the commentary (p111) says “They, the wise
>who have awareness, are meditators by virtue of the
>two-fold meditation- namely 1. the contemplation
>concerned with objects constituted by the eight
>attainments and 2 the contemplation concerned with the
>characteristics of existence constituted by the Paths
>and the fruits of insight.”
>The first one refers to samattha meditation using one
>of the 38 suitable objects such as earth kasina. And
>the second one insight into the tilakkhana, the three
>characteristics.
>Robert.


Robert, I've also gone back to check the background in my excellent copy of 
Dhammapada commentary by Eugene Burlingame)  Harvard Oriental Series, PTS) 
The verse 372 in Pali above and a few other verses were spoken by the Buddha 
after a very interesting story about the conversion of a pack of thieves who 
were in the process of robbing the recently converted Elder Soma's mother's 
house while she listened to her son preaching. When her maid told her that 
the empty house was being robbed she told her maid to tell the thieves to 
help themselves to the copper, then the silver, then the gold as she didn't 
want to be disturbed from the teachings. The thieves were so impressed by 
this, that they put back all they had stolen, came to offer apologies, 
listened to the teachings from Soma and became monks. The Buddha spoke the 
stanzas 'as though sitting face to face with them'.

My qu to the Group is this: usually we explain that the reason the Buddha 
mentions the value of jhana attainment along with insight (vipassana) 
attainment is because those listened have already attained jhanas. For this 
group of thieves, this would seem unlikely (but it may have been directed to 
the other 800+ monks listening). The phrase about wisdom being impossible 
w'out jhana also seems strange to me (yamhi jhanan ca pannan ca) as we know 
jhana attainment is not necessary for realising nibbana. I know this is in 
danger of becoming too 'intellectual' but as the quote has been raised by 
Theresa, it would be interesting to clarify further amongst ourselves of 
with K.Sujin's assistance.

Thanks,
Sarah>