5200 From: Antony 
Date: Thu May 10, 2001 1:57pm
Subject: Re: uprooting your kilesa?

 
  I guess rare are those who SEE without a teacher to give them some 
idea of how to see.

The reality of these things is in the practice and the experience I 
think. So only few people either stumble across it or have the 
conditions to recognise these things as they form. So a teacher is 
useful, if not critical. 

There is a saying I have come to like, it is this: That suttas are 
not for reading, they are for practicing with. The Buddha taught what 
should be implemented. Suttas are not novels.  They are great stories 
but that is a limited understanding and almost a waste. I always 
think though that the reading of them is better than not reading 
them, not withstanding the possible danger of misunderstanding. As 
we've seen lately on our list here the mind states that assumptions 
about ourselves and the dhamma can generate can make us downright 
rude.

I love the Zen saying "only don't know" I don't say I know for sure, 
that's why I am here, to be in cybersangha with the wise, as the 
Buddha suggests, it is one of the causes of happiness. 

I'll think of something to say about the Gihi Sutta.

antony


--- Jonothan Abbott wrote:
> Antony
> 
> --- Antony wrote:
> > It always seems to me that Buddha taught many different people 
> > different things. 
> 
> I'm sure this is exactly right.  And it is often not apparent from 
a 
> casual reading of a sutta who the listeners were or what their 
> particular circumstances might have been.  Yet this is all 
necessary 
> stuff if we are to understand the sutta properly.  For example, if 
a 
> sutta about samatha was addressed to monks who were already well 
> established in samatha, or in mindfulness (or both), that would have
> a 
> bearing on how we 'read' that teaching.  That is why an fairly 
> extensive knowledge of the suttas (and the other pitakas) is
> necessary 
> in order to understand any part of the teachings.
> 
> > It might be the case that as you say that tranquility  is not 
> > neccesary. I would think that could be true. It seems to be that
> the 
> > Buddha used it though. That says to me that it must be useful to 
a 
> > high degree.
> 
> That is indeed true.  Samatha (tranquillity) is kusala of a very 
high 
> degree, and is of course to be encouraged.  But it should not be 
> confused with satipatthana or vipassana.  And like satipatthana and 
> vipassana, it is not easy to understand and therefore not easy to 
> develop.  Samatha cannot be developed without a precise 
understanding 
> of whether the citta (moment of consciousness) is kusala or 
akusala.  
> One who develops satipatthana will also be able to develop samatha.
> 
> > There are teachings of Buddha where he details the recollections, 
> > Buddhagosa uses the sutras in the Vissudhimagga. 
> 
> In the introductory part of Visuddhimagga there is an interesting 
> passage which shows just how necessary it is to have a proper 
command 
> of the whole teachings in order to see clearly the message that the 
> Buddha was trying to deliver, and how easy it would be to 
misconstrue 
> what is being said.  At Vis.I,6 it says -
> 
> "In some instances this path of purification is taught by insight 
> alone, according as it is said: 
> `Formations are all impermanent: 
> `When he sees thus with understanding 
> `And turns away from what is ill, 
> `That is the path to purity'  (Dh. 277).
> 
> And in some instances by jhana and understanding according as it is 
> said: 
> `He is near unto nibbana 
> `In whom are jhana and understanding'  (Dh. 372). 
> 
> And in some instances by deeds (kamma), etc., according as it 
> is said: 
> `By deeds, vision and righteousness, 
> `By virtue, the sublimest life – 
> `By these are mortals purified, 
> `And not by lineage and wealth'   (M.iii,262) 
>   
> And in some instances by virtue, etc., according as it is said: 
> `He who is possessed of constant virtue, 
> `Has understanding, and is concentrated, 
> `Is strenuous and diligent as well, 
> `Will cross the flood so difficult to cross'   (S.i, 53). 
> 
> And in some instances by the Foundations of Mindfulness, etc., 
> according as it is said: 
> `Bhikkhus, this path is the only way for the purification of
> beings, . 
> . . for the realization of nibbana, that is to say, the four 
> Foundations of Mindfulness' (D.ii, 290); and similarly in the
> case of 
> the right efforts, and so on.  But in the answer to this question 
it 
> is taught by virtue and the other two."
> [ends]
> 
> It would be easy, taking any one of those quotes on its own, to 
come 
> away with a wrong idea of the teaching.  Nothing is as
> straightforward 
> as it seems!
> 
> Jon
> 
> PS  Would like to discuss your al

 
5201 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Thu May 10, 2001 2:04pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Introduction and a question from a new person

 
  Dear Paul,

I'm very glad you've found your way here and you've
opened with a very helpful intro and THE important
question....thankyou very much for raising it and we
look forward to hearing a lot more from you. 

The last few days have been pretty quiet and now there
are lots of really good points and comments and
questions to respond to by anyone....I'll try myself
to get back on this and others as soon as I have some
precious time!

Joyce, also good to see you back in great form! I
especially appreciated the questions to Erik in your
first post ;-))

Speak soon,
Sarah



--- Paul Bail wrote: > Hello dear list
members,
> 
>     By way of introduction I am a 54 year old male,
> living on the East Coast 
> of the United States, interested in Buddhdharma. In
> the past year I ahve 
> become aware of some of the resources on the
> Internet, including the 
> wonderful world of lists.
>     I am a newcomer to this particular list, having
> recently stumbled across 
> it due to a comment someone made on another list.  A
> few years ago I read one 
> of Nina van Gorkom's books.  But it is only in the
> past couple of months that 
> an interest has begun in actually studying
> Abdhidamma. Lacking the education 
> to use the correct technical terms, I will have to
> phrase my question in 
> everyday language.
>     I have long been confused about the role of
> intention and effort given 
> the fact of selflessness.  I can appreciate the
> teaching that ther is no 
> "self" that can control one's progress on the path
> of truth.  Finding the 
> path, finding a teacher, recognizing the truth of
> the teachings, deepening 
> one's study, and adhering to the path all depend
> upon conditions and are not 
> in the direct control of a self that can "make" one
> do any of the above.
>     Still, it seems that effort and intention play a
> role in the process. The 
> Buddha set forth the noble truth of suffering and
> its cessation as the 
> gateway to the path.  Therefore one begins with an
> intention to end one's 
> suffering by pursuing the eightfold path. This is a
> desire, but unlike 
> ordinary desires, it begins to deconstruct itself as
> one glimpses the truth 
> that in fact there is no "self" that is suffering.
>     So, when I read the post below (# 5171) I was a
> little confused.  Perhaps 
> this is a semantic confusion, not a substantial one.
>  Hopefully someone can 
> clarify? The post says: "If we open a sutta about
> metta with the intention to 
> have metta, it shows the clinging to self again." 
> What is meant by this?
>     If one starts with the desire to end suffering,
> as the Buddha suggests, 
> and realizes that the path includes the accumulation
> of wisom *and* merit, 
> including the cultivation of virtuous states of mind
> such as metta, then 
> wouldn't one engage in activities that seem to
> promote the arising of metta?  
> One could think that reading the sutta,
> contemplating it, etc. could provide 
> conditions favorable to the arising of metta?  Of
> course, one cannot *make* 
> metta arise by doing this.  Also it could (at times)
> be unskillful to turn to 
> sutta reading in order to avoid investigating an
> unpleasant state of mind 
> that is arising. 
>     Or to take another example--dana.  One engages
> in the physical act of 
> giving but becomes aware that a mental state of
> generosity may not be 
> arising, or may arise momentarily and be followed by
> second-thoughts, 
> regrets, etc.  One sees the selflessness of this
> process.  One cannot *make* 
> generosity arise.  Nevertheless, the act of giving
> is preferable to 
> non-giving. The intention, or wish, to cultivate
> generosity still seems to 
> have some place in the process of the path, does it
> not?
>     I would presume that the point is not to forego
> sutta reading, or acts of 
> generosity.  Do you feel sutta reading is a good
> activity if done with 
> correct understanding, not expecting it to be like
> putting a coin in a 
> machine and getting a candy in return?
> 
> Paul Bail
>     
> ----------------
> Sarah wrote:
> > now if we understand the difference between kusala
> and
> > akusala. It is important to know the intention. If
> we
> > open a sutta about metta with the intention to
> have
> > metta, it shows the clinging to self again. the
> > understanding is always the key, so there can be
> > understanding of metta when it arises naturally by
> > conditions. This is the way that samtha is
> developed,
> > not by wishing to develop it or by selecting an
> object
> > like breath for development. There was also a  lot
> > more discussion about breath as object of samatha.



5202 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Thu May 10, 2001 3:27pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Tanha(JIM ,sarah)

 
  Dear Jim, Rob and Wyn,

Just a real quickie which may be quite
off-track...Like Rob, I'm keen to pursue this tanha!

> --- Jim Anderson  wrote:
> > Dear Robert,
> > 
> > While checking several versions of the commentary
> on A ii 146
> > I noticed a
> > possible error in the following translated
> section:
> > 
> > >Now
> > >(it may be asked) whether such present craving
> (for
> > Arahantship)
> > >is wholesome [kusala] or unwholesome [akusala]? —
> It is
> > >unwholesome.
> > 
> > The answer - unwholesome (akusalaa) is supported
> by the PTS
> > and the
> > Burmese CSCD versions but not by the Thai Budsir
> version which
> > has
> > 'kusalaa' as the answer. The footnote in the PTS
> edition notes
> > that a
> > Mandalay ms. and the Siamese ed. of 1920 reads
> 'kusalaa'. This
> > is quite
> > interesting as it is a discrepancy that can easily
> go
> > unnoticed. My gut
> > feeling is that 'kusalaa' is the correct answer.
> It is
> > contrary to dhamma to
> > state that the unwholesome is to be pursued
> (sevitabba) as in
> > the reading of
> > the PTS ed. (AA iii 136). 

Just assuming for now that akusalaa is correct (my gut
feeling for now!). When it says in the commentary 'It
is unwholesome.-Should it be pursued or not? - it
SHOULD be pursued (sevitabbaa)...' ,is it possible
that sevitabbaa refers not to the tanha but to the
wisdom in the passage I quoted before: 

'Sister, as to the saying: "This body has come into
being through craving, is dependent on craving; 
craving must be abandoned,"- it was said in this
connexion.

Herein, sister, a monk hears it said: "They say that
such and such a monk, by destroying the asavas,
himself in this very life thoroughly comprehending it,
realizes the heart's release, the release by wisdom,
that is free from the asavas, and having attained it
abides therein." then some time later, though
dependent on craving, he abandons craving.  As to the
saying, sister, that body has come into being through
craving, is dependent on craving, craving must be
abandoned, - whatever was said thus was said in this
connexion.'

We also know that
> 'ta.nhaa' can be
> > either
> > wholesome or unwholesome from the Nettippakara.na
> passage (p.
> > 87).
> > 
> > I suppose that most of us had been thinking that
> 'ta.nhaa' is
> > 'lobha' in the
> > paramattha terminology but could it be something
> else --
> > 'chanda'??

If one looks at all the refs to tanha in the Vism and
Vibhanga, this still seems unlikely to me...eben if
they are related to nekkhamma, if they are akusala
they are akusala..
> > 
> > I also glanced through three layers of commentary
> on the
> > Nettippakara.na
> > passage regarding  the twofold ta.nhaa which have
> quite a lot
> > to say about
> > it. I didn't study them as there is just too much
> to take in
> > (1 or 2 pages
> > altogether) without spending a lot of time. This
> is just to
> > let you know
> > that the comments are there.

slowly, slowly, Jim!

Thanks for your comments as always,

Sarah

(Joyce, pls note that apart from Jim and Teng Kee and
one or two others, none of us are Pali or Sanskrit
scholars....;-))



 
5203 From: Ai Lin Edwards   
Date: Thu May 10, 2001 8:19pm
Subject: Hello everybody, I am new here

 
  Hello everybody,

I am AiLin here, Eric (I know him as Sam A. Vacca at other forums)directed 
me here. Thanks Eric, I eventually get through to this site.

I am a Chinese Buddhist, practising Vipassana for about ten years now. I am 
from Malaysia and get my first taste of vipassana under Rev. Sujiva (late 
Mahasi Sayadaw's lineage). I do my self-study on buddha dhamma whenever I 
can. I reside in Australia right now and a regular at both Roshi Hogen's and 
Edepot Buddhist Discussion Forum.

I like what I see here, and will visit very often from now on.

I have not much to offer right now, but find useful information here and 
much to chew on. I'll try to read back all previous posts and hopefully get 
some answers to my questions in my mind. I'll raise further questions to old 
discussion topic if you people don't mind.

My warmest regards to everybody here.

Sincerely,

AiLin

 
5204 From: Howard 
Date: Thu May 10, 2001 7:33pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Introduction and a question from a new person

 
  Hi, Paul and Sarah -

In a message dated 5/10/01 7:52:24 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
Paul Bail writes:


> Hello dear list members,
> 
>     By way of introduction I am a 54 year old male, living on the East 
> Coast 
> of the United States, interested in Buddhdharma. In the past year I ahve 
> become aware of some of the resources on the Internet, including the 
> wonderful world of lists.
>     I am a newcomer to this particular list, having recently stumbled 
> across 
> it due to a comment someone made on another list.  A few years ago I read 
> one 
> of Nina van Gorkom's books.  But it is only in the past couple of months 
> that 
> an interest has begun in actually studying Abdhidamma. Lacking the 
> education 
> to use the correct technical terms, I will have to phrase my question in 
> everyday language.
>     I have long been confused about the role of intention and effort given 
> the fact of selflessness.  I can appreciate the teaching that ther is no 
> "self" that can control one's progress on the path of truth.  Finding the 
> path, finding a teacher, recognizing the truth of the teachings, deepening 
> one's study, and adhering to the path all depend upon conditions and are 
> not 
> in the direct control of a self that can "make" one do any of the above.
>     Still, it seems that effort and intention play a role in the process. 
> The 
> Buddha set forth the noble truth of suffering and its cessation as the 
> gateway to the path.  Therefore one begins with an intention to end one's 
> suffering by pursuing the eightfold path. This is a desire, but unlike 
> ordinary desires, it begins to deconstruct itself as one glimpses the truth 
> that in fact there is no "self" that is suffering.
>     So, when I read the post below (# 5171) I was a little confused.  
> Perhaps 
> this is a semantic confusion, not a substantial one.  Hopefully someone can 
> clarify? The post says: "If we open a sutta about metta with the intention 
> to 
> have metta, it shows the clinging to self again."  What is meant by this?
>     If one starts with the desire to end suffering, as the Buddha suggests, 
> and realizes that the path includes the accumulation of wisom *and* merit, 
> including the cultivation of virtuous states of mind such as metta, then 
> wouldn't one engage in activities that seem to promote the arising of 
> metta?  
> One could think that reading the sutta, contemplating it, etc. could 
> provide 
> conditions favorable to the arising of metta?  Of course, one cannot *make* 
> metta arise by doing this.  Also it could (at times) be unskillful to turn 
> to 
> sutta reading in order to avoid investigating an unpleasant state of mind 
> that is arising. 
>     Or to take another example--dana.  One engages in the physical act of 
> giving but becomes aware that a mental state of generosity may not be 
> arising, or may arise momentarily and be followed by second-thoughts, 
> regrets, etc.  One sees the selflessness of this process.  One cannot 
> *make* 
> generosity arise.  Nevertheless, the act of giving is preferable to 
> non-giving. The intention, or wish, to cultivate generosity still seems to 
> have some place in the process of the path, does it not?
>     I would presume that the point is not to forego sutta reading, or acts 
> of 
> generosity.  Do you feel sutta reading is a good activity if done with 
> correct understanding, not expecting it to be like putting a coin in a 
> machine and getting a candy in return?
> 
> Paul Bail
>     
> ----------------
> Sarah wrote:
> > now if we understand the difference between kusala and
> > akusala. It is important to know the intention. If we
> > open a sutta about metta with the intention to have
> > metta, it shows the clinging to self again. the
> > understanding is always the key, so there can be
> > understanding of metta when it arises naturally by
> > conditions. This is the way that samtha is developed,
> > not by wishing to develop it or by selecting an object
> > like breath for development. There was also a  lot
> > more discussion about breath as object of samatha.
> 
> 
=================================
       I agree with you, Paul. I found myself perplexed with regard to 
several points of Khun Sujin's reported by you, Sarah. It seems to me that 
what KS is talking against, and you, Paul, are talking in favor of, would 
usually be considered as a simple instance of right intention. KS *seems* to 
me to be following a bit of a fatalistic, volition-is-useless tack. Perhaps I 
miss-read her.

With metta,
Howard


/Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble 
in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a 
phantom, and a dream./            (From the Diamond Sutra)                    
            
                                         



 
5205 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Fri May 11, 2001 6:45am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] notes from Bkk

 
  WARNING: lots of pali and fiddly abhidhamma points
here. If you wish to skip, pls do!

Dear Kom and Num,

I'm giving this point priority because of my
carelessness and also because it's a tricky area for
me and I wish to clarify it for myself too. Some other
areas were discussed for an hour or so, but this one
for a couple of minutes only. I'd planned to follow up
on the last day, but it wasn't appropriate and so I'm
looking at texts to help me along too.

> 5. RUPAS (Num's qus). Num said he doubts which rupa
> is
> a result of kamma and asked about hair,eye, skin
> colour etc, good-looking appearance..how can these
> be
> explained when kamma can cause only the
> kammaja-rupa?

As this question relates to an earlier post of Num's
(which I don't think was answered, hence my
consideration of it), for newbies, I'll requote
extracts from Num's (but just his first question for
now!) and then add some extra details. It may be a
little long for some!
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
NUM wrote (24th April):

Here is a quote from Dhammastudy.com

<<<<<<<<<<<

Kammaja-rupa
There are 9 rupa that arise specifically from kamma as
samutthana, never from 
other samutthana:

1. Cakkhuppasada-rupa 2. Sotappasada-rupa 3.
Ghanappasada-rupa 4. 
Jivhappasada-rupa 5. Kayappasada-rupa 6.
Itthibhava-rupa 7. Purisabhava-rupa  
     
8. Hadaya-rupa 9. Jivitindriya-rupa

.......................................................

I don't think kamma is a paccaya for outer rupas,
sound, smell, flavor 
hard-soft-heat-cold-tension and color are pretty much
utuja-rupa, rupa that 
arise from utu as samutthana.

I still doubt that which rupa is a result of kamma.
Here are my questions.

QUES. 1. Is hair, eye, or skin color is result of
kamma.  Or when it's said 
that to be born with good looking appearance is a
result of kamma.  If kamma 
can be cause of only 9 kammaja-rupa as above, how you
explain it?   In 
tipitaka, there repeatedly mentioned about praise for
skin color, I wonder is 
that result of kamma or just plain genetics or
something else.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Sarah again:

I think the main point to remember is that whatever
rupa arises, there have to be the 4 great elements and
the 4 derived rupas (visible object, odour, flavour
and nutrition) as well. 

Now I'm quoting from KS's 'Survey of Paramatha
Dhammas' from Zolag website http://www.zolag.co.uk/
in Appendix 111: to Rupa:
=================================================

'The nine types of kammaja rúpas are derived rúpas,
upådåya rúpas, which have to arise together with the
eight inseparable rúpas, avinibbhoga rúpas. There are
the following groups or kalåpas originated from kamma:

1. the decad of the eyesense, cakkhudasaka  kalåpa,
consisting of the eight inseparable rúpas, eyesense
and life faculty.
2. the decad of earsense, sotadasaka kalåpa,
consisting of the eight inseparable rúpas, earsense
and life faculty.
3. the decad of smellingsense, ghånadasaka kalåpa,
consisting of the eight inseparable rúpas,
smellingsense and life faculty.
4. the decad of tastingsense, jivhådasaka kalåpa,
consisting of the eight inseparable rúpas,
tastingsense and life faculty. 
5. the decad of bodysense, kåyadasaka kalåpa,
consisting of the eight inseparable rúpas, bodysense
and life faculty. 
6. the decad of femininity, itthibhåvadasaka kalåpa,
consisting of the eight inseparable rúpas, femininity
and life faculty.
7. the decad of masculinity, purisabhåvadasaka kalåpa,
consisting of the eight inseparable rúpas, masculinity
and life faculty.
8. the decad of heart-base, hadayadasaka kalåpa,
consisting of the eight inseparable rúpas, heart-base
and life faculty.
9. the vital nonad, jívitanavaka  kalåpa, consisting
of the eight inseparable rúpas and life faculty. 

Groups of rúpa originated from kamma arise at the
arising moment, the upåda khaùa, of the
rebirth-consciousness, paìisandhi- citta, in
accordance with the plane of existence where one is
born. Kamma produces rúpa at the three moments of each
citta, namely, at the arising moment, uppåda khaùa,
the moment of presence, tiììhi khaùa, and the moment
of falling away, bhanga khaùa . Kamma ceases to
produce rúpa shortly before death, that is to say,
from the seventeenth moment of citta reckoned backward
from the dying-consciousness. Thus, all kammajarúpa
falls away together with the dying-consciousness,
cuti-citta, at the end of a lifespan.
For those who are born by way of the womb, in the
human plane of existence, there are three kalåpas of
kammajarúpa, groups of rúpa originated from kamma,
arising together with the rebirth-consciousness. These
three kalåpas are: the decad of heart-base, the decad
of bodysense and the decad of sex. As the newborn
being develops, the kalåpas which are the decads of
the eyesense, the earsense, the smellingsense and the
tastingsense arise at the appropriate time.' 
=====================================================

This detail is  given in the Abhidammattha Sangaha.
Just to clarify on which rupas exactly are produced by
kamma (and to add some textual support!), I'm now
quoting from the B.Bodhi's 'Abhidammattha
Sangaha'V1,10 p.247:

" Eighteen kinds of material phenomena are produced by
kamma; the five sensitivities; the two sex faculties;
the life faculty; the heart-base-arise exclusively
from kamma. The other nine kinds arise from kamma only
when they occur in the kamma-born groups; otherwise
they originate from the other causes".

Num, I hope this last sentence clarifies.

A little further on the AS discusses the 21 material
groups produced by kamma, consciousness, temperature
and nutriment, but I've given enough detail for one
post!

Perhaps I can now correct my original brief summary to
say that what we take for hair, skin colour,
good-looking appearance and the rest are the
kayadasaka kalapa (decad of bodysense) including the 8
inseperable rupas which condition each other and the
bodysense. The kalapa is conditioned by kamma.
According to my recollection of what KS said, vanno
(visible object, NOT cakkhupasada rupa!) is of
significance here. 

As we know, conditions are very complicated. I think I
have to leave it here to Kom (and Jack)!

Hope this helps a little.....

Sarah



5206 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Fri May 11, 2001 6:59am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello everybody, I am new here

 
  Dear Ai Lin,

Warmest regards and welcome to dsg. Eric has been
challenging us all with his debates and has become a
key participant here recently! If you start calling
him Sam, we'll now understand, thank you!! <Eric, the
twins in 'Lord of the Flies' are called Sam 'n Eric,
is this the connection??>

Of course you're very welcome to bring up old
discussion topics or any dhamma topics you like.

Thanks for the other info too...we have a few members
in Malaysia and in Australia. Whereabouts are you
living there? We've lived in Hong Kong for a longtime,
but Jon is from Australia.

Look forward to haring more from you,

Sarah

--- Ai Lin Edwards  wrote:
> Hello everybody,
> 
> I am AiLin here, Eric (I know him as Sam A. Vacca at
> other forums)directed 
> me here. Thanks Eric, I eventually get through to
> this site.
> 
> I am a Chinese Buddhist, practising Vipassana for
> about ten years now. I am 
> from Malaysia and get my first taste of vipassana
> under Rev. Sujiva (late 
> Mahasi Sayadaw's lineage). I do my self-study on
> buddha dhamma whenever I 
> can. I reside in Australia right now and a regular
> at both Roshi Hogen's and 
> Edepot Buddhist Discussion Forum.
> 
> I like what I see here, and will visit very often
> from now on.
> 
> I have not much to offer right now, but find useful
> information here and 
> much to chew on. I'll try to read back all previous
> posts and hopefully get 
> some answers to my questions in my mind. I'll raise
> further questions to old 
> discussion topic if you people don't mind.
> 
> My warmest regards to everybody here.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> AiLin



 
5207 From: Desmond Chiong   
Date: Wed May 9, 2001 11:44pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Kusala etc.

 
  ">Sorry, not a scholar, don't know Pali or Sanskrit.>" [joyce]

But I "know" you. Dharma is universal.

metta,
des




>From: "Joyce Short" 
>Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Kusala etc.
>Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 10:02:00 -0400
>
>
>
> >> I must disagree with this. It is much better to unload akusala
> >> vipaka
> >> as quickly as possible,
>
>
>Who? is unloading akusala vipaka as quickly as possible?
>
> >> because it vipaka grows in power (and
> >> conditions more kamma of the same variety) the longer it
> >> remains
> >> untreated, like a festering wound gets worse, not better, if
> >> left
> >> uncleaned and bandaged. Therefore one should work very
> >> diligently to
> >> purify any akusala as soon as one becomes aware of its
> >> arising.
>
>Who? is working diligently, becoming aware of its arising etc.  And what is
>arising whatever surely just arises, endures and then dissolves on its own
>accord?  Who is placing a value judgment on any arising and when is this
>judgment noted. Surely all this is occurring after the event?  Is this
>noted? How is one noting "conceptuality" without clinging?
>
>One Tibetan Rinpoche pointed out to me that all arisings when
>recognized,(moment of contact) are an expression of intrinsic nature - its
>energy, purity and intelligence.  In this recognition, then there cannot be
>any duality, any "I" and "mine", the essential akusala.  Is there something
>apart from consciousness? (awareness) Mind can create an object or 
>structure
>called meditator who then notes other objects -but any objects noted are 
>the
>energetic expression of consciousness noted by knowing and not other than
>the meditator construct.
>
>Sorry, not a scholar, don't know Pali or Sanskrit.
>
>Metta,
>
>Joyce


 
5208 From: Kom Tukovinit   
Date: Fri May 11, 2001 9:49am
Subject: Re: notes from Bkk

 
  Dear Sarah,

Thanks for following up.  I still don't think K. Num's question was 
answered (unless K. Num says otherwise!).  Let me relate my (private) 
conversation with him on this issue to see if others may have other 
opinion.

My understanding is that each rupa kalapa that we may consider "our" 
rupa has one of the following as samuthana:
1) Kamma 
2) Utu 
3) Ahara
4) Citta 

a) It is exceedingly difficult (impossible for me!) to differentiate among =

these rupas.  For example, when we see the vanna that "is part of" our 
hand, which samuthana does it have?

b) In the human plane, each one of us has only 7 types of kalapas that 
has Kamma as the samuthana.  This counts out the Jivithindriya kalapa 
(even though all other 8 kalapas also have Jivithindriya rupa), and one of =

the Bhava Kalapa (unless you are of two sexes)..

c) Out of the seven, 5 occur at very specific places in our body.  The 5 
includes: eye sense, ear sense, smell sense, taste sense, and hadaya-
rupa.  The other two including Bhava rupa and Kaya-pasada rupa are 
spreaded all over your body, internal and external.

d) The speculation of how Kamma can influence one's look is via the two 
rupas that are spreaded throughout your body.   Although a hair 
probably mostly comprises of Utuja-rupa, but in the beginning when 
there are still "live" cells, its looks may be highly influenced by Kamma-
rupas.  Furthermore, some of the continuing Utuja rupas have, as 
samuthana, the utu rupa that is part of the kamma kalapa.

e) One's look is not influenced by Kamma alone.  For example, Buddha 
is supposed to have unparalleled beauty.  However, when he was going 
through dukkha-kiriya-practice, he ate so little that he was no longer 
beautiful.  His Ahara-ja rupa cancelled out the beauty in the Kammaja-
rupa.  Some people don't look so pretty when they get angry or greedy.  
Some people don't look so pretty when they are cold or hot.

kom
--- Sarah Procter Abbott  
wrote:
> WARNING: lots of pali and fiddly abhidhamma points
> here. If you wish to skip, pls do!
> 
> Dear Kom and Num,
> 
> I'm giving this point priority because of my
> carelessness and also because it's a tricky area for
> me and I wish to clarify it for myself too. Some other
> areas were discussed for an hour or so, but this one
> for a couple of minutes only. I'd planned to follow up
> on the last day, but it wasn't appropriate and so I'm
> looking at texts to help me along too.
> 
> > 5. RUPAS (Num's qus). Num said he doubts which rupa
> > is
> > a result of kamma and asked about hair,eye, skin
> > colour etc, good-looking appearance..how can these
> > be
> > explained when kamma can cause only the
> > kammaja-rupa?
> 
> As this question relates to an earlier post of Num's
> (which I don't think was answered, hence my
> consideration of it), for newbies, I'll requote
> extracts from Num's (but just his first question for
> now!) and then add some extra details. It may be a
> little long for some!
> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> NUM wrote (24th April):
> 
> Here is a quote from Dhammastudy.com
> 
> <<<<<<<<<<<
> 
> Kammaja-rupa
> There are 9 rupa that arise specifically from kamma as
> samutthana, never from 
> other samutthana:
> 
> 1. Cakkhuppasada-rupa 2. Sotappasada-rupa 3.
> Ghanappasada-rupa 4. 
> Jivhappasada-rupa 5. Kayappasada-rupa 6.
> Itthibhava-rupa 7. Purisabhava-rupa  
>      
> 8. Hadaya-rupa 9. Jivitindriya-rupa
> 
> .......................................................
> 
> I don't think kamma is a paccaya for outer rupas,
> sound, smell, flavor 
> hard-soft-heat-cold-tension and color are pretty much
> utuja-rupa, rupa that 
> arise from utu as samutthana.
> 
> I still doubt that which rupa is a result of kamma.
> Here are my questions.
> 
> QUES. 1. Is hair, eye, or skin color is result of
> kamma.  Or when it's said 
> that to be born with good looking appearance is a
> result of kamma.  If kamma 
> can be cause of only 9 kammaja-rupa as above, how you
> explain it?   In 
> tipitaka, there repeatedly mentioned about praise for
> skin color, I wonder is 
> that result of kamma or just plain genetics or
> something else.
> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> 
> Sarah again:
> 
> I think the main point to remember is that whatever
> rupa arises, there have to be the 4 great elements and
> the 4 derived rupas (visible object, odour, flavour
> and nutrition) as well. 
> 
> Now I'm quoting from KS's 'Survey of Paramatha
> Dhammas' from Zolag website http://www.zolag.co.uk/
> in Appendix 111: to Rupa:
> 
==============================================
===
> 
> 'The nine types of kammaja rúpas are derived rúpas,
> upådåya rúpas, which have to arise together with the
> eight inseparable rúpas, avinibbhoga rúpas. There are
> the following groups or kalåpas originated from kamma:
> 
> 1. the decad of the eyesense, cakkhudasaka  kalåpa,
> consisting of the eight inseparable rúpas, eyesense
> and life faculty.
> 2. the decad of earsense, sotadasaka kalåpa,
> consisting of the eight inseparable rúpas, earsense
> and life faculty.
> 3. the decad of smellingsense, ghånadasaka kalåpa,
> consisting of the eight inseparable rúpas,
> smellingsense and life faculty.
> 4. the decad of tastingsense, jivhådasaka kalåpa,
> consisting of the eight inseparable rúpas,
> tastingsense and life faculty. 
> 5. the decad of bodysense, kåyadasaka kalåpa,
> consisting of the eight inseparable rúpas, bodysense
> and life faculty. 
> 6. the decad of femininity, itthibhåvadasaka kalåpa,
> consisting of the eight inseparable rúpas, femininity
> and life faculty.
> 7. the decad of masculinity, purisabhåvadasaka kalåpa,
> consisting of the eight inseparable rúpas, masculinity
> and life faculty.
> 8. the decad of heart-base, hadayadasaka kalåpa,
> consisting of the eight inseparable rúpas, heart-base
> and life faculty.
> 9. the vital nonad, jívitanavaka  kalåpa, consisting
> of the eight inseparable rúpas and life faculty. 
> 
> Groups of rúpa originated from kamma arise at the
> arising moment, the upåda khaùa, of the
> rebirth-consciousness, paìisandhi- citta, in
> accordance with the plane of existence where one is
> born. Kamma produces rúpa at the three moments of each
> citta, namely, at the arising moment, uppåda khaùa,
> the moment of presence, tiììhi khaùa, and the moment
> of falling away, bhanga khaùa . Kamma ceases to
> produce rúpa shortly before death, that is to say,
> from the seventeenth moment of citta reckoned backward
> from the dying-consciousness. Thus, all kammajarúpa
> falls away together with the dying-consciousness,
> cuti-citta, at the end of a lifespan.
> For those who are born by way of the womb, in the
> human plane of existence, there are three kalåpas of
> kammajarúpa, groups of rúpa originated from kamma,
> arising together with the rebirth-consciousness. These
> three kalåpas are: the decad of heart-base, the decad
> of bodysense and the decad of sex. As the newborn
> being develops, the kalåpas which are the decads of
> the eyesense, the earsense, the smellingsense and the
> tastingsense arise at the appropriate time.' 
> 
==============================================
=======
> 
> This detail is  given in the Abhidammattha Sangaha.
> Just to clarify on which rupas exactly are produced by
> kamma (and to add some textual support!), I'm now
> quoting from the B.Bodhi's 'Abhidammattha
> Sangaha'V1,10 p.247:
> 
> " Eighteen kinds of material phenomena are produced by
> kamma; the five sensitivities; the two sex faculties;
> the life faculty; the heart-base-arise exclusively
> from kamma. The other nine kinds arise from kamma only
> when they occur in the kamma-born groups; otherwise
> they originate from the other causes".
> 
> Num, I hope this last sentence clarifies.
> 
> A little further on the AS discusses the 21 material
> groups produced by kamma, consciousness, temperature
> and nutriment, but I've given enough detail for one
> post!
> 
> Perhaps I can now correct my original brief summary to
> say that what we take for hair, skin colour,
> good-looking appearance and the rest are the
> kayadasaka kalapa (decad of bodysense) including the 8
> inseperable rupas which condition each other and the
> bodysense. The kalapa is conditioned by kamma.
> According to my recollection of what KS said, vanno
> (visible object, NOT cakkhupasada rupa!) is of
> significance here. 
> 
> As we know, conditions are very complicated. I think I
> have to leave it here to Kom (and Jack)!
> 
> Hope this helps a little.....
> 
> Sarah
> 

 
5209 From: Joyce Short   
Date: Fri May 11, 2001 10:28am
Subject: Re: Kusala etc.

 
  > ">Sorry, not a scholar, don't know Pali or Sanskrit.>" [joyce]
> 
>Des: But I "know" you. Dharma is universal.

Joyce:  How refreshingly simply put, Des! Truly, we know each other in the
knowing. Dharma is as universal as the sun and as open as the sky.

But, some beings prefer to communicate in preferred ways, not in ways
universal, simple or open.  So, there exists the paradox -how to speak the
Truth as one experiences and thus practice Right Speech (not lying)  if the
manner of one's speech annoys others and thus is not Right Speech, ie. the
cause of divisiveness?  (and the cause of arising of akusala in some)

"The way is not in the sky.
The way is in the heart.

All things pass away.
But the awakened awake forever.

You are the lamp
To lighten the way.
Then hurry, hurry.

When your light shines purely
You will not be born,
And you will not die.
    -Dhammapada-

Metta,

Joyce

 
5210 From: Leonardo Neves   
Date: Fri May 11, 2001 11:35am
Subject: Fw: [Triplegem] Palm Pilot User.

 
  Hi,

Amara and Robert in special ...

For all of you that like this kind of stuff. I'm loving reading Dhamma texts in this machines

Thank you Darren,
Mettaa,
Leonardo 


----- Original Message ----- 
From: Darren Goh 
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2001 2:02 AM
Subject: [Triplegem] Palm Pilot User.


All, 

With the permission of John from Access to Insight, I converted most 
of the Sutta Pitaka into Palm Pilot format. You can read and study 
sutta on your Palm Pilot now. 

http://www.palicanonanywhere.org/

Please write me if you find any missing links or have any technical 
questions. I would be more than happy to help. 

Thank you, 
Darren






 
5211 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Fri May 11, 2001 0:40pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Fw: [Triplegem] Palm Pilot User.

 
  Thanks leornardo and Darren,
You guys are way more advanced than me on computing. I'll wait
till the next generation of ebook readers comes out and invest
then
robert
--- Leonardo Neves  wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Amara and Robert in special ...
> 
> For all of you that like this kind of stuff. I'm loving
> reading Dhamma texts in this machines
> 
> Thank you Darren,
> Mettaa,
> Leonardo 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: Darren Goh 
> > Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2001 2:02 AM
> Subject: [Triplegem] Palm Pilot User.
> 
> 
> All, 
> 
> With the permission of John from Access to Insight, I
> converted most 
> of the Sutta Pitaka into Palm Pilot format. You can read and
> study 
> sutta on your Palm Pilot now. 
> 
> http://www.palicanonanywhere.org/
> 
> Please write me if you find any missing links or have any
> technical 
> questions. I would be more than happy to help. 
> 
> Thank you, 
> Darren
> 


 
5212 From: Kom Tukovinit   
Date: Fri May 11, 2001 1:30pm
Subject: Re: pitaka gurudom

 
  Dear Joe,

Sorry for the late response.

--- Joe wrote:
>
> If you reference the Tipitaka on your own, you are then adding a 
> third interpretation to that of the two teachers I used as 
examples. 

Yes, but at the end, I believe it is your understanding that counts 
the most, and not others.  

> My point is exactly this: the Tipitaka means whatever you, or your 
> teacher, decides it means, and that is dependent on your 
> understanding of the language and concepts, not to mention previous 
> conditioning. As a set of texts, the Tipitaka cannot logically be 
> said to exist as a single, uniform truth but rather is a 
theoretical 
> compendium (to leap ahead to Jon's response, in which he says he's 
> not very good at theoretical constructs -- very humble given his 
> demonstrated mastery of them as demonstrated on this list!)

Yes, indeed, without experiencing the realities as they truly are, 
all one knows is theoretical.  My point is that, with all the 
possible different misunderstanding/micha-dithi, one is best to go by 
the most authoritative source for the theoretical understandings.  
After that, one can't do much more than that except experincing the 
realities on one's own.

> The same might be said of one's understanding of the Tipitaka, that 
> panna might be a precondition to understanding the texts. One is 
> making a wager when one accepts the texts to represent sacca-dhamma 
> before panna knows that they represent same.

I think here, Sarah and Roberts would say that theoretical 
understandings and actual discernments of realities can go hand in 
hand, and in fact, re-inforce one another for the development of both 
types of panna.

> 
> > If one understands the truth without being taught, then one
> > can become self-enlightened.  This is the accumulation of
> > sammasam-buddha and paccekha buddha only.  
> 
> Please explain how you know this is be true, other then because you 
> read it in a text. Otherwise you're caught in the same logical 
> loop that I'm trying to work out of. 

Here's one statement that is unprovable unless one is a samma-
sambuddha.  The drawback of disbelieving in it is that it could 
condition lobha toward believing that one may attain self-
enlightenment without the proper studying of realities or without 
guidance from the enlightened ones while the Buddha's sasana still 
exists.  This would be severe micha-dithi if the statement happens to 
be true.  Of course, there are drawbacks if the statement happens to 
be untrue.

> PS Are you a participant in the DSG in Bangkok (the 'real' one, not 
> the 'virtual' one <g>)?

I am located in California.  I have met Tan Ajarn Sujin only once.  I 
have never met any other people in this group (except maybe a few), 
although I have some inklings about what they look, are, sound, or 
taste (we have extensively discussed about brain-tasting..) like 
based on many stories that have been passed around.

kom

 
5213 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Fri May 11, 2001 8:10pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] notes from Bkk

 
  Hi Num,


--- Num wrote: > Hi Sarah,
> 
> I really appreciate your mail. Thank you for always
> has a follow-up answer 
> and explanation.   I probably have to think about it
> more and more, but I 
> will try to respond and clarify something which is
> still not clear to me.

There's a lot for me to consider and clarify
too...sorry to everyone for delays. Just time for one
of your questions here because it's short:
> 
> <<<<
> 6. Rob & Num were asking about what is meant by
> 'contemplating the EXTERNAL mental objects'. This
> refers to awareness of thinking (one's 'own').
> Thinking can think about 'external objects' and take
> them for being something as wrong view has not been
> eradicated.
> >>>>
> 
>  So it does not mean anohet's another person's citta
> or thought and feeling.  
> It still means our own mental processes which think
> of external object??  
> What is the internal object?  I haven't looked up
> for a search for 
> Cheto-pariya-nanna, ability to know and read another
> person's mind.  I just 
> got my notebook back, so I can search it on my Thai
> Tipitaka CDrom.
> 
Right. Satipatthana ALWAYS concerns the awareness of
realities, so when we read about the 'six external
bases', I understand it to refer to awareness of
'one's own' thinking. The concepts being thought about
at that time concern 'outer' beings and objects, other
visible objects, sounds etc.

So the 'six internal objects' refer to awareness of
seeing, visible object and the rest as in:
"Here, O Bhikkhus, a bhikkhu understands the eye and
material forms and the fetter that arises dependent on
both...."

I would think that if there is the ability to know and
read the other's mind that again this is a special
kind of thinking and would again fall under extenal
objects for the purpose of awareness of thinking. But
the latter is guess work!> 
> 
I'll get back on Kom's reply to my other post to you
and to Erik, Paul, Howard after my busy weekend
teaching.

Must go,

Sarah

p.s look forward to more on phassa, vinnana,
manisakara etc later too! Looks like we can keep
pretty busy for this life!


 
5214 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Fri May 11, 2001 8:59pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Introduction and a question from a new person

 
  Paul

Welcome to the list from me.

>     I am a newcomer to this particular list, having
> recently stumbled across 
> it due to a comment someone made on another list.  A
> few years ago I read one 
> of Nina van Gorkom's books.  But it is only in the
> past couple of months that 
> an interest has begun in actually studying
> Abdhidamma. Lacking the education 
> to use the correct technical terms, I will have to
> phrase my question in 
> everyday language.

This of course is fine.  There is no requirement here
to use technical terms.  Those who are familiar with
the technical terms use them because it helps reduce
uncertainty.  But all approaches are welcome!

>     I have long been confused about the role of
> intention and effort given 
> the fact of selflessness.  I can appreciate the
> teaching that ther is no 
> "self" that can control one's progress on the path
> of truth.  Finding the 
> path, finding a teacher, recognizing the truth of
> the teachings, deepening 
> one's study, and adhering to the path all depend
> upon conditions and are not 
> in the direct control of a self that can "make" one
> do any of the above.
>     Still, it seems that effort and intention play a
> role in the process. The 
> Buddha set forth the noble truth of suffering and
> its cessation as the 
> gateway to the path.  Therefore one begins with an
> intention to end one's 
> suffering by pursuing the eightfold path. This is a
> desire, but unlike 
> ordinary desires, it begins to deconstruct itself as
> one glimpses the truth 
> that in fact there is no "self" that is suffering.
>     So, when I read the post below (# 5171) I was a
> little confused.  Perhaps 
> this is a semantic confusion, not a substantial one.
>  Hopefully someone can 
> clarify? The post says: "If we open a sutta about
> metta with the intention to 
> have metta, it shows the clinging to self again." 
> What is meant by this?

You have touched on one of the most difficult parts of
the dhamma to grasp.  I do not pretend to understand
it to any degree.  What follows is what I have read
and heard but only in some instances (ie. the akusala
bits) noted as being the case, for me at least.

I think the point being made here is that the mental
factors of intention and effort that support the
development of understanding of realities are not the
same as intention and effort in the conventional
sense.  They are mental factors that arise with (ie.
accompany) a wholesome moment of consciousness.  They
accompany the wholesome moment of understanding.  The
conditions for their arising include studying the
teachings and reflecting on them, with the right
purpose in mind.

What we identify as intention and effort on our part
is likely to include a goodly dose of attachment or
wrong view of one form or another (this is the part I
can vouch for).  This is a difficult notion to grasp,
I know, but then we are not used to being completely
honest with ourselves.

So intending to do anything that we expect will lead
to more kusala of whatever kind is likely to include a
lot of unwholesome moments that prevent kusala
actually arising, or simply serve to reinforce the
idea of self.  In other words, such intention is not
the condition for the development of kusala. 

None of this means that we should refrain from doing
anything just because we notice attachment or aversion
that was not previously apparent.  But we are better
placed to avoid the danger of mistaking the
unwholesome for wholesome.

I think this is in line with what you say below, which
I substantially agree with.

Hope you find our discussion useful, and I look
forward to hearing more from you.

Jon

>     If one starts with the desire to end suffering,
> as the Buddha suggests, 
> and realizes that the path includes the accumulation
> of wisom *and* merit, 
> including the cultivation of virtuous states of mind
> such as metta, then 
> wouldn't one engage in activities that seem to
> promote the arising of metta?  
> One could think that reading the sutta,
> contemplating it, etc. could provide 
> conditions favorable to the arising of metta?  Of
> course, one cannot *make* 
> metta arise by doing this.  Also it could (at times)
> be unskillful to turn to 
> sutta reading in order to avoid investigating an
> unpleasant state of mind 
> that is arising. 
>     Or to take another example--dana.  One engages
> in the physical act of 
> giving but becomes aware that a mental state of
> generosity may not be 
> arising, or may arise momentarily and be followed by
> second-thoughts, 
> regrets, etc.  One sees the selflessness of this
> process.  One cannot *make* 
> generosity arise.  Nevertheless, the act of giving
> is preferable to 
> non-giving. The intention, or wish, to cultivate
> generosity still seems to 
> have some place in the process of the path, does it
> not?
>     I would presume that the point is not to forego
> sutta reading, or acts of 
> generosity.  Do you feel sutta reading is a good
> activity if done with 
> correct understanding, not expecting it to be like
> putting a coin in a 
> machine and getting a candy in return?
> 
> Paul Bail


 
5215 From: Joyce Short   
Date: Fri May 11, 2001 9:10pm
Subject: noting "others" (?)

 
  >> <<<<
>> 6. Rob & Num were asking about what is meant by
>> 'contemplating the EXTERNAL mental objects'. This
>> refers to awareness of thinking (one's 'own').
>> Thinking can think about 'external objects' and take
>> them for being something as wrong view has not been
>> eradicated.
>> >>>>
>>
>>  So it does not mean anohet's another person's citta
>> or thought and feeling.
>> It still means our own mental processes which think
>> of external object??

Contemplation of the body, sensations, mind (mental states) and mental
objects (mental contents) are the Four Foundations within "this full fathom
long body."

"Contemplating the body IN the body...the sensations IN the sensations..etc.
What is to be practiced is pure, non-reactive mindfulness i.e. as clear and
full an awareness as possible (ardently and clearly comprehending) of
whatever is present NOW in the area selected for observation, without going
off into a  tangeant into other more or less relevent mental associations
(feelings, thoughts, value judgments, imaginings)  All noted in ones own
body-mind continuum only.

"Fare along contemplating the body in the body, but do not apply yourself to
a train of thought connected to the body; fare along contemplating the
sensations in the sensations....the mind in the mind...,metal objects in
mental objects, but do not apply yourself to the train of thought connected
with sensations...the mind...mental objects. -Dantabhumisutta (M.125)When

So  - all investigation is into one's own package of body-mind only.  This
is done ardently, not with a great deal of tension and effort, but
"ardently" in the full meaning of this word.  Think of really being close
enough with the other/object to close the gap and then be one/unity) Clearly
comprehendending - getting the practice really clear. See each arising
really clearly what ever it may be.  What is an "object?" What is mental
content?  And how does one note?  Here one notices keenly, sharply like an
arrow shot to its target. Noting the object AS it occurs.  Thus mind is not
going off into tangental thinking. ie.  noting rising of abdomen  (mental
associating ...."hmm, wonder if Im doing this right? Hmm, breath seems
shallow to day, wonder if Im sick"...and so on) What is happening to the
object one is noting? and so on. Is it staying around? Not?

So, constant awareness, moment to moment, whatever one is doing and with an
interested, alert, welcoming attitude.

Contemplation of "others mental processes" is actually, "imagining,
imagining". Thinking about external objects or internal objects is
"thinking, thinking" the focus of attention is attending here. The purpose
is to gain complete, immediate and direct awareness of all phenomena as they
arise. In this direct awareness the nature of both the phenomena and the
awareness can be seen by the "experiencer".

Thus you will see for yourself..."Only when you know for yourselves: "These
things are unwholesome and lead to harm and suffering...and these things are
wholesome... and lead to welfare and happiness, THEN you should abandoned
(the unwholeseome things) then you should practice and dwell upon the
wholesome things." (A.3.65)

Metta,

Joyce

 
5216 From: Joyce Short   
Date: Fri May 11, 2001 9:42pm
Subject: clinging to self as practice

 
  > 
> This of course is fine.  There is no requirement here
> to use technical terms.  Those who are familiar with
> the technical terms use them because it helps reduce
> uncertainty.

I thought it was insight into ultimate realities that "reduced" ('removed')
uncertainty.  Only ego can be insecure.  So - when one feels uncertainty -
isn't it just feeling, feeling untill this dissolves- along with the "one",
the knowing, of the object, feeling.  Could also be aversion, aversion one
is noting  -but this also goes, along with the knower.  (Not-two)

Study of technical terms needs only be minimal. Some concepts not well
expressed in English. But use of technical terms to reduce uncertainty?
have I missed that Sutta?

Metta,

Joyce






 But all approaches are welcome!
>
>>     I have long been confused about the role of
>> intention and effort given
>> the fact of selflessness.  I can appreciate the
>> teaching that ther is no
>> "self" that can control one's progress on the path
>> of truth.  Finding the
>> clarify? The post says: "If we open a sutta about
>> metta with the intention to
>> have metta, it shows the clinging to self again."
>> What is meant by this?

Self has the habit of mis-perception of reality.  There is the invention of
an object construct called "I" that grasps/reacts and become entangles with
other objects. "Yours/mine".  All of this is based on deeply rooted desiring
to become.  You can also say that awakening the desire to study the path to
enlightenment is clinging to self.  Everything we do initially is this...but
this is natural.  When one has the feeling that clinging or desire is
present, just know this.  Notice the motivation of the desire. Is practice
selfish? - enlightenment, kindness, happiness for me, kind of
self-cultivation or do we include all other sentient beings?  Or is this
desire to understand and to grow in insight coming itself from wisdom mind
and thus is not ego-centered. When selfishness may be present, one then
changes the aspiration.  After awhile, one may have started any practice
from selfish clinging, but the practice itself will take the mind beyond
this origination. Step by step we move from where we were, more and more
opening to other possibilties, and not moving an inch from enlightened mind
in this process..  Nothing is bad or wrong, we just attempt to be aware.
When the natural intelligence of mind sees deeply into itself, into certain
truths, it naturally lets go, no force needed.

So - it is useful to look at the nature of one's practice approach.  Does it
come from a notion that life/self is bad and that by doing certain practices
one will change things?  This is ego-striving practice out of aversion.
Ditto if you focus on some great enlightenment somewhere in the future -
this is greed and delusion. Most of intitial practice is difficult because
where ever one really is, its can be a bit uncomfortable, one doesn't like
it at all.

If the concepts and questions about "clinging to self" are the foremost in
consciousness  -then take this as your meditation focus or object of
contemplation.  Live with your question until at one point there will not be
"two".  There will be a point of coming together of the contemplator and
object of contemplation (perhaps while you are doing the dishes or cutting
the grass) Then the answer or insight into what you are asking will arise in
the manner which is illuminating for you.  And thus you see for yourself
what is wholesome and what is not.

metta,

Joyce

Metta,

Joyce

 
 
5217 From: Herman 
Date: Sat May 12, 2001 11:25am
Subject: Re: clinging to self as practice

 
  The monk, noting an aversion to technical terms, notes thus : 
Aversion to technical terms, aversion to technical terms.

The monk, noting a clinging to technical terms, notes thus : Clinging 
to technical terms , clinging to technical terms.

The monk, noting an ignorance of technical terms, notes thus : 
Ignorance of technical terms, ignorance of technical terms.

Thus the monk is freed from the fetter of technical terms.


With lovingkindness  (there is a huge smiley around this entire post)


Herman

--- "Joyce Short"  wrote:
> > 
> > This of course is fine.  There is no requirement here
> > to use technical terms.  Those who are familiar with
> > the technical terms use them because it helps reduce
> > uncertainty.
> 
> I thought it was insight into ultimate realities that "reduced" 
('removed')
> uncertainty.  Only ego can be insecure.  So - when one feels 
uncertainty -
> isn't it just feeling, feeling untill this dissolves- along with 
the "one",
> the knowing, of the object, feeling.  Could also be aversion, 
aversion one
> is noting  -but this also goes, along with the knower.  (Not-two)
> 
> Study of technical terms needs only be minimal. Some concepts not 
well
> expressed in English. But use of technical terms to reduce 
uncertainty?
> have I missed that Sutta?
> 
> Metta,
> 
> Joyce
>

 
5219 From: bruce   
Date: Sat May 12, 2001 4:36pm
Subject: some questions on practice: Re: Kusala etc; Re: noting "others" (?)

 
  robert wrote in reply to erik:

> If one
> doesn't know how to study the present moment yet this may seem
> hard to do . But it can be done. 

it does indeed seem hard.  how *does* one study the present moment?


> Mostly my meditation practice involves the investigation of the
> dhammas at the six doors. 

and how does one investigate the dhammas at the six doors?

how is any attempt at this investigation different from attempting to 
notice what is manifesting at the six doors?  in other words, how is 
the practice you describe, robert, different from the 
"even-a-child-can-do" practice joyce describes?

bruce
At 21:27 2001/05/11 -0700, you wrote:
> Dear Joyce,
> Even a child could be taught to focus attention in the way you
> suggest here. Is that what the Buddha meant by satipatthana? 
> I would suggest the development of satipatthana is  more
> profound than that.
> robert 
> 
> --- Joyce Short  wrote:
> > 
> > > What is to be practiced is pure, non-reactive mindfulness
> i.e.
> > as clear and
> > full an awareness as possible (ardently and clearly
> > comprehending) of
> > whatever is present NOW in the area selected for observation,
> > without going
> > off into a  tangeant into other more or less relevent mental
> > associations
> > (feelings, thoughts, value judgments, imaginings)  All noted
> > in ones own
> > body-mind continuum only.
> > 
> > > So  - all investigation is into one's own package of
> body-mind
> > only.  This
> > is done ardently, not with a great deal of tension and effort,
> > but
> > "ardently" in the full meaning of this word.  Think of really
> > being close
> > enough with the other/object to close the gap and then be
> > one/unity) Clearly
> > comprehendending - getting the practice really clear. See each
> > arising
> > really clearly what ever it may be.  What is an "object?" What
> > is mental
> > content?  And how does one note?  Here one notices keenly,
> > sharply like an
> > arrow shot to its target. Noting the object AS it occurs. 
> > Thus mind is not
> > going off into tangental thinking. ie.  noting rising of
> > abdomen  (mental
> > associating ...."hmm, wonder if Im doing this right? Hmm,
> > breath seems
> > shallow to day, wonder if Im sick"...and so on) What is
> > happening to the
> > object one is noting? and so on. Is it staying around? Not?
> > 
> > So, constant awareness, moment to moment, whatever one is
> > doing and with an
> > interested, alert, welcoming attitude.
> > 
> > Contemplation of "others mental processes" is actually,
> > "imagining,
> > imagining". Thinking about external objects or internal
> > objects is
> > "thinking, thinking" the focus of attention is attending here.
> > The purpose
> > is to gain complete, immediate and direct awareness of all
> > phenomena as they
> > arise. In this direct awareness the nature of both the
> > phenomena and the
> > awareness can be seen by the "experiencer".
> > > Joyce
> > 

 
5220 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Sat May 12, 2001 4:41pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: clinging to self as practice

 
  Herman
I was wondering how best to reply to Joyce's post, but
I think you've said it all!
JOn

--- Herman wrote: > The monk, noting
an aversion to technical terms,
> notes thus : 
> Aversion to technical terms, aversion to technical
> terms.
> 
> The monk, noting a clinging to technical terms,
> notes thus : Clinging 
> to technical terms , clinging to technical terms.
> 
> The monk, noting an ignorance of technical terms,
> notes thus : 
> Ignorance of technical terms, ignorance of technical
> terms.
> 
> Thus the monk is freed from the fetter of technical
> terms.
> 
> 
> With lovingkindness  (there is a huge smiley around
> this entire post)
> 
> 
> Herman
> 
> --- "Joyce Short"
>  wrote:
> > > 
> > > This of course is fine.  There is no requirement
> here
> > > to use technical terms.  Those who are familiar
> with
> > > the technical terms use them because it helps
> reduce
> > > uncertainty.
> > 
> > I thought it was insight into ultimate realities
> that "reduced" 
> ('removed')
> > uncertainty.  Only ego can be insecure.  So - when
> one feels 
> uncertainty -
> > isn't it just feeling, feeling untill this
> dissolves- along with 
> the "one",
> > the knowing, of the object, feeling.  Could also
> be aversion, 
> aversion one
> > is noting  -but this also goes, along with the
> knower.  (Not-two)
> > 
> > Study of technical terms needs only be minimal.
> Some concepts not 
> well
> > expressed in English. But use of technical terms
> to reduce 
> uncertainty?
> > have I missed that Sutta?
> > 
> > Metta,
> > 
> > Joyce



 
5221 From: Marlon McCall 
Date: Sat May 12, 2001 1:58pm
Subject: Welcome Back Amara

 
  Welcome Back Amara
 
Its so very nice to hear from you again Amara. This is a very special 
day for everyone in this group. It is so nice to see the welcome back 
messages en mass you received. Whether you remain in DSL or D-L 
really doesn't matter, the fact of the matter is you have returned in 
full. I now can leave these two groups with total peace of mind, as I 
only re-listed while awaiting your hopeful return, which you did. 
Thank you very much Amara and everyone here it has truly been a 
pleasure, and an honor associating with all of you.

With Utmost Respect Always
Marlon McCall

Ps. This is a copy of a message I posted to Dhamma-list as Amara has 
began to post there.

 
5222 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Sat May 12, 2001 8:42pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Welcome Back Amara

 
  Dear marlon,
Why not stay? I think we're all used to your direct style and
can see your sincere nature. Even we have differences of opinion
it is good to discuss them. Rejoin anytime and you'll be most
welcome.
robert
--- Marlon McCall wrote:
> Welcome Back Amara
>  
> Its so very nice to hear from you again Amara. This is a very
> special 
> day for everyone in this group. It is so nice to see the
> welcome back 
> messages en mass you received. Whether you remain in DSL or
> D-L 
> really doesn't matter, the fact of the matter is you have
> returned in 
> full. I now can leave these two groups with total peace of
> mind, as I 
> only re-listed while awaiting your hopeful return, which you
> did. 
> Thank you very much Amara and everyone here it has truly been
> a 
> pleasure, and an honor associating with all of you.
> 
> With Utmost Respect Always
> Marlon McCall
> 
> Ps. This is a copy of a message I posted to Dhamma-list as
> Amara has 
> began to post there.



 
5223 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Sat May 12, 2001 9:56pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] some questions on practice: Re: Kusala etc; Re: noting "others" (?)

 
  Good question Bruce.
--- bruce  wrote:
> robert wrote in reply to erik:
> 
> > If one
> > doesn't know how to study the present moment yet this may
> seem
> > hard to do . But it can be done. 
> 
> it does indeed seem hard.  how *does* one study the present
> moment?
_________________________

I don't think it is some technique that one learns like TM. 
My feeling is that gradually from learning about the Dhamma
there is more understanding that there is only insignificant,
evanescent namas and rupas. Then there is a very gradual
investigation into this matter.


> 
> 
> > Mostly my meditation practice involves the investigation of
> the
> > dhammas at the six doors. 
> 
> and how does one investigate the dhammas at the six doors?
> 
> how is any attempt at this investigation different from
> attempting to 
> notice what is manifesting at the six doors?  in other words,
> how is 
> the practice you describe, robert, different from the 
> "even-a-child-can-do" practice joyce describes?
________________________________________________
I think I mentioned on an earlier that satipatthana is the sole
province of the Buddhas. It must be profound as it leads out of
this beginingless round of birth and death.

In fact, I know that often when doing this 'investigation of the
dhammas at the 6 doors' that it is not actually satipatthana.
More often than not there is simply the experience of feeling or
hardness or colour or sound but without panna or sati. It is 
understanding that distinguishes the difference (between with
and without), and this understanding is supported by listening
and considering.
I think the goal is not so much to have many moments of
awareness but to develop insight into what is seen. There is a
difference.
In the Mahasatipatthana sutta the Buddha says  
"Gacchanto va gacchamiti pajanati = "When he is going (a
bhikkhu) understands: 'I am going.'" 
It perhaps sounds easy enough? Just keep attention focussed on
the body?
The commentary explains

"In this matter of going, readily do dogs, jackals and the like,
know when they move on that they are moving. But this
instruction on the modes of deportment was not given concerning
similar awareness, because awareness of that sort belonging to
animals does not shed the belief in a living being, does not
knock out the percept of a soul, and neither becomes a subject
of meditation nor the development of the Arousing of
Mindfulness."

So the awareness in satipatthana is something that is directly
opposed to the illusion of self that has been present for all
these aeons.
The commentary says
"Mindfulness is established for the yogi through careful
scrutiny. He thinks: There is the body, but there is no being,
no person, no woman, no man, no soul, nothing pertaining to a
soul, no "I", nothing that is mine, no one, and nothing
belonging to anyone ."

Much of what Joyce says is certainly correct. There has to be
direct scrutiny of dhammas. But we should be careful not to
oversimplify on this matter. 


I know some will read this and feel discouraged. they will
surely think "well what exactly is it I'm supposed to do". 
As I said it is difficult but not impossible BUT it is something
we have to learn about for ourself.
Dhamma is deep:
The majhima nikaya ii 72
 "you ought to be at a loss
vaccha, you ought to be bewildered. For vaccha this
Dhamma is deep, difficult to see, difficult to
understand, peaceful, excellent, beyond dialectic,
subtle, intelligible to the wise; but it's hard for
you who are under another view, another allegiance,
another objective, of a different observance, and
under a different teacher"
We should be very grateful to be able to learn the Dhamma and be
grateful to those wise monks who preserved it so carefully for
these millenia. I think we shouldn't neglect the deep teachings
that were taught just as much for us as for those at the time of
the Buddha.

The "Kindred Sayings"(III, 
     Khandha vagga, Middle Fifty, Ch V, par. 99, The Leash) 
     Just as, monks, a dog tied up by a leash to a strong stake
or pillar, keeps running 
     round and revolving round and round that stake or pillar,
even so, monks, the 
     untaught many folk... regard body as self, regard feeling,
perception, activities, 
     consciousness as self... they run and revolve round and
round from body to body, 
     from feeling to feeling, from perception to perception,
from activities to activities, 
     from consciousness to consciousness...they are not released
therefrom, they are not 
     released from rebirth, from old age and decay, from sorrow
and grief, from woe, 
     lamentation and despair... they are not released from
dukkha, I declare... "

 It then says that the ariyan disciple who does not take any
dhamma for self is released  from dukkha. 
You see often when "I" investigate the 6 doors there  is just
that: "I". Sati is taken for self or I think "I" made awareness
happen. But cetana (volition, intention) and awareness are  part
of sankharakkhandha, they are "not-self because
uncontrollable" Visuddhimagga xiv224. 
This doesn't mean fatalism or that nothing can be done but it
should remind us that the right conditions are needed for the
right results.

I repeat it is to our great advantage to learn more about the
Dhamma. The Atthasalini, (triplets p451)defines "ignorant
average man" as:
"owing to the absense of access to the Scriptures, and of the
higher attainment of the path and fruition.
For to whoever owing to the absense of learning by
heart and deduction therefrom regarding the
khandas(aggregates) elements(dhatus)
sense-organs(ayatanas) the causal mode, the
applications of mindfulness etc there is NO attainment
of that learning which represses opinionativeness, nor
any access, owing to the non-attainment of what should
be attained by conduct. Such a person, from the
absense of such access and such attainment should be
known as ignorant".

So surely, as Joyce said, investigate whatever appears now. But
I think don't neglect the teachings given to us by the Buddha;
they are the support for samma ditthi. 
robert




 
5224 From: Howard 
Date: Sat May 12, 2001 7:52pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] noting "others" (?)

 
  Hi, Robert -

In a message dated 5/12/01 12:29:18 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
robert writes:


> Dear Joyce,
> Even a child could be taught to focus attention in the way you
> suggest here. Is that what the Buddha meant by satipatthana? 
> I would suggest the development of satipatthana is  more
> profound than that.
> robert 
> 
==============================
       Actually, I don't understand what is lacking in Joyce's description. 
Observing carefully, with clear comprehension, non-reaction, and strong 
concentration and mindfulness whatever arises from moment to moment certainly 
seems to me to be what "insight meditation" is about, and, from my 
perspective it isn't an easy task even for intelligent adults. Please let me 
know what you think I am missing here. 

With metta and respect,
Howard


/Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble 
in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a 
phantom, and a dream./            (From the Diamond Sutra)                    
            
                                         



 
5225 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Sun May 13, 2001 0:54am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] noting "others" (?)

 
  --- Howard wrote:
> Hi, Robert -
> 
> =========
>        Actually, I don't understand what is lacking in Joyce's
> description. 
> Observing carefully, with clear comprehension, non-reaction,
> and strong 
> concentration and mindfulness whatever arises from moment to
> moment certainly 
> seems to me to be what "insight meditation" is about, and,
> from my 
> perspective it isn't an easy task even for intelligent adults.
> Please let me 
> know what you think I am missing here. 
> 
> With metta and respect,
> Howard

_________________
Dear Howard,
You put this very nicely, as always. It was not so much that
Joyce's post was wrong but that (in my opinion) it pared down
the path beyond what it can be reduced to. Quite rightly she
emphasised the importance of direct awareness of whatever
appears but I felt she underemphasised a crucial ingredient -
sammaditthi. 

What I see, personally, is that there can be concentration but
that there can still be subtle idea of permanence. 
If we simply focus attention on
body or feelings or whatever we may succeed but still have an
idea of being able to control. It is all happening very fast
-even if there are moments of genuine awareness  avijja is still
coming in and obscuring what is there.

Perhaps we think we already know the characteristic of feeling.
After all feeling arises with every citta. But do we experience
it with sati and panna?
Observe feeling now. Somewhere it is arising but is it
experienced with sati or lobha or moha or dosa? Or are we not
sure what type of citta experienced it? Even if we feel very
equanimous about the feelings that arise it is not necessarily
the type of citta associated with satipatthana. 

Certainly we should explore feelings and citta and all dhammas
arising at the 6 doors but let us not underestimate this
process.
Avijja is so often the majician that fools us. It can make what
is not sati look like sati. 
robert




 
5226 From: Erik 
Date: Sun May 13, 2001 3:57am
Subject: Re: Hello everybody, I am new here

 
  --- Sarah Procter Abbott  
wrote:
> Dear Ai Lin,
> 
> Warmest regards and welcome to dsg. Eric has been
> challenging us all with his debates and has become a
> key participant here recently! If you start calling
> him Sam, we'll now understand, thank you!! <Eric, the
> twins in 'Lord of the Flies' are called Sam 'n Eric,
> is this the connection??>

Sure, Sarah, you know I'm out of town and you can talk behind my back 
cuz I can't defend myself! Ha! Re: Sam 'n Eric ref, that has occurred 
to me more than once. I loved that book as a kid.

Just, a few minutes ago, get back from seeing His Holiness the Dalai 
Lama, here in Salt Lake City. Wow. The teachings were on the Four 
Noble Truths and the Paramitas, with a heavy dose of anatta and 
paticca samuppada. Please understand just how big a head-trip this 
has been for me to hear the profound and sublime teaching on ten-drel 
(Paticca Sammupada) elaborated here in the land of Mormons. I never, 
ever believed I'd see the day. I never ever believed I'd live to see 
the day my own mom, a strict Mormon herself, would purchase tickets 
to see His Holiness. Even the President of the Mormon church met with 
the Dalai Lama and called him his "brother." This is PROOF miracles 
are possible. 

As I was perusing the Visuddhimagga on the plane, I saw once again 
the teaching that throughout our limitless rebirths that there are 
few beings who have not been our mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, 
and given it's Mother's Day tommorrow, this meditation couldn't have 
come at a better time. What a weekend!

Today's session began with the Dalai Lama praising the Wisdom of the 
Theras as the foundation of all Buddhadhamma, and began the teaching 
by requesting the contigent of Theravada monks sharing the stage with 
him to recite verses for everyone present. To hear the chants of both 
traditions echoing beside one another and the whole thing nearly 
overwhelmed me with gratitude, love, and tears. And of course hearing 
that from someone I consider one of my two lamas merely encourages my 
further studies in the Theravada Abhidhamma to lay the complete 
foundation for everything else. Just thought I'd write in while it's 
all still so fresh and share this wonderful stuff with all here in 
dsg.

May all beings have happiness and cause of happiness
May all beings be free from suffering and cause of suffering
May all beings neverr be separated from perfect happiness
May all beings abide in perfect equanimity, free from the poijnsons 
of greed, hatred, and delusion

 
5227 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Sun May 13, 2001 8:32am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello everybody, I am new here

 
  Dear Erik,
This is really nice news. It sounds like the Dalai Lama might
have preceeded you in investigating the Theravada. He is very
understanding and evenhanded to say this.
I guess any qualms you might have had about studying within 2
traditions are gone, although I have a feeling that you- an
uncommon man- had very few anyway.
robert
--- Erik wrote:
> --- Sarah Procter Abbott
>  
> wrote:
> > Dear Ai Lin,
> > 
> > Warmest regards and welcome to dsg. Eric has been
> > challenging us all with his debates and has become a
> > key participant here recently! If you start calling
> > him Sam, we'll now understand, thank you!! <Eric, the
> > twins in 'Lord of the Flies' are called Sam 'n Eric,
> > is this the connection??>
> 
> Sure, Sarah, you know I'm out of town and you can talk behind
> my back 
> cuz I can't defend myself! Ha! Re: Sam 'n Eric ref, that has
> occurred 
> to me more than once. I loved that book as a kid.
> 
> Just, a few minutes ago, get back from seeing His Holiness the
> Dalai 
> Lama, here in Salt Lake City. Wow. The teachings were on the
> Four 
> Noble Truths and the Paramitas, with a heavy dose of anatta
> and 
> paticca samuppada. Please understand just how big a head-trip
> this 
> has been for me to hear the profound and sublime teaching on
> ten-drel 
> (Paticca Sammupada) elaborated here in the land of Mormons. I
> never, 
> ever believed I'd see the day. I never ever believed I'd live
> to see 
> the day my own mom, a strict Mormon herself, would purchase
> tickets 
> to see His Holiness. Even the President of the Mormon church
> met with 
> the Dalai Lama and called him his "brother." This is PROOF
> miracles 
> are possible. 
> 
> As I was perusing the Visuddhimagga on the plane, I saw once
> again 
> the teaching that throughout our limitless rebirths that there
> are 
> few beings who have not been our mothers, fathers, brothers,
> sisters, 
> and given it's Mother's Day tommorrow, this meditation
> couldn't have 
> come at a better time. What a weekend!
> 
> Today's session began with the Dalai Lama praising the Wisdom
> of the 
> Theras as the foundation of all Buddhadhamma, and began the
> teaching 
> by requesting the contigent of Theravada monks sharing the
> stage with 
> him to recite verses for everyone present. To hear the chants
> of both 
> traditions echoing beside one another and the whole thing
> nearly 
> overwhelmed me with gratitude, love, and tears. And of course
> hearing 
> that from someone I consider one of my two lamas merely
> encourages my 
> further studies in the Theravada Abhidhamma to lay the
> complete 
> foundation for everything else. Just thought I'd write in
> while it's 
> all still so fresh and share this wonderful stuff with all
> here in 
> dsg.
> 
> May all beings have happiness and cause of happiness
> May all beings be free from suffering and cause of suffering
> May all beings neverr be separated from perfect happiness
> May all beings abide in perfect equanimity, free from the
> poijnsons 
> of greed, hatred, and delusion
> 



 
5228 From: bruce   
Date: Sun May 13, 2001 10:46am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] some questions on practice: Re: Kusala etc; Re: noting "others" (?)

 
  thanks for your reply robert.  i am still not sure how one actually is to
go about studying dhammas arising at the six dvara, so perhaps another
question, open to all of course:

how does one know whether awareness of what is being noticed arises with
panna or sati, or without?

bruce





At 06:56 2001/05/12 -0700, you wrote:
> Good question Bruce.
> --- bruce  wrote:
> > robert wrote in reply to erik:
> > 
> > > If one
> > > doesn't know how to study the present moment yet this may
> > seem
> > > hard to do . But it can be done. 
> > 
> > it does indeed seem hard.  how *does* one study the present
> > moment?
> _________________________
> 
> I don't think it is some technique that one learns like TM. 
> My feeling is that gradually from learning about the Dhamma
> there is more understanding that there is only insignificant,
> evanescent namas and rupas. Then there is a very gradual
> investigation into this matter.
> 
> 
> > 
> > 
> > > Mostly my meditation practice involves the investigation of
> > the
> > > dhammas at the six doors. 
> > 
> > and how does one investigate the dhammas at the six doors?
> > 
> > how is any attempt at this investigation different from
> > attempting to 
> > notice what is manifesting at the six doors?  in other words,
> > how is 
> > the practice you describe, robert, different from the 
> > "even-a-child-can-do" practice joyce describes?
> ________________________________________________
> I think I mentioned on an earlier that satipatthana is the sole
> province of the Buddhas. It must be profound as it leads out of
> this beginingless round of birth and death.
> 
> In fact, I know that often when doing this 'investigation of the
> dhammas at the 6 doors' that it is not actually satipatthana.
> More often than not there is simply the experience of feeling or
> hardness or colour or sound but without panna or sati. It is 
> understanding that distinguishes the difference (between with
> and without), and this understanding is supported by listening
> and considering.
> I think the goal is not so much to have many moments of
> awareness but to develop insight into what is seen. There is a
> difference.
> In the Mahasatipatthana sutta the Buddha says  
> "Gacchanto va gacchamiti pajanati = "When he is going (a
> bhikkhu) understands: 'I am going.'" 
> It perhaps sounds easy enough? Just keep attention focussed on
> the body?
> The commentary explains
> 
> "In this matter of going, readily do dogs, jackals and the like,
> know when they move on that they are moving. But this
> instruction on the modes of deportment was not given concerning
> similar awareness, because awareness of that sort belonging to
> animals does not shed the belief in a living being, does not
> knock out the percept of a soul, and neither becomes a subject
> of meditation nor the development of the Arousing of
> Mindfulness."
> 
> So the awareness in satipatthana is something that is directly
> opposed to the illusion of self that has been present for all
> these aeons.
> The commentary says
> "Mindfulness is established for the yogi through careful
> scrutiny. He thinks: There is the body, but there is no being,
> no person, no woman, no man, no soul, nothing pertaining to a
> soul, no "I", nothing that is mine, no one, and nothing
> belonging to anyone ."
> 
> Much of what Joyce says is certainly correct. There has to be
> direct scrutiny of dhammas. But we should be careful not to
> oversimplify on this matter. 
> 
> 
> I know some will read this and feel discouraged. they will
> surely think "well what exactly is it I'm supposed to do". 
> As I said it is difficult but not impossible BUT it is something
> we have to learn about for ourself.
> Dhamma is deep:
> The majhima nikaya ii 72
>  "you ought to be at a loss
> vaccha, you ought to be bewildered. For vaccha this
> Dhamma is deep, difficult to see, difficult to
> understand, peaceful, excellent, beyond dialectic,
> subtle, intelligible to the wise; but it's hard for
> you who are under another view, another allegiance,
> another objective, of a different observance, and
> under a different teacher"
> We should be very grateful to be able to learn the Dhamma and be
> grateful to those wise monks who preserved it so carefully for
> these millenia. I think we shouldn't neglect the deep teachings
> that were taught just as much for us as for those at the time of
> the Buddha.
> 
> The "Kindred Sayings"(III, 
>      Khandha vagga, Middle Fifty, Ch V, par. 99, The Leash) 
>      Just as, monks, a dog tied up by a leash to a strong stake
> or pillar, keeps running 
>      round and revolving round and round that stake or pillar,
> even so, monks, the 
>      untaught many folk... regard body as self, regard feeling,
> perception, activities, 
>      consciousness as self... they run and revolve round and
> round from body to body, 
>      from feeling to feeling, from perception to perception,
> from activities to activities, 
>      from consciousness to consciousness...they are not released
> therefrom, they are not 
>      released from rebirth, from old age and decay, from sorrow
> and grief, from woe, 
>      lamentation and despair... they are not released from
> dukkha, I declare... "
> 
>  It then says that the ariyan disciple who does not take any
> dhamma for self is released  from dukkha. 
> You see often when "I" investigate the 6 doors there  is just
> that: "I". Sati is taken for self or I think "I" made awareness
> happen. But cetana (volition, intention) and awareness are  part
> of sankharakkhandha, they are "not-self because
> uncontrollable" Visuddhimagga xiv224. 
> This doesn't mean fatalism or that nothing can be done but it
> should remind us that the right conditions are needed for the
> right results.
> 
> I repeat it is to our great advantage to learn more about the
> Dhamma. The Atthasalini, (triplets p451)defines "ignorant
> average man" as:
> "owing to the absense of access to the Scriptures, and of the
> higher attainment of the path and fruition.
> For to whoever owing to the absense of learning by
> heart and deduction therefrom regarding the
> khandas(aggregates) elements(dhatus)
> sense-organs(ayatanas) the causal mode, the
> applications of mindfulness etc there is NO attainment
> of that learning which represses opinionativeness, nor
> any access, owing to the non-attainment of what should
> be attained by conduct. Such a person, from the
> absense of such access and such attainment should be
> known as ignorant".
> 
> So surely, as Joyce said, investigate whatever appears now. But
> I think don't neglect the teachings given to us by the Buddha;
> they are the support for samma ditthi. 
> robert
> 

 
5229 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Sun May 13, 2001 10:53am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] some questions on practice: Re: Kusala etc; Re: noting "others" (?)

 
  Bruce,
this is the million dollar question. I'll leave it to other
wiser members for now and maybe have a comment or two later.
robert
--- bruce  wrote:
> thanks for your reply robert.  i am still not sure how one
> actually is to
> go about studying dhammas arising at the six dvara, so perhaps
> another
> question, open to all of course:
> 
> how does one know whether awareness of what is being noticed
> arises with
> panna or sati, or without?
> 
> bruce



 
5230 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Sun May 13, 2001 3:40pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Gihi Sutta (was 'uprooting your kilesa?')

 
  Antony

--- Antony wrote: 

> There is a saying I have come to like, it is this:
> That suttas are 
> not for reading, they are for practicing with. The
> Buddha taught what 
> should be implemented. Suttas are not novels.  They
> are great stories 
> but that is a limited understanding and almost a
> waste.

Yes, they are certainly more than just that.  Thinking
back to the original occasion, they were what the
listener(s) on that occasion needed to hear.  They
were not always, however, about the practice directly,
although they were always connected with the
development of kusala and release from samsara.

The Gihi Sutta is an interesting example.  It seems to
be descriptive of the layperson who has attained the
first stage of enlightenment.  Only the stream-winner
(or above) observes the 5 precepts to perfection and
has perfected confidence/faith in the teachings.  We
are told that Anathapindika was a stream-winner
himself, having become that on his first meeting with
the Buddha.  So I would guess the purpose of the sutta
was to declare for the benefit of the other 500
laypeople, and for posterity, that the attainment to
stream-entry by a layperson was every bit equal to the
same attainment by a monk, since we know that this
sort of question was and remains an issue for some.

I look forward to any comments of your own on the
sutta.

Jon



 
5231 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Sun May 13, 2001 3:49pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello everybody, I am new here

 
  AiLin

Welcome to the list.  Glad to have you with us.

--- Ai Lin Edwards  wrote:
> Hello everybody,
> 
> I am AiLin here, Eric (I know him as Sam A. Vacca at
> other forums)directed 
> me here. Thanks Eric, I eventually get through to
> this site.

It was nice of Erik to refer you here.  I think his
other name suits well (but there was a contrary view
here at one stage!).

> I am a Chinese Buddhist, practising Vipassana for
> about ten years now. I am 
> from Malaysia and get my first taste of vipassana
> under Rev. Sujiva (late 
> Mahasi Sayadaw's lineage). I do my self-study on
> buddha dhamma whenever I 
> can. I reside in Australia right now and a regular
> at both Roshi Hogen's and 
> Edepot Buddhist Discussion Forum.
> 
> I like what I see here, and will visit very often
> from now on.
> 
> I have not much to offer right now, but find useful
> information here and 
> much to chew on. I'll try to read back all previous
> posts and hopefully get 
> some answers to my questions in my mind. I'll raise
> further questions to old 
> discussion topic if you people don't mind.
>
> My warmest regards to everybody here.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> AiLin

I look forward to hearing more from you.

Jon


 
5232 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Sun May 13, 2001 4:47pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] How 'right' is our intention? (was, Introduction and a question from a new person)

 
  Howard

In a message to Sarah and Paul you said:

>        I agree with you, Paul. I found myself
> perplexed with regard to 
> several points of Khun Sujin's reported by you,
> Sarah. It seems to me that 
> what KS is talking against, and you, Paul, are
> talking in favor of, would 
> usually be considered as a simple instance of right
> intention. KS *seems* to 
> me to be following a bit of a fatalistic,
> volition-is-useless tack. Perhaps I 
> miss-read her.

This is perhaps the same point that has been the
source of some discouragement among one or two of the
members on this list.  It is indeed a difficult one to
get a handle on.  I am reminded that many
non-Buddhists seem to regard the dhamma as fatalistic
when they first hear it (just an observation, no
comparison intended here, Howard).

To say that our intentions are likely to involve
impure motives (eg. expectations and anticipation) or
to be premised on an unrealistic sense of our own
level of understanding is not to suggest that the
activity in question should not be pursued.  It should
I think be taken as a welcome reminder of our
undoubted shortcomings.  We all have the tendency to
regard a genuine interest in the dhamma as meaning
that the accumulated akusala/latent tendencies that
had previously driven our lives should cease to be the
problem they were.  Yet if we think about it for a
minute, this is unlikely to be the case. Even in a
'wholesome situation' there are bound to be the same
old unwholesome tendencies manifesting, perhaps in a
more subtle or devious form but finding an opportunity
nonetheless.  Moments of true kusala remain relatively
speaking few and far between (my own experience,
anyway).

Mistaking akusala for kusala would surely be fatal to
the development of understanding or any form of kusala
for that matter.  Could we say that a healthy
scepticism about the quality of our mind-states is a
useful attitude to have?

Jon

> 
> In a message dated 5/10/01 7:52:24 AM Eastern
> Daylight Time, 
> Paul Bail writes:
> 
> 
> > Hello dear list members,
> > 
> >     By way of introduction I am a 54 year old
> male, living on the East 
> > Coast 
> > of the United States, interested in Buddhdharma.
> In the past year I ahve 
> > become aware of some of the resources on the
> Internet, including the 
> > wonderful world of lists.
> >     I am a newcomer to this particular list,
> having recently stumbled 
> > across 
> > it due to a comment someone made on another list. 
> A few years ago I read 
> > one 
> > of Nina van Gorkom's books.  But it is only in the
> past couple of months 
> > that 
> > an interest has begun in actually studying
> Abdhidamma. Lacking the 
> > education 
> > to use the correct technical terms, I will have to
> phrase my question in 
> > everyday language.
> >     I have long been confused about the role of
> intention and effort given 
> > the fact of selflessness.  I can appreciate the
> teaching that ther is no 
> > "self" that can control one's progress on the path
> of truth.  Finding the 
> > path, finding a teacher, recognizing the truth of
> the teachings, deepening 
> > one's study, and adhering to the path all depend
> upon conditions and are 
> > not 
> > in the direct control of a self that can "make"
> one do any of the above.
> >     Still, it seems that effort and intention play
> a role in the process. 
> > The 
> > Buddha set forth the noble truth of suffering and
> its cessation as the 
> > gateway to the path.  Therefore one begins with an
> intention to end one's 
> > suffering by pursuing the eightfold path. This is
> a desire, but unlike 
> > ordinary desires, it begins to deconstruct itself
> as one glimpses the truth 
> > that in fact there is no "self" that is suffering.
> >     So, when I read the post below (# 5171) I was
> a little confused.  
> > Perhaps 
> > this is a semantic confusion, not a substantial
> one.  Hopefully someone can 
> > clarify? The post says: "If we open a sutta about
> metta with the intention 
> > to 
> > have metta, it shows the clinging to self again." 
> What is meant by this?
> >     If one starts with the desire to end
> suffering, as the Buddha suggests, 
> > and realizes that the path includes the
> accumulation of wisom *and* merit, 
> > including the cultivation of virtuous states of
> mind such as metta, then 
> > wouldn't one engage in activities that seem to
> promote the arising of 
> > metta?  
> > One could think that reading the sutta,
> contemplating it, etc. could 
> > provide 
> > conditions favorable to the arising of metta?  Of
> course, one cannot *make* 
> > metta arise by doing this.  Also it could (at
> times) be unskillful to turn 
> > to 
> > sutta reading in order to avoid investigating an
> unpleasant state of mind 
> > that is arising. 
> >     Or to take another example--dana.  One engages
> in the physical act of 
> > giving but becomes aware that a mental state of
> generosity may not be 
> > arising, or may arise momentarily and be followed
> by second-thoughts, 
> > regrets, etc.  One sees the selflessness of this
> process.  One cannot 
> > *make* 
> > generosity arise.  Nevertheless, the act of giving
> is preferable to 
> > non-giving. The intention, or wish, to cultivate
> generosity still seems to 
> > have some place in the process of the path, does
> it not?
> >     I would presume that the point is not to
> forego sutta reading, or acts 
> > of 
> > generosity.  Do you feel sutta reading is a good
> activity if done with 
> > correct understanding, not expecting it to be like
> putting a coin in a 
> > machine and getting a candy in return?
> > 
> > Paul Bail
> >     
> > ----------------
> > Sarah wrote:
> > > now if we understand the difference between
> kusala and
> > > akusala. It is important to know the intention.
> If we
> > > open a sutta about metta with the intention to
> have
> > > metta, it shows the clinging to self again. the
> > > understanding is always the key, so there can be
> > > understanding of metta when it arises naturally
> by
> > > conditions. This is the way that samtha is
> developed,
> > > not by wishing to develop it or by selecting an
> object
> > > like breath for development. There was also a 
> lot
> > > more discussion about breath as object of
> samatha.
> > 
> > 


 
5233 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Sun May 13, 2001 5:02pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] clinging to self as practice

 
  --- Joyce Short  wrote: > > 
> > This of course is fine.  There is no requirement
> here
> > to use technical terms.  Those who are familiar
> with
> > the technical terms use them because it helps
> reduce
> > uncertainty.
> 
> I thought it was insight into ultimate realities
> that "reduced" ('removed')
> uncertainty.

Joyce
You are no doubt correct.  However, I was referring to
uncertainty of expression, not uncertainty about the
nature of realities (although plenty of this too, of
course).
Jon


  Only ego can be insecure.  So - when
> one feels uncertainty -
> isn't it just feeling, feeling untill this
> dissolves- along with the "one",
> the knowing, of the object, feeling.  Could also be
> aversion, aversion one
> is noting  -but this also goes, along with the
> knower.  (Not-two)
> 
> Study of technical terms needs only be minimal. Some
> concepts not well
> expressed in English. But use of technical terms to
> reduce uncertainty?
> have I missed that Sutta?
> 
> Metta,
> 
> Joyce
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  But all approaches are welcome!
> >
> >>     I have long been confused about the role of
> >> intention and effort given
> >> the fact of selflessness.  I can appreciate the
> >> teaching that ther is no
> >> "self" that can control one's progress on the
> path
> >> of truth.  Finding the
> >> clarify? The post says: "If we open a sutta about
> >> metta with the intention to
> >> have metta, it shows the clinging to self again."
> >> What is meant by this?
> 
> Self has the habit of mis-perception of reality. 
> There is the invention of
> an object construct called "I" that grasps/reacts
> and become entangles with
> other objects. "Yours/mine".  All of this is based
> on deeply rooted desiring
> to become.  You can also say that awakening the
> desire to study the path to
> enlightenment is clinging to self.  Everything we do
> initially is this...but
> this is natural.  When one has the feeling that
> clinging or desire is
> present, just know this.  Notice the motivation of
> the desire. Is practice
> selfish? - enlightenment, kindness, happiness for
> me, kind of
> self-cultivation or do we include all other sentient
> beings?  Or is this
> desire to understand and to grow in insight coming
> itself from wisdom mind
> and thus is not ego-centered. When selfishness may
> be present, one then
> changes the aspiration.  After awhile, one may have
> started any practice
> from selfish clinging, but the practice itself will
> take the mind beyond
> this origination. Step by step we move from where we
> were, more and more
> opening to other possibilties, and not moving an
> inch from enlightened mind
> in this process..  Nothing is bad or wrong, we just
> attempt to be aware.
> When the natural intelligence of mind sees deeply
> into itself, into certain
> truths, it naturally lets go, no force needed.
> 
> So - it is useful to look at the nature of one's
> practice approach.  Does it
> come from a notion that life/self is bad and that by
> doing certain practices
> one will change things?  This is ego-striving
> practice out of aversion.
> Ditto if you focus on some great enlightenment
> somewhere in the future -
> this is greed and delusion. Most of intitial
> practice is difficult because
> where ever one really is, its can be a bit
> uncomfortable, one doesn't like
> it at all.
> 
> If the concepts and questions about "clinging to
> self" are the foremost in
> consciousness  -then take this as your meditation
> focus or object of
> contemplation.  Live with your question until at one
> point there will not be
> "two".  There will be a point of coming together of
> the contemplator and
> object of contemplation (perhaps while you are doing
> the dishes or cutting
> the grass) Then the answer or insight into what you
> are asking will arise in
> the manner which is illuminating for you.  And thus
> you see for yourself
> what is wholesome and what is not.
> 
> metta,
> 
> Joyce
> 
> Metta,
> 
> Joyce
> 



 
5234 From: bruce   
Date: Sun May 13, 2001 5:13pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] How 'right' is our intention? (was, Introduction and a question from a new person)

 
  hi jon

At 16:47 2001/05/13 +0800, you wrote:


> Mistaking akusala for kusala would surely be fatal to
> the development of understanding or any form of kusala
> for that matter.  

of course! but how are we to differentiate kusala cetana from akusala? 

bruce

 
5235 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Sun May 13, 2001 7:48pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Introduction and a question from a new person

 
  Dear Paul, Howard, Bruce & Joyce, 

This may be a little long, but I'll keep this one
pretty free of Pali and references. I hope I am not
just repeating what others have said more succinctly
and wisely!

Paul wrote:
>I can appreciate the
> teaching that there is no 
> > "self" that can control one's progress on the path
> of truth.  Finding the 
> > path, finding a teacher, recognizing the truth of
> the teachings, deepening 
> > one's study, and adhering to the path all depend
> upon conditions and are 
> > not 
> > in the direct control of a self that can "make"
> one do any of the above.

This is exactly right as I see it too!

> >     Still, it seems that effort and intention play
> a role in the process. 
> > The 
> > Buddha set forth the noble truth of suffering and
> its cessation as the 
> > gateway to the path.  Therefore one begins with an
> intention to end one's 
> > suffering by pursuing the eightfold path. This is
> a desire, but unlike 
> > ordinary desires, it begins to deconstruct itself
> as one glimpses the truth 
> > that in fact there is no "self" that is suffering.

Effort and intention do play their roles. Intention
arises at every moment and effort at most times. These
are also 'not-self' and arise according to conditions,
their particular nature at any given moment being
influenced by all the different factors at that time.

It seems to me that we hear and accept there is no
self and yet whenever there is the idea of attending
to a particular reality, observing carefully,
selecting an object, not reacting, or being aware at
every moment, that the idea of self is there again.
Focusing or strongly concentrating on an object is not
the same as being aware of what has arisen already by
conditions at this very moment. 

It is not the desire or intention to follow the
eightfold path that begins to lead to an end of
suffering, but the understanding of a reality, say
seeing or hearing or hardness now as a mental or
physical phenomena, not self.

> >     If one starts with the desire to end
> suffering, as the Buddha suggests, 
> > and realizes that the path includes the
> accumulation of wisom *and* merit, 
> > including the cultivation of virtuous states of
> mind such as metta, then 
> > wouldn't one engage in activities that seem to
> promote the arising of 
> > metta?  
> > One could think that reading the sutta,
> contemplating it, etc. could 
> > provide 
> > conditions favorable to the arising of metta?  Of
> course, one cannot *make* 
> > metta arise by doing this.  Also it could (at
> times) be unskillful to turn 
> > to 
> > sutta reading in order to avoid investigating an
> unpleasant state of mind 
> > that is arising. 

As you started off by saying, all these activities
depend on conditions and are not 'in the direct
control of a self'. There are always many skilful and
unskilful moments. The point being made was that lobha
and clinging to self are there when we wish to have
more metta or would like to end suffering. If there is
more understanding of the value of metta, there wil be
conditions to read, hear, consider more about it and
best of all to show friendliness and kindness whenever
one has an opportunity anyway. So it is the
understanding of the value, by knowing its wholesome
nature when it arises, not the wish to have metta,
which will condition metta to arise more often.

> >     Or to take another example--dana.  One engages
> in the physical act of 
> > giving but becomes aware that a mental state of
> generosity may not be 
> > arising, or may arise momentarily and be followed
> by second-thoughts, 
> > regrets, etc.  One sees the selflessness of this
> process.  One cannot 
> > *make* 
> > generosity arise. 

These are astute observations and like Rob and the
others, I appreciate your careful consideration of the
dhamma.

> Nevertheless, the act of giving
> is preferable to 
> > non-giving. The intention, or wish, to cultivate
> generosity still seems to 
> > have some place in the process of the path, does
> it not?

Exactly. The point is that there is some understanding
about the value of generosity and knowledge that even
though there are different mental states involved,
there are moments of giving to the other which should
be encouraged.

> >     I would presume that the point is not to
> forego sutta reading, or acts 
> > of 
> > generosity.  

Exactly so! the point is to understand the value of
wholesome states (however few and far between!) and to
know these and all other realities are not self, not
worthy of being clung to.

Do you feel sutta reading is a good
> activity if done with 
> > correct understanding, not expecting it to be like
> putting a coin in a 
> > machine and getting a candy in return?

Of course. Reading, hearing, considering and
developing  intellectual right understanding are
essential. Most useful of all is understanding the
reality now, whether reading a sutta, shopping or
playing tennis.


> > Sarah wrote:

> If we
> > > open a sutta about metta with the intention to
> have
> > > metta, it shows the clinging to self again. the
> > > understanding is always the key, so there can be
> > > understanding of metta when it arises naturally
> by
> > > conditions. This is the way that samtha is
> developed,
> > > not by wishing to develop it or by selecting an
> object
 
> =================================
Howard: 

>        I agree with you, Paul. I found myself
> perplexed with regard to 
> several points of Khun Sujin's reported by you,
> Sarah. It seems to me that 
> what KS is talking against, and you, Paul, are
> talking in favor of, would 
> usually be considered as a simple instance of right
> intention. KS *seems* to 
> me to be following a bit of a fatalistic,
> volition-is-useless tack. Perhaps I 
> miss-read her.
> 

Firstly, let me make it quite clear that I'm writing
according to 'my' understanding of dhamma. I am not
quoting Khun Sujin unless indicated.

The more understanding develops the more it begins to
know more and more subtle clinging and wrong view. So
what is obvious now as when Paul says 'I can
appreciate the teaching that there is no 'self' that
can control one's progress on the path of truth' was
not obvious when we first heard the Buddha's
teachings. 
 
Is it fatalistic and can generosity and metta be
developed? My experience is that the more is known and
understood about these different realities and about
the difference between say, attachment and metta or
about what generosity really is, the more conditions
there will be for these qualities to be developed.

If we just plan to be more generous but know nothing
about different mental states or about good and bad,
how can it develop? If we just wish to be a kind
person and read a sutta over and over again without
understanding the special quality of metta when there
is a chance to show kindness, will it grow?

Understanding realities as they are, as not-self, is
not fatalistic but realistic. However, if we cling to
the idea that a self can act or do something or have
more good intentions at will, it will seem this way
for sure!

When there is a moment of understanding, there is no
doubt or idea of fatalism at that moment. It can
develop and it does develop if there has been the
right considering. Personally I find it really
inspiring and encouraging and a condition to read,
consider and develop a little more metta and dana,
rather than the reverse.

As we all know, these points are not easy. I don't
wish to suggest I have all or many of the answers but
I'm just trying to share a little of how I understand
the dhamma. I'll be glad to hear any objections!

Best regards for now,

Sarah





 
5236 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Sun May 13, 2001 8:21pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello everybody, I am new here

 
  Erik

Welcome back (btw, I don't think you had mentioned you
would be away).

Thanks for sharing your experience with HH Dalai Lama.
 It was obviously quite an occasion.  I also
'anumodana' your wholesome resolution to continue
studying the Dhamma.

Jon


--- Erik wrote: >  Sarah Procter Abbott
>  
> wrote:
> > Dear Ai Lin,
> > 
> > Warmest regards and welcome to dsg. Eric has been
> > challenging us all with his debates and has become
> a
> > key participant here recently! If you start
> calling
> > him Sam, we'll now understand, thank you!! <Eric,
> the
> > twins in 'Lord of the Flies' are called Sam 'n
> Eric,
> > is this the connection??>
> 
> Sure, Sarah, you know I'm out of town and you can
> talk behind my back 
> cuz I can't defend myself! Ha! Re: Sam 'n Eric ref,
> that has occurred 
> to me more than once. I loved that book as a kid.
> 
> Just, a few minutes ago, get back from seeing His
> Holiness the Dalai 
> Lama, here in Salt Lake City. Wow. The teachings
> were on the Four 
> Noble Truths and the Paramitas, with a heavy dose of
> anatta and 
> paticca samuppada. Please understand just how big a
> head-trip this 
> has been for me to hear the profound and sublime
> teaching on ten-drel 
> (Paticca Sammupada) elaborated here in the land of
> Mormons. I never, 
> ever believed I'd see the day. I never ever believed
> I'd live to see 
> the day my own mom, a strict Mormon herself, would
> purchase tickets 
> to see His Holiness. Even the President of the
> Mormon church met with 
> the Dalai Lama and called him his "brother." This is
> PROOF miracles 
> are possible. 
> 
> As I was perusing the Visuddhimagga on the plane, I
> saw once again 
> the teaching that throughout our limitless rebirths
> that there are 
> few beings who have not been our mothers, fathers,
> brothers, sisters, 
> and given it's Mother's Day tommorrow, this
> meditation couldn't have 
> come at a better time. What a weekend!
> 
> Today's session began with the Dalai Lama praising
> the Wisdom of the 
> Theras as the foundation of all Buddhadhamma, and
> began the teaching 
> by requesting the contigent of Theravada monks
> sharing the stage with 
> him to recite verses for everyone present. To hear
> the chants of both 
> traditions echoing beside one another and the whole
> thing nearly 
> overwhelmed me with gratitude, love, and tears. And
> of course hearing 
> that from someone I consider one of my two lamas
> merely encourages my 
> further studies in the Theravada Abhidhamma to lay
> the complete 
> foundation for everything else. Just thought I'd
> write in while it's 
> all still so fresh and share this wonderful stuff
> with all here in 
> dsg.
> 
> May all beings have happiness and cause of happiness
> May all beings be free from suffering and cause of
> suffering
> May all beings neverr be separated from perfect
> happiness
> May all beings abide in perfect equanimity, free
> from the poijnsons 
> of greed, hatred, and delusion
> 



 
5237 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Sun May 13, 2001 8:28pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] notes from Bkk - the hindrances

 
  --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Sarah -
> 
> In a message dated 5/9/01 2:21:31 AM Eastern
> Daylight Time, 
> Sarah  writes:
> 
> 
> > 3. HINDRANCE to development of satipatthana. The
> only
> > hindrance is the last one, ignorance. The other
> > hindrances are to the development of samatha only.
> > 
> > 
> > 9. NIBBANA. Someone asked how a sankhara citta
> > cognizes nibbana, an asankhara reality,. Response
> 'Why
> > not?"
> > 
> ==================================
>        The above two strike me as less than optimal
> answers. # 9 simply 
> offers no explanation. Without some detailed
> clarification, # 3 appears to be 
> simply false. Sorry to be a nay-sayer, but this is
> how I see these.

On #3, see the following excerpt from the
Abhidhammattha Sangaha translation by Bhikkhu Bodhi
(CMA p. 267):

"#8:  Six hindrances:  the hindrances of (1) sensual
desire, (2) ill will, (3) sloth and torpor, (4)
restlessness and worry, (5) doubt, (6) ignorance.

Guide to #8:  The hindrances are so called because
they obstruct the way to a heavenly rebirth and to the
attainment of Nibbana.  According to the commentary
the hindrances are mental factors which prevent
unarisen wholesome states from arising and which do
not allow arisen wholesome states to endure.  The
first five hindrances are the major obstacles to the
attainment of the jhaanas, the sixth hindrance is the
major obstacle to the arising of wisdom."
[end quote]

The view generally espoused nowadays is, I believe,
that the hindrances are all hindrances to the arising
of wisdom (this view is of course consistent with the
idea that development of the jhanas is necessary for
the attainment of the path).

Jon



 
5238 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Sun May 13, 2001 8:56pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Kusala etc. - Erik

 
  Eric

Just a question on a point from your post to Joyce
that you have mentioned before.

> Hi Joyce,
> 
> You bring up the idea that Robert mentioned, the
> notion that it is 
> quite possible to become attached to kusala. I think
> it is very 
> important to be aware of what both yourself and
> Robert mention, 
> namely, not getting attached to a "doer" behind it.
> Of course this is 
> exactly the logic behind any activity from the
> perspective of 
> Prajnaparamita, and I do not disagree with you een a
> little bit on 
> this point. 
> 
> What I have been addressing, mainly, is not putting
> the cart before 
> the horse. There has to be kusala in place, first,
> before panna is 
> even remotely possible. It really is a requirement.

It seems to me that we come to this life with
accumulated tendencies (is this the same as your
'stocks of merit', I wonder?) of various kinds of
kusala, including the kusala that is panna.  [How
otherwise would a boy from a good Mormon family
gravitate to the dhamma!]  These tendencies, again
including panna, are the result of kusala
performed/developed in previous lives.  What then is
the basis for the idea that more kusala is needed
before panna can arise in this life?  The main
condition for that must surely be to meet the teaching
again in a form which is understandable to us.

Jon

> That people can 
> become attached to kusala, to me, represents a far
> less risky 
> proposition than going full-bore into the wisdom
> teachings and trying 
> to skip the dualistic realities of the Dhamma that
> distinguishes 
> between conventional phenomena based on their
> caharacteristics.
>
> It is what I perceive as a lack of balance that I am
> questioning. And 
> really, what's the worst that can happen if you
> diligently strive to 
> cultivate kusala states of mind and fail in
> awakening to supramundane 
> insight in this lifetime? I think the result is far
> better than 
> failing at BOTH kusala AND insight! At least if
> there is a large 
> stock of merit, then the conditions will certainly
> arise to come into 
> contact with the Dharma later on, and one will
> additionally encounter 
> toall the conditions necessary to practice the
> wisdom aspect of the 
> Dhamma to bring it to fruition.



 
5239 From: Erik 
Date: Sun May 13, 2001 11:02pm
Subject: Re: Kusala etc. - Erik

 
  --- Jonothan Abbott  wrote:
> Eric

Hi JonAthan, :)

> It seems to me that we come to this life with
> accumulated tendencies (is this the same as your
> 'stocks of merit', I wonder?) of various kinds of
> kusala, including the kusala that is panna.  [How
> otherwise would a boy from a good Mormon family
> gravitate to the dhamma!]  These tendencies, again
> including panna, are the result of kusala
> performed/developed in previous lives.  What then is
> the basis for the idea that more kusala is needed
> before panna can arise in this life?  The main
> condition for that must surely be to meet the teaching
> again in a form which is understandable to us.

I was referring to (and I should have been more specific) lokuttara 
panna here. Definitely one needs to have abandoned akusala to a high 
degree and have accumulated a lot of kusala. Otherwise the conditions 
won't arise to actualize this.

For example, I am thinking about yesterday's event. There were over 
ten thousand people there all listening to the sublime teachings of 
paticca samuppada. How many of those hearing those teachings 
yesterday will realize this sublime teaching directly in this 
lifetime?

It is one thing to have the kamma to hear these teachings; it is an 
entirely different thing to have all the appropriate causes and 
conditions such that one will be able to penetreate their essence.

I tend to concentrate on this wisdom aspect of the path a lot, 
because kusala is great but insufficient. But also, if one has poor 
conditions, then big stocks of merit are necessary to clear away the 
obstructions brought about by unfavorable conditions, so that one may 
find favorable enough circumstances for actual development of this 
type of wisdom. And that in itself is no small feat.

 
5240 From: Erik 
Date: Sun May 13, 2001 11:02pm
Subject: Re: Kusala etc. - Erik

 
  --- Jonothan Abbott  wrote:
> Eric

Hi JonAthan, :)

> It seems to me that we come to this life with
> accumulated tendencies (is this the same as your
> 'stocks of merit', I wonder?) of various kinds of
> kusala, including the kusala that is panna.  [How
> otherwise would a boy from a good Mormon family
> gravitate to the dhamma!]  These tendencies, again
> including panna, are the result of kusala
> performed/developed in previous lives.  What then is
> the basis for the idea that more kusala is needed
> before panna can arise in this life?  The main
> condition for that must surely be to meet the teaching
> again in a form which is understandable to us.

I was referring to (and I should have been more specific) lokuttara 
panna here. Definitely one needs to have abandoned akusala to a high 
degree and have accumulated a lot of kusala. Otherwise the conditions 
won't arise to actualize this.

For example, I am thinking about yesterday's event. There were over 
ten thousand people there all listening to the sublime teachings of 
paticca samuppada. How many of those hearing those teachings 
yesterday will realize this sublime teaching directly in this 
lifetime?

It is one thing to have the kamma to hear these teachings; it is an 
entirely different thing to have all the appropriate causes and 
conditions such that one will be able to penetreate their essence.

I tend to concentrate on this wisdom aspect of the path a lot, 
because kusala is great but insufficient. But also, if one has poor 
conditions, then big stocks of merit are necessary to clear away the 
obstructions brought about by unfavorable conditions, so that one may 
find favorable enough circumstances for actual development of this 
type of wisdom. And that in itself is no small feat.

 
5241 From: Alex 
Date: Sun May 13, 2001 11:12pm
Subject: some questions on practice: Re: Kusala etc; Re: noting "others" (?)

 
  Dear Bruce and Robert,

   While reading those excellent posts of questions and answers, I 
came up with a very naive idea.

   Let's look at a lotus flower.

   Before being a flower, it was a little bud in the muddy water.  It 
got all of the nourishments from that muddy water.  Gradually, it 
grew stronger and stronger with its not-so-pure environment.  Then, 
it rose above the water level.  Before it knows what's happening, it 
blooms into one of the most beautiful flowers in this world.

Respectfully,
Alex Tran

 
5242 From: Erik 
Date: Sun May 13, 2001 11:25pm
Subject: Re: Hello everybody, I am new here

 
  --- Robert Kirkpatrick 
 wrote:
> Dear Erik,
> This is really nice news. It sounds like the Dalai Lama might
> have preceeded you in investigating the Theravada. He is very
> understanding and evenhanded to say this.
> I guess any qualms you might have had about studying within 2
> traditions are gone, although I have a feeling that you- an
> uncommon man- had very few anyway.

It has never been a question in Tibetan Buddhism that the Theravada 
is correct Dhamma. Never. I was approaching it from that perspective 
to begin with. Also, with the intention of validating the calim that 
tnere is nothing taught there that lacks direct precedent in the 
Suttas. So far this has been confirmed in every way. The Dalai Lama 
said this exact thing again yesterday, that all the Tibetan teachings 
are points found in the Suttas which have been given greater emphasis.

To be clear, I have never had any qualms about studying Theravada, 
nor have I sought or needed anyone's approval to do so. I have always 
felt a profound connection to the Theravada (I did get my start in 
the Dhamma with Walpola Rahula's "What the Buddha Taught" after all), 
and just as great a love for it as for Tibetan Buddhism--just that my 
present accumulations mean that I have no intention of switching my 
present lineage for another. HOWEVER, that does not mean I don't want 
to understand the Theravada presentation thoroughly, and adapt what I 
am learning to forge a version of the Dhamma that works best for 
these accumulations. Which is really what each of us has to do anyway.

Thank you for your kind words, Robert, they are appreciated as always.

 
5243 From: Howard 
Date: Sun May 13, 2001 7:53pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] How 'right' is our intention? (was, Introduction and a...

 
  Hi, Jon -

In a message dated 5/13/01 4:48:39 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
Jonothan Abbott writes:


> Howard
> 
> In a message to Sarah and Paul you said:
> 
> >        I agree with you, Paul. I found myself
> > perplexed with regard to 
> > several points of Khun Sujin's reported by you,
> > Sarah. It seems to me that 
> > what KS is talking against, and you, Paul, are
> > talking in favor of, would 
> > usually be considered as a simple instance of right
> > intention. KS *seems* to 
> > me to be following a bit of a fatalistic,
> > volition-is-useless tack. Perhaps I 
> > miss-read her.
> 
> This is perhaps the same point that has been the
> source of some discouragement among one or two of the
> members on this list.  It is indeed a difficult one to
> get a handle on.  I am reminded that many
> non-Buddhists seem to regard the dhamma as fatalistic
> when they first hear it (just an observation, no
> comparison intended here, Howard).
> 
> To say that our intentions are likely to involve
> impure motives (eg. expectations and anticipation) or
> to be premised on an unrealistic sense of our own
> level of understanding is not to suggest that the
> activity in question should not be pursued.  It should
> I think be taken as a welcome reminder of our
> undoubted shortcomings.  We all have the tendency to
> regard a genuine interest in the dhamma as meaning
> that the accumulated akusala/latent tendencies that
> had previously driven our lives should cease to be the
> problem they were.  Yet if we think about it for a
> minute, this is unlikely to be the case. Even in a
> 'wholesome situation' there are bound to be the same
> old unwholesome tendencies manifesting, perhaps in a
> more subtle or devious form but finding an opportunity
> nonetheless.  Moments of true kusala remain relatively
> speaking few and far between (my own experience,
> anyway).
> 
> Mistaking akusala for kusala would surely be fatal to
> the development of understanding or any form of kusala
> for that matter.  Could we say that a healthy
> scepticism about the quality of our mind-states is a
> useful attitude to have?
> 
> Jon
> 
================================
       I have no disagreement at all with the foregoing. If that is all that 
KS was conveying then I have no problem with what she said. (I had sensed an 
odor of fatalism and near-hopelessness in her statements, but, evidentally, I 
was mistaken.)  
       There is no question that we are carrying out our practice from within 
the midst of ignorance, and this makes that practice constantly vulnerable to 
various pitfalls, some quite subtle, and, for that very reason, all the more 
dangerous. It is the fact that we are so enmeshed in ignorance that makes 
Right View, obtained from the Buddhadhamma, such an important factor of the 
Noble Eightfold Path. A true bodhisatta can probably dispense with external 
guidance to a great extent, but there are not very many such folks in the 
world ;-), and the rest of us need the sure guidance of the Dhamma at pretty 
much every step of the way

With metta,
Howard


/Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble 
in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a 
phantom, and a dream./            (From the Diamond Sutra)                    
            
                                         



 
5244 From: Howard 
Date: Sun May 13, 2001 8:17pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Introduction and a question from a new person

 
  Hi, Sarah -

In a message dated 5/13/01 7:48:45 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
Sarah  writes:


> Howard: 
> 
> >        I agree with you, Paul. I found myself
> > perplexed with regard to 
> > several points of Khun Sujin's reported by you,
> > Sarah. It seems to me that 
> > what KS is talking against, and you, Paul, are
> > talking in favor of, would 
> > usually be considered as a simple instance of right
> > intention. KS *seems* to 
> > me to be following a bit of a fatalistic,
> > volition-is-useless tack. Perhaps I 
> > miss-read her.
> > 
> 
> Firstly, let me make it quite clear that I'm writing
> according to 'my' understanding of dhamma. I am not
> quoting Khun Sujin unless indicated.
> 
> The more understanding develops the more it begins to
> know more and more subtle clinging and wrong view. So
> what is obvious now as when Paul says 'I can
> appreciate the teaching that there is no 'self' that
> can control one's progress on the path of truth' was
> not obvious when we first heard the Buddha's
> teachings. 
> 
> Is it fatalistic and can generosity and metta be
> developed? My experience is that the more is known and
> understood about these different realities and about
> the difference between say, attachment and metta or
> about what generosity really is, the more conditions
> there will be for these qualities to be developed.
> 
> If we just plan to be more generous but know nothing
> about different mental states or about good and bad,
> how can it develop? If we just wish to be a kind
> person and read a sutta over and over again without
> understanding the special quality of metta when there
> is a chance to show kindness, will it grow?
> 
> Understanding realities as they are, as not-self, is
> not fatalistic but realistic. However, if we cling to
> the idea that a self can act or do something or have
> more good intentions at will, it will seem this way
> for sure!
> 
> When there is a moment of understanding, there is no
> doubt or idea of fatalism at that moment. It can
> develop and it does develop if there has been the
> right considering. Personally I find it really
> inspiring and encouraging and a condition to read,
> consider and develop a little more metta and dana,
> rather than the reverse.
> 
> As we all know, these points are not easy. I don't
> wish to suggest I have all or many of the answers but
> I'm just trying to share a little of how I understand
> the dhamma. I'll be glad to hear any objections!
> 
> Best regards for now,
> 
> Sarah
> 
===================================
       All that you write above makes clear and good sense to me, Sarah. 
Please see my reply I just sent of a couple minutes ago to Jon on this same 
topic.
       I particularly like your writing "Understanding realities as they are, 
as not-self, is
not fatalistic but realistic. However, if we cling to the idea that a self 
can act or do something or have more good intentions at will, it will seem 
this way for sure!" 
       I agree with this. At the same time, I would caution that this correct 
statement should not be incorrectly interpreted to imply that because there 
is no self, there also is no volition or that volition, being impersonal, is 
impotent. That would be a serious mistake, for volition, rightly directed by 
the Dhamma, is a tool to help us dig ourselves out of the mire of ignorance.

With metta,
Howard


/Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble 
in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a 
phantom, and a dream./            (From the Diamond Sutra)                    
            
                                         



 
5245 From: Howard 
Date: Sun May 13, 2001 8:25pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] notes from Bkk - the hindrances

 
  Hi, Jon -

In a message dated 5/13/01 8:28:26 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
Jonothan Abbott writes:


> --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Sarah -
> > 
> > In a message dated 5/9/01 2:21:31 AM Eastern
> > Daylight Time, 
> > Sarah  writes:
> > 
> > 
> > > 3. HINDRANCE to development of satipatthana. The
> > only
> > > hindrance is the last one, ignorance. The other
> > > hindrances are to the development of samatha only.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 9. NIBBANA. Someone asked how a sankhara citta
> > > cognizes nibbana, an asankhara reality,. Response
> > 'Why
> > > not?"
> > > 
> > ==================================
> >        The above two strike me as less than optimal
> > answers. # 9 simply 
> > offers no explanation. Without some detailed
> > clarification, # 3 appears to be 
> > simply false. Sorry to be a nay-sayer, but this is
> > how I see these.
> 
> On #3, see the following excerpt from the
> Abhidhammattha Sangaha translation by Bhikkhu Bodhi
> (CMA p. 267):
> 
> "#8:  Six hindrances:  the hindrances of (1) sensual
> desire, (2) ill will, (3) sloth and torpor, (4)
> restlessness and worry, (5) doubt, (6) ignorance.
> 
> Guide to #8:  The hindrances are so called because
> they obstruct the way to a heavenly rebirth and to the
> attainment of Nibbana.  According to the commentary
> the hindrances are mental factors which prevent
> unarisen wholesome states from arising and which do
> not allow arisen wholesome states to endure.  The
> first five hindrances are the major obstacles to the
> attainment of the jhaanas, the sixth hindrance is the
> major obstacle to the arising of wisdom."
> [end quote]
> 
> The view generally espoused nowadays is, I believe,
> that the hindrances are all hindrances to the arising
> of wisdom (this view is of course consistent with the
> idea that development of the jhanas is necessary for
> the attainment of the path).
> 
> Jon
> 
=======================
       Yes. And also, also, there is a difference between "major obstacle" 
and "ONLY (my emphasis) hindrance".

With metta,
Howard


/Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble 
in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a 
phantom, and a dream./            (From the Diamond Sutra)                    
            
                                         



 
5246 From: Paul Bail 
Date: Mon May 14, 2001 9:20am
Subject: some questions on practice: Re: Kusala etc; Re: noting "others" (?)

 
  Dear Robert et al :

Just picking up one one tiny aspect of your response...I had never 
occurred to me before that animals might have a concept of self.  
Certainly they are conditioned by desire, aversion, and ignorance, 
just as humans, and are deeply conditioned to act in "self-
preservation." But I wonder if they truly have any kind of 
an "awarness" of a (false) self? 

Paul Bail


--- Robert Kirkpatrick 
 wrote> In the Mahasatipatthana sutta the 
Buddha says  
> "Gacchanto va gacchamiti pajanati = "When he is going (a
> bhikkhu) understands: 'I am going.'" 
> It perhaps sounds easy enough? Just keep attention focussed on
> the body?
> The commentary explains
> 
> "In this matter of going, readily do dogs, jackals and the like,
> know when they move on that they are moving. But this
> instruction on the modes of deportment was not given concerning
> similar awareness, because awareness of that sort belonging to
> animals does not shed the belief in a living being, does not
> knock out the percept of a soul, and neither becomes a subject
> of meditation nor the development of the Arousing of
> Mindfulness."
> 
> So the awareness in satipatthana is something that is directly
> opposed to the illusion of self that has been present for all
> these aeons.

 
5247 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Mon May 14, 2001 10:52am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] How 'right' is our intention?

 
  Hi Bruce
Nice to see you back again

--- bruce  wrote: > hi jon
> 
> At 16:47 2001/05/13 +0800, you wrote:
> 
> 
> > Mistaking akusala for kusala would surely be fatal
> to
> > the development of understanding or any form of
> kusala
> > for that matter.  
> 
> of course! but how are we to differentiate kusala
> cetana from akusala? 
> 
> bruce

I had meant to come in on your earlier posts, but ran
out of steam last night ...

Here is a question to ponder in reply to your's:  Why
is it important to be able to make this
differentiation?

Jon
5248 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Mon May 14, 2001 10:59am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The hindrances

 
  Howard

> > On #3, see the following excerpt from the
> > Abhidhammattha Sangaha translation by Bhikkhu
> Bodhi
> > (CMA p. 267):
> > 
> > "#8:  Six hindrances:  the hindrances of (1)
> sensual
> > desire, (2) ill will, (3) sloth and torpor, (4)
> > restlessness and worry, (5) doubt, (6) ignorance.
> > 
> > Guide to #8:  The hindrances are so called because
> > they obstruct the way to a heavenly rebirth and to
> the
> > attainment of Nibbana.  According to the
> commentary
> > the hindrances are mental factors which prevent
> > unarisen wholesome states from arising and which
> do
> > not allow arisen wholesome states to endure.  The
> > first five hindrances are the major obstacles to
> the
> > attainment of the jhaanas, the sixth hindrance is
> the
> > major obstacle to the arising of wisdom."
> > [end quote]
> > 
> > The view generally espoused nowadays is, I
> believe,
> > that the hindrances are all hindrances to the
> arising
> > of wisdom (this view is of course consistent with
> the
> > idea that development of the jhanas is necessary
> for
> > the attainment of the path).
> > 
> > Jon
> > 
> =======================
>        Yes. And also, also, there is a difference
> between "major obstacle" 
> and "ONLY (my emphasis) hindrance".
> 
> With metta,
> Howard

Good point, Howard.  Thanks for drawing my attention
to the significance of 'major obstacle'.  I intend to
follow up and see what the Visuddhimagga and others
have to say on the subject of the hindrances.

Jon


 
5249 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Mon May 14, 2001 2:40pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] some questions on practice: Re: Kusala etc; Re: noting "others" (?)

 
  Good question Paul. Animals don't think, I guess, in words the
way we do but they still have concepts. Thus they know who their
children are or their mate. They get frightened if they see
enemies. 
Thinking of a soul and other complex conceptual proliferations
(papanca) is perhaps the domain of humans. But animals must
still have the core papanca which mistakes concept for reality.
Because they are animals they have no way to insight paramattha
dhammas (namas and rupas) thus they must live in a world of
concept. They still have the idea, albeit not in words, that
'this is nice, that is bad' ..'that will hurt me'.
All unenlightened beings have this basic level of delusion but
humans are able to magnify and build on this and so come up with
all types of wrongview. We can even believe that comets have
aliens on them who are going to take us to a better place. Thus
I suppose a human's degree of papanca can even be more than
animals. 
Humans also have the possiblity of learning to see beyond the
shadow world of concepts and so can differentiate concept from
reality, and this is what satipatthana gradually accomplishes.

robert
--- Paul Bail wrote:
> Dear Robert et al :
> 
> Just picking up one one tiny aspect of your response...I had
> never 
> occurred to me before that animals might have a concept of
> self.  
> Certainly they are conditioned by desire, aversion, and
> ignorance, 
> just as humans, and are deeply conditioned to act in "self-
> preservation." But I wonder if they truly have any kind of 
> an "awarness" of a (false) self? 
> 
> Paul Bail
> 
> 
> --- Robert Kirkpatrick 
>  wrote> In the Mahasatipatthana sutta
> the 
> Buddha says  
> > "Gacchanto va gacchamiti pajanati = "When he is going (a
> > bhikkhu) understands: 'I am going.'" 
> > It perhaps sounds easy enough? Just keep attention focussed
> on
> > the body?
> > The commentary explains
> > 
> > "In this matter of going, readily do dogs, jackals and the
> like,
> > know when they move on that they are moving. But this
> > instruction on the modes of deportment was not given
> concerning
> > similar awareness, because awareness of that sort belonging
> to
> > animals does not shed the belief in a living being, does not
> > knock out the percept of a soul, and neither becomes a
> subject
> > of meditation nor the development of the Arousing of
> > Mindfulness."
> > 
> > So the awareness in satipatthana is something that is
> directly
> > opposed to the illusion of self that has been present for
> all
> > these aeons.
> 



 
5250 From: bruce   
Date: Mon May 14, 2001 3:29pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] How 'right' is our intention?

 
  hi jonathan

thanks for a sharp reply....


At 10:52 2001/05/14 +0800, you wrote:
> Hi Bruce
> Nice to see you back again
> 
> --- bruce  wrote: > hi jon
> > 
> > At 16:47 2001/05/13 +0800, you wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > > Mistaking akusala for kusala would surely be fatal
> > to
> > > the development of understanding or any form of
> > kusala
> > > for that matter.  
> > 
> > of course! but how are we to differentiate kusala
> > cetana from akusala? 
> > 
> > bruce
> 
> I had meant to come in on your earlier posts, but ran
> out of steam last night ...
> 
> Here is a question to ponder in reply to your's:  Why
> is it important to be able to make this
> differentiation?

well, for a start, it would certainly help to know what to cultivate and
what to avoid, re Dhammapada 14, 183:

"To avoid all evil, to cultivate good, and to cleanse one's mind -- this is
the teaching of the Buddhas."

bruce

 
5251 From: craig garner   
Date: Mon May 14, 2001 4:34pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] some questions on practice: Re: Kusala etc; Re: noting "others" (?)

 
  Dear Robert, I have a few questions why do Buddhists bow down at the feet of
a Master? or Guru? Why must the be a sign of respect and humbleness? What
could be achieved by this?

Best Wishes Craig

 
5252 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Mon May 14, 2001 5:07pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] some questions on practice: Re: Kusala etc; Re: noting "others" (?)

 
  Dear craig,
I guess everyone has a different idea about this. In Theravada
Buddhism buddhist usually bow three times when they enter a
Dhamma hall. In Thailand usually in front of the Buddha image.
And often when we go to meet the monks we bow down too. 
The monks are the representative of the ariyan sangha and should
be respected for their confidence in the Dhamma and their
development of many wholesome qualities.
The buddha image is a reminder of the Buddha and we bow down as
an outward sign of our great respect for his unlimited wisdom
and compassion. While we do so we may be focused in a wholesome
way on these virtues and so the mind is kusala.
I think the idea of a guru or master is not how we should see
our teachers of today. The Buddha was the great teacher or guru
but those who come after should be respected as followers of the
buddha who can show us what the buddha taught. 
I read that in burma in the old days the monks used to preach
holding a large fan obscuring their faces so that the listeners
would focus on the message, not the person speaking it.
 
I'd be interested to know what other members think on this
issue.
robert
--- craig garner  wrote:
> Dear Robert, I have a few questions why do Buddhists bow down
> at the feet of
> a Master? or Guru? Why must the be a sign of respect and
> humbleness? What
> could be achieved by this?
> 
> Best Wishes Craig
> 



 
5253 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Mon May 14, 2001 6:23pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Questions: Phassa, ekaggata, manasikara & Vi~n~nana

 
  Dear Howard & Num,

Back to the questions on Cetasikas. 

for anyone new to the list, cetasikas are the mental
factors which accompany the citta (consciousness) at
each moment.

There are 7 cetasikas that always arise with every
citta. these are called the 'universals'.
          ===========================

The 7 universals are:

1. Phassa (contact)
2. Vedana (feeling
3. Sanna (perception)
4. Cetana (volition)
5. Ekaggata (concentration)
6. Jivitindriya (vitality)
7. Manasikara (attention)

'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
--- Howard wrote:
>        One more point: There are certain universal
> factors which occur in any 
> act of discernment/consciousness such as phassa
> (contact), viriya (energy), 
> and sa~n~na (marking/recognizing). It almost seems
> that the co-occurrence of 
> such universal factors, as a group, constitutes by
> itself, the 
> citta/vi~n~nana. Most specifically, what I wonder
> about here is what can be 
> the difference between phassa and vi~n~nana; there
> hardly seems a be a hair's 
> difference betwen the two.
''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
I'd like to consider Num's question at the same time:
''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
Num:This a follow-up for cetasika question.  What is
the difference between 
ekaggata and manasikara cetasika??

You mentioned about phassa cetasika, I don't know
where to look for a 
detailed explanation.  
'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
Firstly, as before, I highly recommend "Cetasikas' by
Nina Van Gorkom (distributed by Wisdom bks I think).
She includes a lot of details. Most the references and
further details about the cetasikas can be found in
the visuddhimagga, Atthasalani and also Dhammasangani.

I would like to quote one paragraph from Nina's book
(p69) because I think it gives a much neater
explanation of the universals at work than I could
give. In this case, seeing-consciousness is the
vinnana or citta, the 'leader' in experiencing the
visible object. Remember the 'five
pairs'(dvipancavinnana i.e. seeing, hearing, tasting,
touching and body consciousness), are ONLY accompanied
by the universals and not by other cetasikas:

'When seeing-consciousness arises, each of the
'universals' which accompanies it performs its own
function.  Phassa which accompanies
seeing-consciousness is eye-contact
(cakkhu-samphassa).  It contacts visible object.  When
there is eye-contact there is the coinciding of
eye-base, visible object and seeing-consciousness. 
Vedana, which is in this case indifferent feeling,
experiences the 'taste' of visible object.  Sanna
'marks' and remembers visible object.  Cetana
coordinates the tasks of the accompanying dhammas.
since seeing-consciousness is vipakacita, cetana
merely coordinates, it does not 'will' kusala or
akusala.  Ekaggata performs its function of focusing
on visible object;  it does not focus on any other
object.  Jivitindriya sustains citta and the
accompanying cetasikas until they fall away. 
manasikara 'drives' citta and the accompanying
cetasikas towards visible object. 
Seeing-consciousness needs the accompanying
'universals' in order to cognize visible object;  it
could not arise and cognize its object without the
assistance of the accompanying cetasikas'.
                ======================
As Num pointed out(thanks Num) in the following quote,
phassa plays a very important role as a condition for
the citta to experience the object:
'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
In Milinda-panha book II, page 92 R.Davids 1925

Reverend Sir, what is the distinguishing
characteristic of contact (phassa)?
Touch, O king.
But give me an illustration.
It is as when two rams are butting together, O king. 
The eye should be 
regarded as one of those two, the form (object) as the
other, and the contact 
as the union of the two.
Give me further explanation
It is as when the two cymbals are clashed together.
The one is as the eye, 
the other as the object, and the junction of the two
is like contact.
Very good Nagasena.
''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

At each moment of citta, the phassa which accompanies
it is different. So eye-contact is not the same as
ear-contact and neither are the same as what we
understand conventionally as physical contact.

There was some discussion on dsg about the order of
the cetasikas given in paticca-samuppada and Dan
quoted from Narada's "Manual of Abhidhamma' which
discussed with a quote from the Atthasalani how "it is
not valid to say that 'this' arises first, 'that'
afterwards.' In fact the mental states are coesixtent
and 'it was also permissable to bring it in
thus:--There are feeling and contact, perception and
contact, feeling, volition and contact, there are
consciousness and contact, feeling, perception,
volition, initial application of mind.' "
               =====================

Interestingly, the Atthaslani (107), besides giving a
good analogy of a pillar for phassa, also discusses
why it is the first cetasika described (accompanying
cittas):

"But why is contact mentioned here first?  Because of
its being the first incidence of consciousness on an
object, and arises touching the object.  Therefore it
is mentioned first.  Touching by contact,
consciousness experiences by feeling, perceives by
perception, wills by volition.  Hence it has been
said:- 'bhikkhus, touched one feels, touched one
perceives, touched one wills.'<Sam Nik 1V 68>.
Further: just as in a palace a pillar is the strong
support to the rest of the structure, just as beams,
cross-beams, wing-supports, roof, rafters,
cross-rafters, neck-pieces arwe bound to the pillar,
fixed on the pillar, so is contact a strong support to
the co-existent and associated states.  It is like the
pillar, and the remaining states are like the rest of
the structure."
               =================

I think that phassa is a very difficult object for
awareness to be aware of. However this theoretical
understanding of the different cetasikas helps to
break down any illusion of self. Cetana, ekaggata and
manasikara arise with every citta. Thus they can be
kusala, akusala, vipaka (as in seeing) and kiriya,
depending on what 'jati'(nature) the citta is. We
begin to see, I think, that the ideas we have about
intention or attention, for example, are very
different from these realities which arise with the
citta as a result of so many different conditions.

Phassa has the function of ''coinciding' (the physical
base, object and consciousness' (Vis). Manasikara has
the function of 'joining (yoking) associate states
tothe object'(Vis), while ekaggata has 'the welding
together of the coexistent states as function' (Atth).

For awareness to grow, I don't think it's important to
pin-point the differences or to determine exactly
which cetasika is appearing now. This is bound to be
thinking only. However, it is important to understand
directly that these realities are namas which
experience an object.  There is no self to perform any
of their functions!

Best wishes for now! Num, sorry if ekaggata and
manasikara got short-changed! You're welcome to ask
for 'better value'!

Sarah

            ==========================





 
5255 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Mon May 14, 2001 8:11pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] some questions on practice: Re: Kusala etc; Re: noting "others" (?)

 
  --- bruce  wrote:
> thanks for your reply robert.  i am still not sure how one
> actually is to
> go about studying dhammas arising at the six dvara, so perhaps
> another
> question, open to all of course:
> 
> how does one know whether awareness of what is being noticed
> arises with
> panna or sati, or without?
> 
____________________________
Dear bruce,
This is the sort of question that we need the whole tipitaka to
answer but just a little..
Firstly, I think we should bear in mind that what we are trying
to understand is "the way things are" at this moment. Thus the
process is not really one of trying to change things or get
special states of mind or even to be calm. Dhammas are appearing
all the time: colour, seeing, sound, hearing, taste, tasting,
lust, lust, kindness, painful feeling, pleasant feeling, neutral
feeling, thinking, aversion. But they are obscured by avijja,
ignorance, and so they are misapprehended as permanent, self,
pleasant. Satipatthan gradually wears away this veil.
If there is satipatthana the khandas - consciousness, feeling,
sanna, sankhara and rupa are not grasped as me or mine or
permananent. Whichever of the khandas is being insighted at that
moment is not seen as my khanda but there is awareness of its
characteristic with some degree of detachment. It is just as a
scientist might look at a rock from the moon. Or as in one sutta
where the buddha pointed out some people adding grass and sticks
to a fire and asked the monks if they felt any attachment to
those sticks that were being burned. they said "No, why should
we, they are not ours or part of us". he said "and so it is
monks that the khandas are not you or yours". 
We can see that since we began our buddhist studies there is
more understanding and a little more detachment; however, there
is bound to be thinking mixed in with moments of awareness and
so it is hard to estimate how much is intellectual and how much
is direct understanding. 
When we are talking to someone are we lost in concept is or is
there also sometimes a little investigation of the
characteristic of sound  or the feelings that are arising?
Knowing that this investigation may be done with lobha(CRAVING)
or panna(wisdom) helps one to be awake to either; but
sometimes/often? we can't be sure which it was. Khun Sujin would
probably say: 'if it is not clear,  develop it until it becomes
clear.' 
Now we are thinking about Dhamma but also there must be seeing
and colour and so the difference between thinking and seeing can
be known. But if we try to force sati or catch these realities
we get it wrong and make ourselves tense.
Even a little insight makes life more understandable but it is
so difficult to really understand all these different dhammas,
it must take much time. 
Mike wrote me a note last week saying he had been feeling a lot
of aversion to someone but then he remembered that there is only
namas and rupas, thus what was there to be averse with, Sound or
colour? Even just reflecting in this wise way removes anger.
Seeing it at deeper levels must be more calming. Still even
sotapanna and sakadagami have dosa (aversion)because their
insight isn't perfected, so we don't have to feel bad if we are
not perfect models of Buddhist saints.
robert


 
5256 From: Herman 
Date: Mon May 14, 2001 8:40pm
Subject: some questions on practice: Re: Kusala etc; Re: noting "others" (?)

 
  Hi everyone,

There is at least a tenth of an inch difference between being and 
knowing, and therefore they are worlds apart.

Being requires no effort, no input. In practise, any imagined effort 
or imagined input will create a reflexive, self-based, partial and 
false reality.

Knowing is reflexive being, a replay with commentary using freeze 
frames and slo mo.

Whatever happens at the gates requires no intervention, no analyis. 
Suchness is excellent.

Beyond , beyond ............
no words no meaning no being
blissssssssss


This is probably not doctrinally correct, but experience precedes 
classification of experience (theory) by at least a tenth of an inch.

Now does samatha precede vipasanna or vice versa or .... 

As long as you're thinking about it it doesn't really matter, coz it 
won't be relevant.


With lovingkindness

Herman



--- Robert Kirkpatrick 
 wrote:
> Bruce,
> this is the million dollar question. I'll leave it to other
> wiser members for now and maybe have a comment or two later.
> robert
> --- bruce  wrote:
> > thanks for your reply robert.  i am still not sure how one
> > actually is to
> > go about studying dhammas arising at the six dvara, so perhaps
> > another
> > question, open to all of course:
> > 
> > how does one know whether awareness of what is being noticed
> > arises with
> > panna or sati, or without?
> > 
> > bruce
> > 

 
5257 From: craig garner   
Date: Mon May 14, 2001 9:05pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] some questions on practice: Re: Kusala etc; Re: noting "others" (?)

 
  Thanks Robert that was a lovely heartly explanation, and I appreciate your
answer. With  mindfullnes we should know when to bow down. I feel it is a
matter of respect, rather than worship. So I bow down to you with metta
Craig.
----- Original Message -----
From: Robert Kirkpatrick 
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2001 11:07 AM
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] some questions on practice: Re: Kusala etc;
Re: noting "others" (?)

 
5258 From: Desmond Chiong   
Date: Mon May 14, 2001 10:41pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] noting "others" (?)

 
  "In this direct awareness the nature of both the phenomena and the
awareness can be seen by the "experiencer"." [Joyce]

You are enlightened, Joyce.

mudita,
des



>From: "Joyce Short" 
>Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] noting "others" (?)
>Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 09:10:27 -0400
>
>
> >> <<<<
> >> 6. Rob & Num were asking about what is meant by
> >> 'contemplating the EXTERNAL mental objects'. This
> >> refers to awareness of thinking (one's 'own').
> >> Thinking can think about 'external objects' and take
> >> them for being something as wrong view has not been
> >> eradicated.
> >> >>>>
> >>
> >>  So it does not mean anohet's another person's citta
> >> or thought and feeling.
> >> It still means our own mental processes which think
> >> of external object??
>
>Contemplation of the body, sensations, mind (mental states) and mental
>objects (mental contents) are the Four Foundations within "this full fathom
>long body."
>
>"Contemplating the body IN the body...the sensations IN the 
>sensations..etc.
>What is to be practiced is pure, non-reactive mindfulness i.e. as clear and
>full an awareness as possible (ardently and clearly comprehending) of
>whatever is present NOW in the area selected for observation, without going
>off into a  tangeant into other more or less relevent mental associations
>(feelings, thoughts, value judgments, imaginings)  All noted in ones own
>body-mind continuum only.
>
>"Fare along contemplating the body in the body, but do not apply yourself 
>to
>a train of thought connected to the body; fare along contemplating the
>sensations in the sensations....the mind in the mind...,metal objects in
>mental objects, but do not apply yourself to the train of thought connected
>with sensations...the mind...mental objects. -Dantabhumisutta (M.125)When
>
>So  - all investigation is into one's own package of body-mind only.  This
>is done ardently, not with a great deal of tension and effort, but
>"ardently" in the full meaning of this word.  Think of really being close
>enough with the other/object to close the gap and then be one/unity) 
>Clearly
>comprehendending - getting the practice really clear. See each arising
>really clearly what ever it may be.  What is an "object?" What is mental
>content?  And how does one note?  Here one notices keenly, sharply like an
>arrow shot to its target. Noting the object AS it occurs.  Thus mind is not
>going off into tangental thinking. ie.  noting rising of abdomen  (mental
>associating ...."hmm, wonder if Im doing this right? Hmm, breath seems
>shallow to day, wonder if Im sick"...and so on) What is happening to the
>object one is noting? and so on. Is it staying around? Not?
>
>So, constant awareness, moment to moment, whatever one is doing and with an
>interested, alert, welcoming attitude.
>
>Contemplation of "others mental processes" is actually, "imagining,
>imagining". Thinking about external objects or internal objects is
>"thinking, thinking" the focus of attention is attending here. The purpose
>is to gain complete, immediate and direct awareness of all phenomena as 
>they
>arise. In this direct awareness the nature of both the phenomena and the
>awareness can be seen by the "experiencer".
>
>Thus you will see for yourself..."Only when you know for yourselves: "These
>things are unwholesome and lead to harm and suffering...and these things 
>are
>wholesome... and lead to welfare and happiness, THEN you should abandoned
>(the unwholeseome things) then you should practice and dwell upon the
>wholesome things." (A.3.65)
>
>Metta,
>
>Joyce
>


 
5259 From: Desmond Chiong   
Date: Mon May 14, 2001 10:48pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] How 'right' is our intention? (was, Introduction and a question from a new person)

 
  Your own mindfulness, through practice of vipassana meditation; not someone 
else.

karuna,
des


>From: bruce 
>Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] How 'right' is our intention? (was, 
>Introduction and a question from a new person)
>Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 18:13:18 +0900
>
>hi jon
>
>At 16:47 2001/05/13 +0800, you wrote:
>
>
> > Mistaking akusala for kusala would surely be fatal to
> > the development of understanding or any form of kusala
> > for that matter.
>
>of course! but how are we to differentiate kusala cetana from akusala?
>
>bruce
>


 
5260 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Tue May 15, 2001 7:42am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Questions: Phassa, ekaggata, manasikara & Vi~n~nana

 
  One small correction:

--- Sarah Procter Abbott 
wrote: 

> ......... Remember the 'five
> pairs'(dvipancavinnana i.e. seeing, hearing,
> tasting,
> touching and body consciousness), 

This should have read:

............Remember the 'five pairs'(dvipancavinnana
i.e. seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and
body-consciousness),

These cittas are vipaka cittas that can be either
kusala (wholesome) or akusala (unwholesome). Hence the
'five pairs'.

Sarah


 
5261 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Tue May 15, 2001 8:58am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] some questions on practice: Re: Kusala etc; Re: noting "others" (?)

 
  --- craig garner  wrote:
> With  mindfullnes we should know when to bow down. I
> feel it is a
> matter of respect, rather than worship. So I bow down to you
> with metta
> Craig.
> ----- 
Thank you Craig,
And I bow down to you with respect and metta.
robert


 
5262 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Tue May 15, 2001 3:24pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: notes from Bkk- Kom & Num

 
  Dear Kom,

Good to see you back in good form!

--- Kom Tukovinit  wrote:
> 
> Thanks for following up.  I still don't think K.
> Num's question was 
> answered (unless K. Num says otherwise!).  

Hmmmmm, well, Num wondered:

>>  'Is hair, eye, or skin color is result of
> > kamma.  Or when it's said 
> > that to be born with good looking appearance is a
> > result of kamma.  If kamma 
> > can be cause of only 9 kammaja-rupa as above, how 
> you
> > explain it?'.

The point is that it is not only the  9 kammaja rupa
that are conditioned by kamma, but also the other
rupas that arise with them at these times. The 9
kammaja rupa ONLY arise from kamma as samutthana.

As we know, we can speculate for ever about exactly
what conditions are at work at any given moment and
your comments below are all very pertinent in this
regard. You may wish to take this up further in India,
but I wonder if it isn't in danger of becoming 'an
imponderable'? What is important is what can be
experienced at this moment and how the knowledge helps
this I think. So now seeing sees visible object and
because of the sanna (perception) and thinking there
is the idea of a good-looking person or good skin
colour. Like you say, many conditions work together to
affect the rupas which we take for the hair colour at
this moment including kamma and ahara and utu. 

> My understanding is that each rupa kalapa that we
> may consider "our" 
> rupa has one of the following as samuthana:
> 1) Kamma 
> 2) Utu 
> 3) Ahara
> 4) Citta 

yes!
 
> a) It is exceedingly difficult (impossible for me!)
> to differentiate among = 
> these rupas.  For example, when we see the vanna
> that "is part of" our 
> hand, which samuthana does it have?

One reason it is exceedingly difficult (read
impossible) to differentiate between the samuthanas
and the the various rupas which make up 'our hand' is
because what can be known directly is only that which
is experienced. So seeing can be known, vanna (visible
object) can be known while looking at 'the hand'.
Thinking can be known. Even hardness/softness, motion
and heat/cold can be known while looking at it.

You have studied more than any of us about the complex
conditions at play in order for that visible object to
be experienced at that very moment and how different
it is from the visible object at the next moment.
Knowing the realities is what is important here I
feel.
 
> b) In the human plane, each one of us has only 7
> types of kalapas that 
> has Kamma as the samuthana.  This counts out the
> Jivithindriya kalapa 
> (even though all other 8 kalapas also have
> Jivithindriya rupa), and one of =
> 
> the Bhava Kalapa (unless you are of two sexes)..

yes!
 
> c) Out of the seven, 5 occur at very specific places
> in our body.  The 5 
> includes: eye sense, ear sense, smell sense, taste
> sense, and hadaya-
> rupa.  The other two including Bhava rupa and
> Kaya-pasada rupa are 
> spreaded all over your body, internal and external.

yes!
 
> d) The speculation of how Kamma can influence one's
> look is via the two 
> rupas that are spreaded throughout your body.  
> Although a hair 
> probably mostly comprises of Utuja-rupa, but in the
> beginning when 
> there are still "live" cells, its looks may be
> highly influenced by Kamma-
> rupas.  Furthermore, some of the continuing Utuja
> rupas have, as 
> samuthana, the utu rupa that is part of the kamma
> kalapa.

The point here was that the kalapa also consists of
other rupas (including vanna) which are also
determined by kamma and support and influence each
other.
> 
> e) One's look is not influenced by Kamma alone.  For
> example, Buddha 
> is supposed to have unparalleled beauty.  However,
> when he was going 
> through dukkha-kiriya-practice, he ate so little
> that he was no longer 
> beautiful.  His Ahara-ja rupa cancelled out the
> beauty in the Kammaja-
> rupa.  Some people don't look so pretty when they
> get angry or greedy.  
> Some people don't look so pretty when they are cold
> or hot.

Yes, I agree with most your points. So many different
conditions at work. 

Of course, if there is no seeing now, no visible
object, no sanna about the object and no thinking
about how pretty or ugly someone is!

Kom, I know you'll let me know if I've missed the
point or got the details wrong. This is a tricky area
for me and as i mentioned KS didn't elaborate, I
suspect because it seemed more academic and less
concerned with the development of satipatthana.

Sarah

 p.s. 
Num, when I'm feeling brave and have 'caught up', I'll
also try to get back to your other 2 earlier questions
in this thread....about the twins and being woke up in
the night (if Kom already did so, perhaps you can
share that first!)




 
5263 From: bruce   
Date: Tue May 15, 2001 7:07pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] some questions on practice: Re: Kusala etc; Re: noting "others" (?)

 
  hi robert

thanks so much for your "just a little"...i guess i have some pretty strong
lobha for your explanations, and hope others on the list find them as lucid
and helpful as i do....

re:
> Knowing that this investigation may be done with lobha(CRAVING)
> or panna(wisdom) helps one to be awake to either; but
> sometimes/often? we can't be sure which it was. Khun Sujin would
> probably say: 'if it is not clear,  develop it until it becomes
> clear.' 

but that's where i get stuck...if all dhammas except nibbana are
conditioned (i'm going on saddha with this, of course), then thinking one
can develop anything seems like an exercise in micchaditthi....

can the path be developed? or do we just leave it up to (for lack of a
better f-word) "fate"?  

howard, i know you've considered this quandry.....how does one reconcile
the seeming fatalism inherent in anatta 
("no-one-driving") with the fact that we are constantly urged that it is to
our benefit to develop any number of faculties ("sharp-curve-ahead!")....

curious about everyone's thoughts here...

bruce


At 05:11 2001/05/14 -0700, you wrote:
> --- bruce  wrote:
> > thanks for your reply robert.  i am still not sure how one
> > actually is to
> > go about studying dhammas arising at the six dvara, so perhaps
> > another
> > question, open to all of course:
> > 
> > how does one know whether awareness of what is being noticed
> > arises with
> > panna or sati, or without?
> > 
> ____________________________
> Dear bruce,
> This is the sort of question that we need the whole tipitaka to
> answer but just a little..
> Firstly, I think we should bear in mind that what we are trying
> to understand is "the way things are" at this moment. Thus the
> process is not really one of trying to change things or get
> special states of mind or even to be calm. Dhammas are appearing
> all the time: colour, seeing, sound, hearing, taste, tasting,
> lust, lust, kindness, painful feeling, pleasant feeling, neutral
> feeling, thinking, aversion. But they are obscured by avijja,
> ignorance, and so they are misapprehended as permanent, self,
> pleasant. Satipatthan gradually wears away this veil.
> If there is satipatthana the khandas - consciousness, feeling,
> sanna, sankhara and rupa are not grasped as me or mine or
> permananent. Whichever of the khandas is being insighted at that
> moment is not seen as my khanda but there is awareness of its
> characteristic with some degree of detachment. It is just as a
> scientist might look at a rock from the moon. Or as in one sutta
> where the buddha pointed out some people adding grass and sticks
> to a fire and asked the monks if they felt any attachment to
> those sticks that were being burned. they said "No, why should
> we, they are not ours or part of us". he said "and so it is
> monks that the khandas are not you or yours". 
> We can see that since we began our buddhist studies there is
> more understanding and a little more detachment; however, there
> is bound to be thinking mixed in with moments of awareness and
> so it is hard to estimate how much is intellectual and how much
> is direct understanding. 
> When we are talking to someone are we lost in concept is or is
> there also sometimes a little investigation of the
> characteristic of sound  or the feelings that are arising?
> Knowing that this investigation may be done with lobha(CRAVING)
> or panna(wisdom) helps one to be awake to either; but
> sometimes/often? we can't be sure which it was. Khun Sujin would
> probably say: 'if it is not clear,  develop it until it becomes
> clear.' 
> Now we are thinking about Dhamma but also there must be seeing
> and colour and so the difference between thinking and seeing can
> be known. But if we try to force sati or catch these realities
> we get it wrong and make ourselves tense.
> Even a little insight makes life more understandable but it is
> so difficult to really understand all these different dhammas,
> it must take much time. 
> Mike wrote me a note last week saying he had been feeling a lot
> of aversion to someone but then he remembered that there is only
> namas and rupas, thus what was there to be averse with, Sound or
> colour? Even just reflecting in this wise way removes anger.
> Seeing it at deeper levels must be more calming. Still even
> sotapanna and sakadagami have dosa (aversion)because their
> insight isn't perfected, so we don't have to feel bad if we are
> not perfect models of Buddhist saints.
> robert
 
 

5264 From: Herman 
Date: Tue May 15, 2001 8:05pm
Subject: some questions on practice: Re: Kusala etc; Re: noting "others" (?)

 
  Hi Bruce, Robert et al,

--- bruce  wrote:
> hi robert
> 
> 
> howard, i know you've considered this quandry.....how does one 
reconcile
> the seeming fatalism inherent in anatta 
> ("no-one-driving") with the fact that we are constantly urged that 
it is to
> our benefit to develop any number of faculties ("sharp-curve-
ahead!")....
> 
> curious about everyone's thoughts here...
> 
> bruce
> 
The social reality of mankind is the most significant reality that 
mankind contends with. It is the driving force in our continuing 
evolution, man learning to cope with man, ad infinitum.

Language is a social medium. It is a means of exchange between human 
beings. It is social glue.

Human beings uttering speech or thinking speech (thinking) whilst 
they are alone or not attempting to communicate with another human 
being is a neuroticism, behaviour taken out of a relevant context and 
thus a dysfunctional activity.

Thought, unspoken speech, implies society. 

Reality at a social level is real enough. Society is not 
comprehended, however, in terms of atoms. Neither are atoms 
comprehended in terms of society. 

"Nibbana" as a subject of conversation is a social reality.
"Cittas" as a subject of conversation are a social reality.
"Nama/Rupa" as a subject of conversation are social realities.

Fatalism / free will are social stories, the subject of chattering, 
chattering, chattering.

The awareness of ultimate realities does not arise in a social 
setting.
The people who have told you about Nibbana have left wives, children, 
fathers, mothers, houses, property. They have isolated themselves 
from all interaction with others for days, months, years. They have 
left society. They have stilled the social mind, they have eliminated 
the social conditioning.

There is only one voice. It will be heard when there is silence.


With lovingkindness


Herman

 
5265 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Tue May 15, 2001 10:05pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] some questions on practice: Re: Kusala etc; Re: noting "others" (?)

 
  Dear bruce,
Your interest encourages me to write some more. Anatta is the
core of the Buddha's teaching and so is hard to fathom.
Visudd. XViii31 "The mental and physical (nama and rupa) are
really here, but here no human being is to be found, for it is
void and merely fashioned like a doll;just suffering piled up
like grass and sticks"
Do we think in this way yet? It is not so easy even to reflect
in such a manner; hence we should expect that deeper insight
into nama and rupa takes time.
xix19 "there is no doer of a deed or one who reaps the fruit;
phenomena alone flow on- no other view than this is right"

XX47 talks about sankhara khanda (the agrregate of formations)
this includes all cetasikas except feeling and sanna. It
includes sati, intention, effort, metta, dosa etc.
"they are void of the possibilty of any power being exercised
over them, they are therefore not-self beacuse void, because
owner less, because unsusceptible to the weilding of power, and
because of precluding a self".
This last quote may disturb some because if nothing is
controllable then "what the hell can we do?!!!" This sort of
reaction is rooted in "we" - it comes from an assumption of self
and control. 
Now for the good news: vis.xvi "there IS a path but no goer".

This round of births and deaths is beginningless. However, it is
not random in any sense. Because of conditions birth occurs in
one plane and because of different conditions birth occurs in
another plane. Panna (wisdom) is a conditioned phenomena and it
is itself conditioned. 
What are the conditions for panna to develop : hearing the
Dhamma, considering it, applying it and also accumulations of
merit from the infinite past (pubekata punnata). Why are we so
interested in Dhamma? Why isn't the leader of the Taliban
interested; surely he makes effort, surely he has the intention
to do what is best? Why do some people hear Dhamma but find it
unappealing while others can't get enough even after hearing it
just once? Why are some initially not interested and then later
they get interested and surpass in understanding those who
studied much longer? It is clear that there must be reasons for
all this; and the Dhamma explains it all. 
 
You wrote "that's where i get stuck...if all dhammas except
nibbana
> are
> conditioned (i'm going on saddha with this, of course), then
> thinking one
> can develop anything seems like an exercise in
> micchaditthi....

_________________
Good point. I think it depends on the thinking. If we have the
idea of "I can do it", then we are likely to be caught in self
view. Or we think we can manufacture sati by effort or good
intention - self. But there can be wisdom - not us- that sees
the danger in samasara and thus there is naturally effort that
arises with that understanding. It is subtle: often we slip into
self view; either towards the freewill end of the continuum or
towrds the fatalistic end that thinks nothing can be done.   

____________________________

> 
> can the path be developed? or do we just leave it up to (for
> lack of a
> better f-word) "fate"? ""
__________________
Fate implies a preordained outcome. In that case whether we did
this that or the other nothing would make a thread of
difference. We could go out and kill and pillage and nothing
would have any effect and we would all get enlightened or not
get enlightened depending on our "fate". This is not what the
Buddha taught. He explained in detail many different conditions.
It is true that some are past conditions but there are also
present ones thus it is not fatalism. Both the idea of fatalism
and the idea of freewill are bound up in self view - a self who
can control and a self who can't. The Dhamma is the middle way
and is neither.
When we hear a teacher like sujin say "develop it" this can be a
condition for either wrong effort or right effort. It depends on
the understanding of the listener.
I think we all have vastly different accumulations and so we
have to learn what is most suitable each for his own. For me
when I first saw the nature of the mind I realized
how powerful ignorance and desire were and I became
frightened by these powerful energies. I just wanted to stop
them - but without wisdom.
It was because I didn't understand
anatta. Later, I understood that defilements 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 to understand conditions and to see that there is nobody at
all doing anything. 
This doesn't mean that nothing is being done. In the Majjhima
Nikaya 148
Chachakka Sutta
The Blessed One said: "The six internal media should be known.
The six external media should be known. The six classes of
consciousness should be known. The six classes of contact should
be known. The six classes of feeling should be known. The six
classes of CRAVING should be known."

Note that it says the six classes of craving should be known. I
think this is important. Most of us are very keen to get the
stage where all craving is gone but first it should be
understood. If we are afraid of it (as I was) then it is not
possible to insight it. Craving, as much as other dhammas, can
be an object for understanding. if it is seen through the lens
of anatta it is not mistaken for "my" craving and so its true
characteristic can be seen. 

Later the sutta says:

"'The six classes of craving should be known.' Thus it was said.
In reference to what was it said? Dependent on the eye & forms
there arises consciousness at the eye. The meeting of the three
is contact. With contact as a requisite condition there is
feeling. With feeling as a requisite condition there is
craving." and it repeats for the other senses. 

"If anyone were to say, 'The eye is the self,' that wouldn't be
tenable. The arising & falling away of the eye are discerned.
And when its arising & falling away are discerned, it would
follow that 'My self arises & falls away.' That's why it
wouldn't be tenable if anyone were to say, 'The eye is the
self.' So the eye is not-self. ......
If anyone were to say, 'Craving is the self,' that wouldn't be
tenable. The arising & falling away of craving are discerned.
And when its arising & falling away are discerned, it would
follow that 'My self arises & falls away.' That's why it
wouldn't be tenable if anyone were to say, 'Craving is the
self.' Thus the eye is not-self, forms are not-self,
consciousness at the eye is not-self, contact at the eye is
not-self, feeling is not self, craving is not-self. "


robert



5266 From: Alex 
Date: Tue May 15, 2001 10:47pm
Subject: some questions on practice: Re: Kusala etc; Re: noting "others" (?)

 
  Dear Robert,

   Wonderful as usual! Sadhu...

Alex

--- Robert Kirkpatrick 
 wrote:
> Dear bruce,
> Your interest encourages me to write some more. Anatta is the
> core of the Buddha's teaching and so is hard to fathom.
> Visudd. XViii31 "The mental and physical (nama and rupa) are
> really here, but here no human being is to be found, for it is
> void and merely fashioned like a doll;just suffering piled up
> like grass and sticks"
> Do we think in this way yet? It is not so easy even to reflect
> in such a manner; hence we should expect that deeper insight
> into nama and rupa takes time.
> xix19 "there is no doer of a deed or one who reaps the fruit;
> phenomena alone flow on- no other view than this is right"
> 
> XX47 talks about sankhara khanda (the agrregate of formations)
> this includes all cetasikas except feeling and sanna. It
> includes sati, intention, effort, metta, dosa etc.
> "they are void of the possibilty of any power being exercised
> over them, they are therefore not-self beacuse void, because
> owner less, because unsusceptible to the weilding of power, and
> because of precluding a self".
> This last quote may disturb some because if nothing is
> controllable then "what the hell can we do?!!!" This sort of
> reaction is rooted in "we" - it comes from an assumption of self
> and control. 
> Now for the good news: vis.xvi "there IS a path but no goer".
> 
> This round of births and deaths is beginningless. However, it is
> not random in any sense. Because of conditions birth occurs in
> one plane and because of different conditions birth occurs in
> another plane. Panna (wisdom) is a conditioned phenomena and it
> is itself conditioned. 
> What are the conditions for panna to develop : hearing the
> Dhamma, considering it, applying it and also accumulations of
> merit from the infinite past (pubekata punnata). Why are we so
> interested in Dhamma? Why isn't the leader of the Taliban
> interested; surely he makes effort, surely he has the intention
> to do what is best? Why do some people hear Dhamma but find it
> unappealing while others can't get enough even after hearing it
> just once? Why are some initially not interested and then later
> they get interested and surpass in understanding those who
> studied much longer? It is clear that there must be reasons for
> all this; and the Dhamma explains it all. 
>  
> You wrote "that's where i get stuck...if all dhammas except
> nibbana
> > are
> > conditioned (i'm going on saddha with this, of course), then
> > thinking one
> > can develop anything seems like an exercise in
> > micchaditthi....
> 
> _________________
> Good point. I think it depends on the thinking. If we have the
> idea of "I can do it", then we are likely to be caught in self
> view. Or we think we can manufacture sati by effort or good
> intention - self. But there can be wisdom - not us- that sees
> the danger in samasara and thus there is naturally effort that
> arises with that understanding. It is subtle: often we slip into
> self view; either towards the freewill end of the continuum or
> towrds the fatalistic end that thinks nothing can be done.   
> 
> ____________________________
> 
> > 
> > can the path be developed? or do we just leave it up to (for
> > lack of a
> > better f-word) "fate"? ""
> __________________
> Fate implies a preordained outcome. In that case whether we did
> this that or the other nothing would make a thread of
> difference. We could go out and kill and pillage and nothing
> would have any effect and we would all get enlightened or not
> get enlightened depending on our "fate". This is not what the
> Buddha taught. He explained in detail many different conditions.
> It is true that some are past conditions but there are also
> present ones thus it is not fatalism. Both the idea of fatalism
> and the idea of freewill are bound up in self view - a self who
> can control and a self who can't. The Dhamma is the middle way
> and is neither.
> When we hear a teacher like sujin say "develop it" this can be a
> condition for either wrong effort or right effort. It depends on
> the understanding of the listener.
> I think we all have vastly different accumulations and so we
> have to learn what is most suitable each for his own. For me
> when I first saw the nature of the mind I realized
> how powerful ignorance and desire were and I became
> frightened by these powerful energies. I just wanted to stop
> them - but without wisdom.
> It was because I didn't understand
> anatta. Later, I understood that defilements 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 to understand conditions and to see that there is nobody at
> all doing anything. 
> This doesn't mean that nothing is being done. In the Majjhima
> Nikaya 148
> Chachakka Sutta
> The Blessed One said: "The six internal media should be known.
> The six external media should be known. The six classes of
> consciousness should be known. The six classes of contact should
> be known. The six classes of feeling should be known. The six
> classes of CRAVING should be known."
> 
> Note that it says the six classes of craving should be known. I
> think this is important. Most of us are very keen to get the
> stage where all craving is gone but first it should be
> understood. If we are afraid of it (as I was) then it is not
> possible to insight it. Craving, as much as other dhammas, can
> be an object for understanding. if it is seen through the lens
> of anatta it is not mistaken for "my" craving and so its true
> characteristic can be seen. 
> 
> Later the sutta says:
> 
> "'The six classes of craving should be known.' Thus it was said.
> In reference to what was it said? Dependent on the eye & forms
> there arises consciousness at the eye. The meeting of the three
> is contact. With contact as a requisite condition there is
> feeling. With feeling as a requisite condition there is
> craving." and it repeats for the other senses. 
> 
> "If anyone were to say, 'The eye is the self,' that wouldn't be
> tenable. The arising & falling away of the eye are discerned.
> And when its arising & falling away are discerned, it would
> follow that 'My self arises & falls away.' That's why it
> wouldn't be tenable if anyone were to say, 'The eye is the
> self.' So the eye is not-self. ......
> If anyone were to say, 'Craving is the self,' that wouldn't be
> tenable. The arising & falling away of craving are discerned.
> And when its arising & falling away are discerned, it would
> follow that 'My self arises & falls away.' That's why it
> wouldn't be tenable if anyone were to say, 'Craving is the
> self.' Thus the eye is not-self, forms are not-self,
> consciousness at the eye is not-self, contact at the eye is
> not-self, feeling is not self, craving is not-self. "
> 
> 
> robert
> 


 
5267 From: bruce   
Date: Wed May 16, 2001 6:05pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] some questions on practice: Re: Kusala etc; Re: noting "others" (?)

 
  what a great reply robert, thanks so much....very much worth re-reading few
times...

bruce




At 07:05 2001/05/15 -0700, you wrote:
> Dear bruce,
> Your interest encourages me to write some more. Anatta is the
> core of the Buddha's teaching and so is hard to fathom.
> Visudd. XViii31 "The mental and physical (nama and rupa) are
> really here, but here no human being is to be found, for it is
> void and merely fashioned like a doll;just suffering piled up
> like grass and sticks"
> Do we think in this way yet? It is not so easy even to reflect
> in such a manner; hence we should expect that deeper insight
> into nama and rupa takes time.
> xix19 "there is no doer of a deed or one who reaps the fruit;
> phenomena alone flow on- no other view than this is right"
> 
> XX47 talks about sankhara khanda (the agrregate of formations)
> this includes all cetasikas except feeling and sanna. It
> includes sati, intention, effort, metta, dosa etc.
> "they are void of the possibilty of any power being exercised
> over them, they are therefore not-self beacuse void, because
> owner less, because unsusceptible to the weilding of power, and
> because of precluding a self".
> This last quote may disturb some because if nothing is
> controllable then "what the hell can we do?!!!" This sort of
> reaction is rooted in "we" - it comes from an assumption of self
> and control. 
> Now for the good news: vis.xvi "there IS a path but no goer".
> 
> This round of births and deaths is beginningless. However, it is
> not random in any sense. Because of conditions birth occurs in
> one plane and because of different conditions birth occurs in
> another plane. Panna (wisdom) is a conditioned phenomena and it
> is itself conditioned. 
> What are the conditions for panna to develop : hearing the
> Dhamma, considering it, applying it and also accumulations of
> merit from the infinite past (pubekata punnata). Why are we so
> interested in Dhamma? Why isn't the leader of the Taliban
> interested; surely he makes effort, surely he has the intention
> to do what is best? Why do some people hear Dhamma but find it
> unappealing while others can't get enough even after hearing it
> just once? Why are some initially not interested and then later
> they get interested and surpass in understanding those who
> studied much longer? It is clear that there must be reasons for
> all this; and the Dhamma explains it all. 
>  
> You wrote "that's where i get stuck...if all dhammas except
> nibbana
> > are
> > conditioned (i'm going on saddha with this, of course), then
> > thinking one
> > can develop anything seems like an exercise in
> > micchaditthi....
> 
> _________________
> Good point. I think it depends on the thinking. If we have the
> idea of "I can do it", then we are likely to be caught in self
> view. Or we think we can manufacture sati by effort or good
> intention - self. But there can be wisdom - not us- that sees
> the danger in samasara and thus there is naturally effort that
> arises with that understanding. It is subtle: often we slip into
> self view; either towards the freewill end of the continuum or
> towrds the fatalistic end that thinks nothing can be done.   
> 
> ____________________________
> 
> > 
> > can the path be developed? or do we just leave it up to (for
> > lack of a
> > better f-word) "fate"? ""
> __________________
> Fate implies a preordained outcome. In that case whether we did
> this that or the other nothing would make a thread of
> difference. We could go out and kill and pillage and nothing
> would have any effect and we would all get enlightened or not
> get enlightened depending on our "fate". This is not what the
> Buddha taught. He explained in detail many different conditions.
> It is true that some are past conditions but there are also
> present ones thus it is not fatalism. Both the idea of fatalism
> and the idea of freewill are bound up in self view - a self who
> can control and a self who can't. The Dhamma is the middle way
> and is neither.
> When we hear a teacher like sujin say "develop it" this can be a
> condition for either wrong effort or right effort. It depends on
> the understanding of the listener.
> I think we all have vastly different accumulations and so we
> have to learn what is most suitable each for his own. For me
> when I first saw the nature of the mind I realized
> how powerful ignorance and desire were and I became
> frightened by these powerful energies. I just wanted to stop
> them - but without wisdom.
> It was because I didn't understand
> anatta. Later, I understood that defilements 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 to understand conditions and to see that there is nobody at
> all doing anything. 
> This doesn't mean that nothing is being done. In the Majjhima
> Nikaya 148
> Chachakka Sutta
> The Blessed One said: "The six internal media should be known.
> The six external media should be known. The six classes of
> consciousness should be known. The six classes of contact should
> be known. The six classes of feeling should be known. The six
> classes of CRAVING should be known."
> 
> Note that it says the six classes of craving should be known. I
> think this is important. Most of us are very keen to get the
> stage where all craving is gone but first it should be
> understood. If we are afraid of it (as I was) then it is not
> possible to insight it. Craving, as much as other dhammas, can
> be an object for understanding. if it is seen through the lens
> of anatta it is not mistaken for "my" craving and so its true
> characteristic can be seen. 
> 
> Later the sutta says:
> 
> "'The six classes of craving should be known.' Thus it was said.
> In reference to what was it said? Dependent on the eye & forms
> there arises consciousness at the eye. The meeting of the three
> is contact. With contact as a requisite condition there is
> feeling. With feeling as a requisite condition there is
> craving." and it repeats for the other senses. 
> 
> "If anyone were to say, 'The eye is the self,' that wouldn't be
> tenable. The arising & falling away of the eye are discerned.
> And when its arising & falling away are discerned, it would
> follow that 'My self arises & falls away.' That's why it
> wouldn't be tenable if anyone were to say, 'The eye is the
> self.' So the eye is not-self. ......
> If anyone were to say, 'Craving is the self,' that wouldn't be
> tenable. The arising & falling away of craving are discerned.
> And when its arising & falling away are discerned, it would
> follow that 'My self arises & falls away.' That's why it
> wouldn't be tenable if anyone were to say, 'Craving is the
> self.' Thus the eye is not-self, forms are not-self,
> consciousness at the eye is not-self, contact at the eye is
> not-self, feeling is not self, craving is not-self. "
> 
> 
> robert

 
5268 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Wed May 16, 2001 6:20pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] some questions on practice: Re: Kusala etc; Re: noting "others" (?)

 
  Dear Alex and Bruce,
thanks for your kind words and always looking forward to your
valuable input.
robert
--- bruce  wrote:
> what a great reply 


 
5269 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Wed May 16, 2001 10:38pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] How 'right' is our intention?

 
  Bruce

Sorry to have taken so long to get back to you.  I
have limited time during the week to do any posting.

I did not mean to suggest in my post that knowing the
difference between kusala and akusala mind-states was
something that we can or should be doing.  My point
was that we should avoid the danger of thinking we can
when in fact we can't.

In your earlier posts you asked about studying the
present moment, and investigating the dhammas at the
six doors.  As Robert so well explained, studying the
present moment involves the study of any reality that
appears at the present moment.  In this regard, mind
states are no more suitable or valuable an object
than, say, sound;  any reality is equally valuable as
object of some awareness of the present moment.

We may be inclined to think that mind-states are
particularly worth knowing because then we can have
more kusala.  This is true if by kusala one means less
attachment to sensuous objects, less dosa etc.  But it
is not the right condition for developing kusala of
the level of satipatthana, the kind of kusala that
helps to eradicate wrong view.

Jon


--- bruce  wrote: > hi
jonathan
> 
> thanks for a sharp reply....
> 
> 
> At 10:52 2001/05/14 +0800, you wrote:
> > Hi Bruce
> > Nice to see you back again
> > 
> > --- bruce  wrote: > hi
> jon
> > > 
> > > At 16:47 2001/05/13 +0800, you wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > Mistaking akusala for kusala would surely be
> fatal
> > > to
> > > > the development of understanding or any form
> of
> > > kusala
> > > > for that matter.  
> > > 
> > > of course! but how are we to differentiate
> kusala
> > > cetana from akusala? 
> > > 
> > > bruce
> > 
> > I had meant to come in on your earlier posts, but
> ran
> > out of steam last night ...
> > 
> > Here is a question to ponder in reply to your's: 
> Why
> > is it important to be able to make this
> > differentiation?
> 
> well, for a start, it would certainly help to know
> what to cultivate and
> what to avoid, re Dhammapada 14, 183:
> 
> "To avoid all evil, to cultivate good, and to
> cleanse one's mind -- this is
> the teaching of the Buddhas."
> 
> bruce
> 



 
5270 From: Howard 
Date: Wed May 16, 2001 9:41pm
Subject: Some thoughts on Absences and the Importance of Concepts

 
  Hi, all -

       I was reading a newspaper article that referred to a "Sherlock 
Holmes"story entitled 'Silver Blaze', which got me to thinking. The story 
involved the theft of a horse. A main clue for Sherlock Holmes was a dog that 
had been on the scene but apparently had *not* barked. Holmes inferred that 
the thief must have been known by the dog, else he would have barked. Thus, 
the NON-occurrence of an event, an ABSENCE, was what was important. Holmes 
would not have inferred this had he not known that barking was to be expected.
       This reminded me of the many times in various suttas that the Buddha 
pointed out that something was "not evident" or "not seen" as a means of 
saying that there is no such thing. To realize that something is "not 
evident" or "not seen" it is not good enough to see what *is* present, but 
also to see that none of what is present is that "missing thing". In order to 
do that, a clear, well understood *concept* of the missing something is 
required. To get down to the main point: When engaged in vipassana 
meditation, it is not enough, it would seem, to clearly see what elements do 
arise, but also to see quite clearly that none of these conditioned dhammas 
satisfy the *concept* of self. One has to have it clear in mind what 'self' 
is in order to observe that it is "not evident" and "not seen". One needs to 
know that whatever is 'self' is permanent, unconditioned, satisfactory, etc.

With metta,
Howard

/Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble 
in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a 
phantom, and a dream./            (From the Diamond Sutra)                    
            
                                         



 
5271 From: Herman 
Date: Thu May 17, 2001 8:35am
Subject: Re: Some thoughts on Absences and the Importance of Concepts

 
  Hi Howard and everyone,

That is a very interesting issue you raise here. I have wondered 
along similar lines, and have not yet gotten anywhere with it.

If I could piggyback what I believe to be a relevant question onto 
your post?

Can the absence or lack  of a specific cause be a contributing factor 
to a result?

For example, is it meaningful to say that ignorance arises due to 
lack of insight? Or what about vice versa, does insight arise due to 
lack of ignorance? Darkness through absence of light? Light through 
absence of darkness?

Is it reasonable to say that I am alive because I didn't get knocked 
over by either the car that was at the intersection, or all the cars 
that weren't there?

With Kind Regards

Herman









--- Howard wrote:
> Hi, all -
> 
>        I was reading a newspaper article that referred to 
a "Sherlock 
> Holmes"story entitled 'Silver Blaze', which got me to thinking. The 
story 
> involved the theft of a horse. A main clue for Sherlock Holmes was 
a dog that 
> had been on the scene but apparently had *not* barked. Holmes 
inferred that 
> the thief must have been known by the dog, else he would have 
barked. Thus, 
> the NON-occurrence of an event, an ABSENCE, was what was important. 
Holmes 
> would not have inferred this had he not known that barking was to 
be expected.
>        This reminded me of the many times in various suttas that 
the Buddha 
> pointed out that something was "not evident" or "not seen" as a 
means of 
> saying that there is no such thing. To realize that something 
is "not 
> evident" or "not seen" it is not good enough to see what *is* 
present, but 
> also to see that none of what is present is that "missing thing". 
In order to 
> do that, a clear, well understood *concept* of the missing 
something is 
> required. To get down to the main point: When engaged in vipassana 
> meditation, it is not enough, it would seem, to clearly see what 
elements do 
> arise, but also to see quite clearly that none of these conditioned 
dhammas 
> satisfy the *concept* of self. One has to have it clear in mind 
what 'self' 
> is in order to observe that it is "not evident" and "not seen". One 
needs to 
> know that whatever is 'self' is permanent, unconditioned, 
satisfactory, etc.
> 
> With metta,
> Howard
> 
> /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, 
a bubble 
> in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering 
lamp, a 
> phantom, and a dream./            (From the Diamond 
Sutra)                    
>             

 
5272 From: Howard 
Date: Thu May 17, 2001 6:08am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Some thoughts on Absences and the Importance of Co...

 
  Hi, Herman -

In a message dated 5/16/01 8:37:02 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
Herman writes:


> Hi Howard and everyone,
> 
> That is a very interesting issue you raise here. I have wondered 
> along similar lines, and have not yet gotten anywhere with it.
> 
> If I could piggyback what I believe to be a relevant question onto 
> your post?
> 
> Can the absence or lack  of a specific cause be a contributing factor 
> to a result?
> 
> For example, is it meaningful to say that ignorance arises due to 
> lack of insight? Or what about vice versa, does insight arise due to 
> lack of ignorance? Darkness through absence of light? Light through 
> absence of darkness?
> 
> Is it reasonable to say that I am alive because I didn't get knocked 
> over by either the car that was at the intersection, or all the cars 
> that weren't there?
> 
> With Kind Regards
> 
> Herman
> 
=============================
       What you write about here is related, tangentially, to what I wrote. 
It picks up on one element of what I was discussing, and brings it to the 
fore. I think the question you raise is interesting. If formulated carefully, 
I think that the answer is probably a positive one; that is, yes, there are 
negative causes. Not only that. There are stranger things - for example, the 
future can affect the present!! What do I mean by that? Well, for example, in 
many languages, how one pronounces part of a sentence may depend on what will 
be following it! Likewise, the tone in one part of a piece of music can be 
affected by what is to follow! Causality is fascinating and rather complex I 
think.

With metta,
Howard


/Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble 
in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a 
phantom, and a dream./            (From the Diamond Sutra)                    
            
                                         



 
5273 From: Herman 
Date: Thu May 17, 2001 0:09pm
Subject: Re: Some thoughts on Absences and the Importance of Concepts

 
  Hi Howard,

I find the issue you have raised fascinating, and very diffficult to 
get my head around. I am going to sit and think for a while. 
Hopefully you or some other bright spark on the list can illuminate 
further.

I get stuck on "not". Negating is a purely mental function. There are 
no nots out there, knocking at the gates. Yet understanding, insight 
seems to depend as much on what is there as what is absent, as you 
point out.

Thanks and Regards


Herman

--- Howard wrote:
> Hi, all -
> 
>        I was reading a newspaper article that referred to 
a "Sherlock 
> Holmes"story entitled 'Silver Blaze', which got me to thinking. The 
story 
> involved the theft of a horse. A main clue for Sherlock Holmes was 
a dog that 
> had been on the scene but apparently had *not* barked. Holmes 
inferred that 
> the thief must have been known by the dog, else he would have 
barked. Thus, 
> the NON-occurrence of an event, an ABSENCE, was what was important. 
Holmes 
> would not have inferred this had he not known that barking was to 
be expected.
>        This reminded me of the many times in various suttas that 
the Buddha 
> pointed out that something was "not evident" or "not seen" as a 
means of 
> saying that there is no such thing. To realize that something 
is "not 
> evident" or "not seen" it is not good enough to see what *is* 
present, but 
> also to see that none of what is present is that "missing thing". 
In order to 
> do that, a clear, well understood *concept* of the missing 
something is 
> required. To get down to the main point: When engaged in vipassana 
> meditation, it is not enough, it would seem, to clearly see what 
elements do 
> arise, but also to see quite clearly that none of these conditioned 
dhammas 
> satisfy the *concept* of self. One has to have it clear in mind 
what 'self' 
> is in order to observe that it is "not evident" and "not seen". One 
needs to 
> know that whatever is 'self' is permanent, unconditioned, 
satisfactory, etc.
> 
> With metta,
> Howard
> 
> /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, 
a bubble 
> in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering 
lamp, a 
> phantom, and a dream./            (From the Diamond 
Sutra)                    
>             

 
5274 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Thu May 17, 2001 3:18pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Kusala etc.- Erik

 
  Dear Erik,

I've got several posts of yours on front of me which
I'd like to comment on. If you don't mind, I think
I'll use a number and point system.

1. Firstly I'd like to add that I really appreciated
your comments and notes from the D.L.'s visit to Salt
Lake. It sounded really excellent. I hope your mother
found it useful too. I was also impressed that you
were reading the Visuddhimagga on the plane!
          ----------
2. I thought Joyce asked some valid questions but I
felt your responses (below) did not give justice to
your very proficient debating skills! I would also
like to point out that until right understanding is
well developed, there cannot be any direct experience
of dukkha in essence!

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Joyce: > Who? is working diligently, becoming aware of
its arising etc.

Eric: Who indeed? And yet, there is the experience of
dukkha.

J. >  And what is
> arising whatever surely just arises, endures and
then dissolves on 
its own
> accord?  

E. Nevertheless, there is the experience of dukkha.

J. > Who is placing a value judgment on any arising
and when is this
> judgment noted. Surely all this is occurring after
the event?  Is 
this
> noted? How is one noting "conceptuality" without
clinging?

E. Nevertheless, there is the experience of dukkha.
etc
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,  
          ----------
3. You mention (in the same post) that 'in nibbana
there is no duaality nor dukkha...' but I beleive the
rest of us were talking about NOW....! The same
applies to samatha and jhana.. what about now? Is
there any understanding of samatha now?
          ----------
4. Eric, you wrote the following in response to my
'note' about samatha development:

Sarah: >This is the way that samtha is developed,
> not by wishing to develop it or by selecting an
object
> like breath for development. There was also a  lot
> more discussion about breath as object of samatha.

Eric: I have to disagree with this. Mere attention to
the breath is 
sufficient to engender samatha--if one can maintain
that attention  
properly. All one needs to do is remain concentrated
on the breath 
long enough, without too much tension, gently bringing
the mind back 
again and again if it wanders, and it just works
(assuming one has 
pacified really coarse junk through sila prior to
this). Eventually 
things settle, and awareness becomes concentrated.
This serves as the 
foundation for the jhanas. Once samatha is established
this way then 
upcara is nearly automatic, because the mind "unifies"
in 
concentration. It is "as easy as falling off a log"
(to quote a 
Tibetan commentator) if done this way. <end quote>
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

This is interesting and curious. Firstly, samatha
bhavana is a way of cultivating kusala (skilful)
cittas (consciousness). The calm which is developed in
samatha has to be wholesome and yet as Bruce and
others have recently pointed out, it is extremely
difficult to know exactly when the citta is kusala and
when it is akusala. For example, indifferent feeling
can arise with attachment and always arises with
ignorance. So only right understanding can know the
difference.

So, only if there is right understanding of the
charcteristic of calm and of the meditation subject
are there conditions for samatha to develop. When one
tries hard to concentrate, there can so easily be
attachment, aversion or ignorance. There may even be
wrong view if one thinks of it as one's own
concentration. In fact I would say that if samatha is
being developed, there is no need to think of
concentration. It (ekaggagata cetasika) arises with
every citta anyway.

We know from the Visuddhimagga that breath as an
object of samatha development is extremely difficult.
If it is not developed in the right way, it cannot be
considered as samatha bhavana. If we wish to watch it,
it will be clinging for sure. I have not read anything
in the Tipitaka to support the idea that the
development of any kind of kusala is 'as easy as
falling off a log' at any stage. My experience,
studies and any understanding suggest quite the
contrary!
          ----------

5. Eric, I'm now skipping to the end of your post as I
think the vipaka question was dealt with for now by
you and Rob and this is in danger of turning into
another over-long post!

> My opinion would be that worrying a lot about
> lokuttarra panna--if 
> there is not skill enough for at least upcara
> samadhi--is a waste of 
> time other than for getting rid of the grossest
> intellectual flavors 
> of miccha-ditthi (which of course is always
> beneficial). To do 
> emphasize wisdom at the expanse of merit (or vice
> versa) is like 
> trying to fly with a broken wing. The Buddha's
> formualation, in 
> order, consists of dana, sila, samadhi, panna. Until
> the sila part is 
> well-established, there is no hope of samadhi.
> Likewise, without 
> samadhi, there is no hope of concentrating the mind
> enough to 
> thoroughly penetrate the lakkhanas of dhammas.
> 
> Thoughts, comments?

I assure you that I spend no time at all 'worrying
about lokuttara panna'!! My interest (theoretical and
practical) is very much related to realities at this
moment!!

With this in mind,  I am very interested to hear and
understand more about all kinds of kusala as well as
any other realities appearing now. I am also very
interested in the development of any kind of kusala
that there is an opportunity for at this moment. As we
know, only a sotapanna keeps even the 5 precepts
perfectly. Does this mean there should be no
consideration or development of samatha or vipassana
until this time? How is the very highly developed
wisdom of the sotapanna developed if there isn't a
start now? All realities are conditioned and anatta as
you know. If there is the idea of selecting a kind of
kusala to develop now or any idea of 'ordering'
realities, doesn't this show the clinging to self?
          ----------> 

> As always, appreciate the wonderful dialogues here.
>
Me too! You keep us all busy and challenged here, Eric
and I really am grateful for that!! thank you also for
reading my notes from Bangkok so carefully which I had
thought would only be of interest to a very few.

Best wishes as always,

Sarah

p.s. I don't think you replied to my (some time ago)
last 'present moment' post to you..I take it that
meant you were in full agrement??? ;-))

          ----------




 
5275 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Fri May 18, 2001 2:35pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Some thoughts on Absences and the Importance of Concepts

 
  Howard

An interesting idea, and I admire the lateral thinking
that led you to make this connection.

--- Howard wrote: > Hi, all -
> 
>        I was reading a newspaper article that
> referred to a "Sherlock 
> Holmes"story entitled 'Silver Blaze', which got me
> to thinking. The story 
> involved the theft of a horse. A main clue for
> Sherlock Holmes was a dog that 
> had been on the scene but apparently had *not*
> barked. Holmes inferred that 
> the thief must have been known by the dog, else he
> would have barked. Thus, 
> the NON-occurrence of an event, an ABSENCE, was what
> was important. Holmes 
> would not have inferred this had he not known that
> barking was to be expected.
>        This reminded me of the many times in various
> suttas that the Buddha 
> pointed out that something was "not evident" or "not
> seen" as a means of 
> saying that there is no such thing. To realize that
> something is "not 
> evident" or "not seen" it is not good enough to see
> what *is* present, but 
> also to see that none of what is present is that
> "missing thing". 

But I would question what follows next.

In order to 
> do that, a clear, well understood *concept* of the
> missing something is 
> required. To get down to the main point: When
> engaged in vipassana 
> meditation, it is not enough, it would seem, to
> clearly see what elements do 
> arise, but also to see quite clearly that none of
> these conditioned dhammas 
> satisfy the *concept* of self. One has to have it
> clear in mind what 'self' 
> is in order to observe that it is "not evident" and
> "not seen". One needs to 
> know that whatever is 'self' is permanent,
> unconditioned, satisfactory, etc.

It's not so much that something is missing, or that
for example one needs to have a clear idea of what the
concept of self is.  The problem is rather that we
have a firmly entrenched but incorrect (and often
unrecognised) idea that needs to be exposed to the
light of insight.  The 'missing something' is never
more than a thought-moment away.

No doubt there is a wealth of material in the Sherlock
Holmes series that could be made relevant.  A
dispeller of delusion, in his own way.

Jon


 
5276 From: Howard 
Date: Fri May 18, 2001 8:15pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Some thoughts on Absences and the Importance of Concepts

 
  Hi, Jon -

In a message dated 5/18/01 2:37:50 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
Jonothan Abbott writes:


> Howard
> 
> An interesting idea, and I admire the lateral thinking
> that led you to make this connection.
> 
> --- Howard wrote: > Hi, all -
> > 
> >        I was reading a newspaper article that
> > referred to a "Sherlock 
> > Holmes"story entitled 'Silver Blaze', which got me
> > to thinking. The story 
> > involved the theft of a horse. A main clue for
> > Sherlock Holmes was a dog that 
> > had been on the scene but apparently had *not*
> > barked. Holmes inferred that 
> > the thief must have been known by the dog, else he
> > would have barked. Thus, 
> > the NON-occurrence of an event, an ABSENCE, was what
> > was important. Holmes 
> > would not have inferred this had he not known that
> > barking was to be expected.
> >        This reminded me of the many times in various
> > suttas that the Buddha 
> > pointed out that something was "not evident" or "not
> > seen" as a means of 
> > saying that there is no such thing. To realize that
> > something is "not 
> > evident" or "not seen" it is not good enough to see
> > what *is* present, but 
> > also to see that none of what is present is that
> > "missing thing". 
> 
> But I would question what follows next.
> 
> In order to 
> > do that, a clear, well understood *concept* of the
> > missing something is 
> > required. To get down to the main point: When
> > engaged in vipassana 
> > meditation, it is not enough, it would seem, to
> > clearly see what elements do 
> > arise, but also to see quite clearly that none of
> > these conditioned dhammas 
> > satisfy the *concept* of self. One has to have it
> > clear in mind what 'self' 
> > is in order to observe that it is "not evident" and
> > "not seen". One needs to 
> > know that whatever is 'self' is permanent,
> > unconditioned, satisfactory, etc.
> 
> It's not so much that something is missing, or that
> for example one needs to have a clear idea of what the
> concept of self is.  The problem is rather that we
> have a firmly entrenched but incorrect (and often
> unrecognised) idea that needs to be exposed to the
> light of insight.  The 'missing something' is never
> more than a thought-moment away.
> 
> No doubt there is a wealth of material in the Sherlock
> Holmes series that could be made relevant.  A
> dispeller of delusion, in his own way.
> 
> Jon
> 
=================================
       I'd like to comment on your statement: 

       "It's not so much that something is missing, or that for example one 
needs to have a clear idea of what the concept of self is.  The problem is 
rather that we have a firmly entrenched but incorrect (and often 
unrecognised) idea that needs to be exposed to the light of insight.  The 
'missing something' is never more than a thought-moment away."

       What I meant was that our idea of 'self' is inchoate, generally not 
being much more than a *sense* of 'self'. Actually, when you say that we have 
an entrenched, incorrect, and often unrecognized idea that needs to be 
brought to light, I don't think that what we are thinking is all that 
different! 
       Without becoming clear in our own mind exactly what we *mean* by 
'self', we make ourselves even more vulnerable to our grasping after some 
anchor. In that case, no matter how many dhammas we see to be impermanent, 
unsatisfactory, impersonal, and insubstantial, we still grasp for something 
*else* that can be a "center", an "anchor", a "safe haven", perhaps some 
unseen, indescribable Brahman, for example. As I see it, we won't be willing 
to thoroughly LET GO until we are fully sure that there IS no 'self' to cling 
to. To see that something does not exist, we must know clearly what we mean 
by such a thing, else we continue to hope, search, to cling, because our 
deep-seated tendencies are exactly that, deep-seated.

With metta,
Howard
       


/Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble 
in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a 
phantom, and a dream./            (From the Diamond Sutra)                    
            
                                         



 
5277 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Sat May 19, 2001 9:01am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Some thoughts on Absences and the Importance of Concepts

 
  Howard

>        What I meant was that our idea of 'self' is
> inchoate, generally not 
> being much more than a *sense* of 'self'. Actually,
> when you say that we have 
> an entrenched, incorrect, and often unrecognized
> idea that needs to be 
> brought to light, I don't think that what we are
> thinking is all that 
> different! 
>        Without becoming clear in our own mind
> exactly what we *mean* by 
> 'self', we make ourselves even more vulnerable to
> our grasping after some 
> anchor. In that case, no matter how many dhammas we
> see to be impermanent, 
> unsatisfactory, impersonal, and insubstantial, we
> still grasp for something 
> *else* that can be a "center", an "anchor", a "safe
> haven", perhaps some 
> unseen, indescribable Brahman, for example. As I see
> it, we won't be willing 
> to thoroughly LET GO until we are fully sure that
> there IS no 'self' to cling 
> to. To see that something does not exist, we must
> know clearly what we mean 
> by such a thing, else we continue to hope, search,
> to cling, because our 
> deep-seated tendencies are exactly that,
> deep-seated.

I think the texts may give a more direct relationship
between the development of understanding of the
characteristic of realities and the erosion of the
concept of ‘self’ than you suggest (if I have
understood you correctly, Howard).  

As I recall, the simile is given of light dispelling
darkness etc., ie. the one necessarily results in the
other.  It is not as though we have to develop panna
*and* learn to let go of the idea of self – the latter
is a necessary and inevitable consequence of the
former.  Panna is a total antidote!

Sorry, but no references to hand.  Can anyone assist
here?

Jon


 
5278 From: Howard 
Date: Sat May 19, 2001 9:35am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Some thoughts on Absences and the Importance of Concepts

 
  Hi, Jon -

In a message dated 5/18/01 10:09:23 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
Jonothan Abbott writes:


> Howard
> 
> >        What I meant was that our idea of 'self' is
> > inchoate, generally not 
> > being much more than a *sense* of 'self'. Actually,
> > when you say that we have 
> > an entrenched, incorrect, and often unrecognized
> > idea that needs to be 
> > brought to light, I don't think that what we are
> > thinking is all that 
> > different! 
> >        Without becoming clear in our own mind
> > exactly what we *mean* by 
> > 'self', we make ourselves even more vulnerable to
> > our grasping after some 
> > anchor. In that case, no matter how many dhammas we
> > see to be impermanent, 
> > unsatisfactory, impersonal, and insubstantial, we
> > still grasp for something 
> > *else* that can be a "center", an "anchor", a "safe
> > haven", perhaps some 
> > unseen, indescribable Brahman, for example. As I see
> > it, we won't be willing 
> > to thoroughly LET GO until we are fully sure that
> > there IS no 'self' to cling 
> > to. To see that something does not exist, we must
> > know clearly what we mean 
> > by such a thing, else we continue to hope, search,
> > to cling, because our 
> > deep-seated tendencies are exactly that,
> > deep-seated.
> 
> I think the texts may give a more direct relationship
> between the development of understanding of the
> characteristic of realities and the erosion of the
> concept of ‘self’ than you suggest (if I have
> understood you correctly, Howard).  
> 
> As I recall, the simile is given of light dispelling
> darkness etc., ie. the one necessarily results in the
> other.  It is not as though we have to develop panna
> *and* learn to let go of the idea of self – the latter
> is a necessary and inevitable consequence of the
> former.  Panna is a total antidote!
> 
> Sorry, but no references to hand.  Can anyone assist
> here?
> 
> 
====================================
       I *do* understand what you are saying, and you might be entirely 
correct. I can certainly conceive ot it being quite possible that even 
without a clear, fully conscious understanding of the deep-seated concept of 
'self', the direct experiencing of conditioned dhammas as not remaining, 
ungraspable, unsatisfactory, impersonal, and insubstantial would lead to a 
disenchantment and a distaste sufficient to cause a radical letting go of 
them and a consequent moment of path consciousness which would then uproot 
certain defilements, *remove* the belief in 'self', and seriously *shake* the 
sense of 'self'.
       In hypothesizing that it might be necessary to have a fully clear 
understanding of the concept of 'self' in order to disabuse ourselves of it I 
was extrapolating from more mundane areas of our lives. An example, albeit 
dramatic and outlandish, of my thinking would be: To establish that the Loch 
Ness Monster does not exist, one could thoroughly dredge the Loch with the 
most sophisticated equipment, and discover that there was no Loch Ness 
Monster to be found. That, however, would work only if one knew what the Loch 
Ness monster was supposed to look like! The same applies to looking for the 
yeti in the Himalayas. One has to know that it's not supposed to just be a 
giant sherpa in a fur coat, for example, in order to know that there is no 
yeti to be found. One would really need to know that it is supposed to be an 
ape-like hominid. Perhaps, however, such methodological extrapolation isn't 
valid in the case of such a fundamental matter as 'self'. 
       I share in your wish for someone to address this issue on the basis of 
material drawn from the Tipitaka.

With metta,
Howard


/Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble 
in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a 
phantom, and a dream./            (From the Diamond Sutra)                    
            
                                         
 
5279 From: Howard 
Date: Sat May 19, 2001 8:12pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Some thoughts on Absences and the Importance of Concepts

 
  Hi again, Jon -

In a message dated 5/19/01 1:37:38 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Howard 
writes:


> I *do* understand what you are saying, and you might be entirely 
> correct. I can certainly conceive ot it being quite possible that even 
> without a clear, fully conscious understanding of the deep-seated concept 
> of 
> 'self', the direct experiencing of conditioned dhammas as not remaining, 
> ungraspable, unsatisfactory, impersonal, and insubstantial would lead to a 
> disenchantment and a distaste sufficient to cause a radical letting go of 
> them and a consequent moment of path consciousness which would then uproot 
> certain defilements, *remove* the belief in 'self', and seriously *shake* 
> the 
> sense of 'self'.
> 
=============================
       One more point I'd like to make: Even if having the concept of 'self' 
held completely clearly and up-front in the mind is not *necessary* to free 
ourselves from delusion, it is still *useful* to not keep that concept as an 
unexamined one, but rather to examine it carefully (as with all our 
concepts), making it as clearly understood as possible. Clarity at all 
levels, including the conceptual level, is important I think. In fact, 
wouldn't clarity at the conceptual level be an aspect of "clear 
comprehension"?

With metta,
Howard


/Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble 
in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a 
phantom, and a dream./            (From the Diamond Sutra)                    
            
                                         



 
5280 From: Erik 
Date: Sun May 20, 2001 2:48am
Subject: Re: Kusala etc.- Erik

 
  --- Sarah Procter Abbott  
wrote:

Hi Sarah,

> 1. Firstly I'd like to add that I really appreciated
> your comments and notes from the D.L.'s visit to Salt
> Lake. It sounded really excellent. I hope your mother
> found it useful too. I was also impressed that you
> were reading the Visuddhimagga on the plane!

My mom did find it useful, I think. At least she knows this isn't some
bizarre nut-cult after hearing the teachings on compassion and seeing 
the response (sold out for months in advance, for example). She said 
that what she heard from "Ethics for a New Millenium," his talk of 
that evening, perfectly resonated with her views, and has even said 
she's proud of my choosing this path, in spite of her beliefs. So in 
all, I'd say that things went quite well. Re: Visuddhimagga, I can 
thank Robert for giving me the inspiration to read it cover to cover, 
which I am doing now.

> 3. You mention (in the same post) that 'in nibbana
> there is no duality nor dukkha...' but I beleive the
> rest of us were talking about NOW....! The same
> applies to samatha and jhana.. what about now? Is
> there any understanding of samatha now?

Understanding "now" in which sense? Namas and rupas that arise in the 
moment? In the Tibetan teachings, for example, such practice is said 
to only lead to a lower level of insight, something termed "subtle 
impermenance," which is distinguished from lokuttara nana. This 
knowledge is considered a precursor for lokuttara nana.

This understanding is not only restricted to the Tibetans, it seems. 
Thanissaro Bikkhu notes that:

"This line of questioning is part of a strategy leading to a level of 
knowledge called "knowing and seeing things as they actually are 
(yatha-bhuta-ñana-dassana)," where things are understood in terms of 
a fivefold perspective: their arising, their passing away, their 
drawbacks, their allure, and the escape from them -- the escape, 
here, lying in dispassion. 

"Some commentators have suggested that, in practice, this fivefold
perspective can be gained simply by focusing on the arising and 
passing away of these aggregates in the present moment; if one's 
focus is relentless enough, it will lead naturally to a knowledge of 
drawbacks, allure, and escape, sufficient for total release. The 
texts, however, don't support this reading, and practical experience 
would seem to back them up. As MN 101 points out, individual 
meditators will discover that, in some cases, they can develop 
dispassion for a particular cause of stress simply by watching it 
with equanimity; but in other cases, they will need to make a 
conscious exertion to develop the dispassion that will provide an 
escape. The discourse is vague -- perhaps deliberately so -- as to 
which approach will work where. This is something each meditator must 
test for him or herself in practice."

>           ----------
> 4. Eric, you wrote the following in response to my
> 'note' about samatha development:
>
> Sarah: >This is the way that samtha is developed,
> > not by wishing to develop it or by selecting an
> object
> > like breath for development. There was also a  lot
> > more discussion about breath as object of samatha.
>
> Eric: I have to disagree with this. Mere attention to
> the breath is
> sufficient to engender samatha--if one can maintain
> that attention
> properly. All one needs to do is remain concentrated
> on the breath
> long enough, without too much tension, gently bringing
> the mind back
> again and again if it wanders, and it just works
> (assuming one has
> pacified really coarse junk through sila prior to
> this). Eventually
> things settle, and awareness becomes concentrated.
> This serves as the
> foundation for the jhanas. Once samatha is established
> this way then
> upcara is nearly automatic, because the mind "unifies"
> in
> concentration. It is "as easy as falling off a log"
> (to quote a
> Tibetan commentator) if done this way. <end quote>
> ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
>
> This is interesting and curious. Firstly, samatha
> bhavana is a way of cultivating kusala (skilful)
> cittas (consciousness). The calm which is developed in
> samatha has to be wholesome and yet as Bruce and
> others have recently pointed out, it is extremely
> difficult to know exactly when the citta is kusala and
> when it is akusala. For example, indifferent feeling
> can arise with attachment and always arises with
> ignorance. So only right understanding can know the
> difference.
>
> So, only if there is right understanding of the
> charcteristic of calm and of the meditation subject
> are there conditions for samatha to develop. When one
> tries hard to concentrate, there can so easily be
> attachment, aversion or ignorance.

Other than noting potential pitfalls in meditation, I am not sure 
what you're getting at here. I am assuming anyone with appropriate 
instruction and diligence can avoid basic mistakes and make progress 
with samatha, even samatha cultivated via anapanasati. Especially 
with this practice. Therefore I think cultivating samatha, for 
anyone, at any stage of development, is an unalloyed good thing, even 
if the view is imperfect to start with (as it is, by definition, for 
everyone entering the path). 

> We know from the Visuddhimagga that breath as an
> object of samatha development is extremely difficult.

What the Visuddhimagga actually says (VIII.155) is that "mindfulness 
of breathing as a meditation subject--which is foremost among the 
meditation subjects of all Buddhas, Paccekhabuddhas, and disciples as 
a basis for attaining distinction and abiding in bliss here & now--is 
not easy to develop without leaving the neighborhood of villages, 
which resound with the noises of women, men, elephants, horses, etc., 
noise being a thorn to jhana, whereas the forest away from a village 
a meditator can at his ease set about discering this meditation 
subject and achieve the fourth jhana in mindfulness of breathing; and 
then, by making that same jhana a basis for comprehension of 
formations, he can reach arahatship, the highest fruit."

I do not see here where it says that breath as object of samatha is 
very difficult, unless one has too many noisy distractions present. 
Even this, from my own experience, is less an obstacle than I had 
assumed before, once I was able to find a couple of other practices 
to help pacify hindrances, such as Tibetan tummo yoga (khumbaka 
breath-retention), which unlocked jhana meditation for me within days 
of taking it up, because it engendered enough bliss and pliancy that 
I was able to concentrate on the aramanna rather than sitting in 
constant discomfort and distraction. With the addition of one 
variable--tummo--the body and mind filled with piti enough to 
overcome other hindrances. I am sure there are other techniques 
that can effect similar results. This is in spite of living on a 
noisy NYC block, with the obligatory sirens, car-alarms, drunken 
yobs on weekends. I realize this is only one data-point, but it is 
also a part of concrete experience in the very mileu many of us find 
ourselves in these days.

Also, if anapanasati is so difficult as a meditation subject, then 
why did the Buddha teach it as the first meditation in the 
Satipatthana Sutta? Given how widespread teachings on this are, I 
surmise that the breath is perhaps among the easiest meditation 
subjects, certainly the most versatile, if one is interested in 
gaining proficiency in samatha & jhanas. When it is believed "too 
difficult," this vicikicca directly discourages taking this practice 
up, even to test it out. 

"Too difficult" for whom? Unless this practice has been well-tried, 
it is impossible to know if this is a practice that will bear fruit 
for oneself or not. Given its versatility and its prominence as the 
central subject of meditation in Zen and Tibetan systems, as well as 
being the FIRST meditation subject taught in the Satipatthana Sutta, 
I think it bears thorough investigation. I think it highly unwise to 
cast it off simply because of the view, apropos of nothing in the 
Suttas, that it might be a bit too difficult. And as far as I know, 
the Buddha never said bhavana and acquiring wisdom were easy. Like 
everything in the Dhamma, this too is ehipassika. It can be tested 
out with a bit of confidence it can work and enough persistence to 
really give it a go.

> If it is not developed in the right way, it cannot be
> considered as samatha bhavana. If we wish to watch it,
> it will be clinging for sure. I have not read anything
> in the Tipitaka to support the idea that the
> development of any kind of kusala is 'as easy as
> falling off a log' at any stage. My experience,
> studies and any understanding suggest quite the
> contrary!

The "falling off a log" bit is about effort in meditation itself. 
It's to counter the lute-string that's too tight.

> With this in mind,  I am very interested to hear and
> understand more about all kinds of kusala as well as
> any other realities appearing now. I am also very
> interested in the development of any kind of kusala
> that there is an opportunity for at this moment. As we
> know, only a sotapanna keeps even the 5 precepts
> perfectly. Does this mean there should be no
> consideration or development of samatha or vipassana
> until this time? How is the very highly developed
> wisdom of the sotapanna developed if there isn't a
> start now? All realities are conditioned and anatta as
> you know. If there is the idea of selecting a kind of
> kusala to develop now or any idea of 'ordering'
> realities, doesn't this show the clinging to self?

I think my entire thesis here has been on the importance of 
cultivating kusala and wisdom right here and now in appropriate 
balance, beginning with dana, then sila, then bhavana. I base this on 
the "Five Paths" teachings in my school, which is in turn based on 
the 37 bodhipakkiya-dhammas:

The first path is the "Path of Accumulation," where one has developed 
satipatthana and the four right exertions, accumulated sufficient 
merit to become ready for the "Path of Preparation." The "Path of 
Preparation" is where all the jhana factors are brought to 
completion, resulting in the ability to attain jhanas. Then, after 
this, because of this, one attains the "Path of Seeing" (sotapatti-
magga-nana), where all the seven bojjhangas are brought to 
completion. The next is the "Path of Meditation," where the eight 
path-factors are brought to maturity. The last is the "Path of No 
More Learning," where all afflictions have been done away with and 
Buddhahood and omniscience attained. In this presentation, there is 
very much a linear notion, but also a holistic one, in that these are 
not strictly linear, yet, by practicing in the appropriate order with 
the appropriate emphasis at the right time and place, all the path-
factors are brought to completion.

 
5281 From: Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala   
Date: Sun May 20, 2001 10:55am
Subject: Re: understanding the "self" concept

 
  Dear Howard,
I have enjoyed reading your many posts and wish to address the question of
whether it is necessary to understand to any degree the exact nature of the
"self" concept before one can experience satipatthana. Though I have only
been studying with Acharn Sujin only a short time and am not well versed in
the Tipitika, I have come to realize that when panna does indeed arise,
there is not only a gradual "letting go" of the "self" concept, but there is
also a deeper and increasing realization of that which we had been "taking"
for self all along and of the various ways it is so deeply entrenched.
Therefore, when panna arises it also gives us an increased understanding of
the nature and extent of the "self" concept. So, just by being aware of the
realities as they arise, from moment to moment, as Acharn teaches, is
enough, and when the conditions are right, panna will rise and allow further
understanding of the nature of "self" and the gradual eroding of the concept
will occur.

With metta,
Betty

 
5282 From: Howard 
Date: Sun May 20, 2001 9:22am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: understanding the "self" concept

 
  Hi, Betty -

       Thank you! The following is very clear. Much obliged.

With metta,
Howard

In a message dated 5/19/01 10:55:08 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
Bettywrites:


> Dear Howard,
> I have enjoyed reading your many posts and wish to address the question of
> whether it is necessary to understand to any degree the exact nature of the
> "self" concept before one can experience satipatthana. Though I have only
> been studying with Acharn Sujin only a short time and am not well versed in
> the Tipitika, I have come to realize that when panna does indeed arise,
> there is not only a gradual "letting go" of the "self" concept, but there is
> also a deeper and increasing realization of that which we had been "taking"
> for self all along and of the various ways it is so deeply entrenched.
> Therefore, when panna arises it also gives us an increased understanding of
> the nature and extent of the "self" concept. So, just by being aware of the
> realities as they arise, from moment to moment, as Acharn teaches, is
> enough, and when the conditions are right, panna will rise and allow further
> understanding of the nature of "self" and the gradual eroding of the concept
> will occur.
> 
> With metta,
> Betty
> 



/Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble 
in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a 
phantom, and a dream./            (From the Diamond Sutra)                    
            
                                         



 
5283 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Sun May 20, 2001 2:01pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] noting "others" (?)

 
  Dear Joyce,

While dsg is so quiet  I'm taking the chance to 'catch
up'. I was particularly pleased to see your
participation again after a very long break....I do
hope everything's been well with you.  You must be
well into Spring in Canada and perhaps this is the
time Canadians come out of hibernation;-))

Now to get down to one or two of your posts, I was
especially interested in this one which I'll repeat
parts of, as it was some time ago now:
> 
> "Contemplating the body IN the body...the sensations
> IN the sensations..etc.
> What is to be practiced is pure, non-reactive
> mindfulness i.e. as clear and
> full an awareness as possible (ardently and clearly
> comprehending) of
> whatever is present NOW in the area selected for
> observation, without going
> off into a  tangeant into other more or less
> relevent mental associations
> (feelings, thoughts, value judgments, imaginings) 
> All noted in ones own
> body-mind continuum only.

I'm not sure where you are quoting this from. I don't
think it was from the Dantabhumisutta. Can you give a
reference in the Tipitaka for 'the area selected for
observation' in particular, I wonder?
> 
> "Fare along contemplating the body in the body, but
> do not apply yourself to
> a train of thought connected to the body; fare along
> contemplating the
> sensations in the sensations....the mind in the
> mind...,metal objects in
> mental objects, but do not apply yourself to the
> train of thought connected
> with sensations...the mind...mental objects.
> -Dantabhumisutta (M.125)

This is a very interesting extract and it led me to
read the Dantabhumisutta (The Grade of the Tamed) more
carefully. I'll be referring to B.Bodhi's translation
in my comments. If you remember, your quotes were in
response to my 'note' about external mental objects in
the Satipatthana Sutta. So it was the development of
satipatthana that was being discussed.

In the Dantabhumisutta, the novice Aggivessana
mentions to the Buddha that Prince Jayasena doubts the
Teachings and the Buddha says it is because he is too
fond of pleasure and undisciplined and gives examples,
such as a description of catching and taming a wild
elephant and not believing the view from the top of
the mountain until one has been there because of
ignorance, which could have been told to Jayasena.

the Buddha then encourages the development of sila and
satipatthana encouraging Aggivessana to teach noble
sisciples to guard the sense doors and mind door, 'On
seeing a form with the eye, do not grasp at its signs
and features....On cognizing a mind-object with the
mind, do not grasp at its signs and features. Since if
you were to leave the mind faculty unguarded, evil
unwholesome states of covetousness and grief might
invade you, practise the way of its restraint, guard
the mind faculty, undertake the restraint of the mind
faculty'. (134)

In other words, the Buddha is encouraging the
disciples to be aware of realities appearing through
the sense and mind doors (including thinking) and to
see the danger of lobha, dosa and moha as I read it.
Furthermore a little further on, he encourages the
disciples to be aware throughout the day (and night)
during their 'daily life':

'.....when going forward and returning..when looking
ahead and looking away..when flexing and extending
your limbs...when wearing your robes and carrying your
outer robe and bowl...when eating, drinking, consuming
food, and tasting..when defacating and urinating..when
walking, standing, sitting, falling asleep, waking up,
talking, and keeping silent'. (135)

So far so good. Next is an example of just how tricky
it can be to understand suttas which may appear at
first glance to be straightforward. The disciple is
then encouraged to 'resort to a secluded resting
place' and he abandons the 5 hindrances. this could
well be talking about the attainment of the 1st jhana,
I suspect.

The sutta is unusual because it then again reverts to
the four foundations of mindfulness 'having put away
covetousness and grief for the world'. B.Bodhi says in
a footnote too, that this is 'expounded in the place
usually reserved for the four jhanas'. (136)

Only after this, do we come to the paragraph you quote
at the outset which is immediately followed by 'With
the stilling of applied and sustained thought, he
enters upon the abides in the second jhana..the third
jhana..the fourth jhana.' (This would 'fit' with my
speculative gues that it was the first jhana earlier
being discussed).

Finally, it's clear that he has attained all jhanas
and  become an arahat: ' When his concentrated mind is
thus purified..He understands 'Birth is destroyed, the
holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been
done, there is no more coming to any state of being.'
' 

'If Aggivessana, the king's elephant dies in old age
well tamed and well disciplined, then he is considered
an old elephant that has died a tamed death. 
...middle-aged elephant...young elephant...So too,..if
an elder bhikkhu dies with his taints destroyed, then
he is considered an elder bhikkhu who has died a tamed
death.....middle status.....newly ordained...'(137)

Joyce, the reason I've gone throught his interesting
sutta at some length is because sometimes when we just
quote a few lines, it's not always clear what the
context or meaning is or whether it is satipatthana or
the jhanas that are being discussed. 

A sutta like this one is not at all simple to fully
comprehend (for me) and I've probably raised more
questions than answers.  I'll certainly welcome
comments from anyone else.

Joyce, I agree with you when you say that the purpose
in satipatthana is to be aware of phenomena as they
arise (though I question the 'all' as you know!).
However, when you say later in your same post that 'in
this direct awareness the nature of both the phenomena
and the awareness can be seen by the 'experiencer',
this reminds me of a chat I had with Des. If by the
'experiencer' you mean panna (wisdom), then I agree.

> Thus you will see for yourself..."Only when you know
> for yourselves: "These
> things are unwholesome and lead to harm and
> suffering...and these things are
> wholesome... and lead to welfare and happiness, THEN
> you should abandoned
> (the unwholeseome things) then you should practice
> and dwell upon the
> wholesome things." (A.3.65)

Of course, as I know you realise, Joyce, the listeners
would understand here that the 'you' is being used in
conventional language and it is right understanding
that understands what is wholesome and to be
developed/practised and what is unwholesome and to be
abandoned.

Many thanks again for your posts. I appreciated the
chance to look at the first sutta.Sorry that mine are
all so lengthy at the moment!

Best wishes,

Sarah



 
5284 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Sun May 20, 2001 2:23pm
Subject: DSSF website

 
  Dear Friends,

As there are quite a few members who read Thai, I'm passing on the info below about the new 
Foundation website:
http://www.buddhadhamma.com/

Ivan or Betty may give info about the English part in due course;-) Sarah

Ell wrote: THE WEB SITE IS ON LINE NOW IN THAI, PLEASE TELL JON THAT WE ARE 
PLANNING TO 
PROGRAMM
THAI FONTS IN SO THAT PEOPLE CAN DOWNLOAD THE FONTS INTOTHEIR COMPUTER 
AND 
BE ABLE TO
READ DHAMMA IN THAI. AND JON READ THAI SO HOPEFULLY  IT WILL BE BENEFIT 
JON 
AS WELL.
THE ENGLISH SITE IS COMMING BUT IT WILL TAKE TIME BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE 
THAT 
MANY PEOPLE TO HELP.



 
5285 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Sun May 20, 2001 9:32pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] How 'right' is our intention?

 
  Bruce

I would like to supplement my post of last week on this topic.

Only panna can know by direct experience whether a moment of consciousness is kusala or akusala. 
For the most part, that panna does not arise, since it has not been developed (ie. in previous
lives).  What we think of as knowing akusala is really 'knowing' it by its signs.  When there is
anger, for example, there is obvious agitation, unpleasant feeling, perhaps loud speech or some
other manifestation.  It is by these signs that we know it, not by the direct experience of the
citta (moment of consciousness) by panna.

This is not particularly a problem when it comes to coarse akusala which is by definition readily
apparent (to others if not always ourselves!).  But less course akusala, let alone the relatively
few moments of real kusala we have in a day, cannot be 'known' in the same manner, ie. by its
signs.  Take feeling, for example.  Neutral feeling, like pleasant feeling, can arise with both
kusala and akusala moments, so this should not be taken as a 'sign' of kusala.

Does purity of motivation (eg. helping another, intending to develop metta or have more
understanding) mean that the mind-states will be kusala?  I believe not.  Even when acting with
the best of motives, there can be idea of self, pride/conceit, moments of disappointment or regret
or any other kind of akusala.  Furthermore, the purity of our motives cannot be taken for granted
in the fist place, for reasons that I think are obvious.

This is why an intention to develop more wholesomeness or to have less unwholesomeness by
'knowing' mind-states better can lead unwittingly to the development of more akusala.

The panna that can make this differentiation can of course be developed, and is certainly to be
encouraged.  But we should not think of it is simply a matter of paying attention to mind-states. 
The kusala or akuala characteristic of a citta (moment of consciousness) can be known if it
appears as object to a moment of awareness or panna arising at any time.  The conditions for this
development are the same as we have discussed in previous posts.

Jon



--- Jonothan Abbott  wrote: > Bruce
> 
> Sorry to have taken so long to get back to you.  I
> have limited time during the week to do any posting.
> 
> I did not mean to suggest in my post that knowing the
> difference between kusala and akusala mind-states was
> something that we can or should be doing.  My point
> was that we should avoid the danger of thinking we can
> when in fact we can't.
> 
> In your earlier posts you asked about studying the
> present moment, and investigating the dhammas at the
> six doors.  As Robert so well explained, studying the
> present moment involves the study of any reality that
> appears at the present moment.  In this regard, mind
> states are no more suitable or valuable an object
> than, say, sound;  any reality is equally valuable as
> object of some awareness of the present moment.
> 
> We may be inclined to think that mind-states are
> particularly worth knowing because then we can have
> more kusala.  This is true if by kusala one means less
> attachment to sensuous objects, less dosa etc.  But it
> is not the right condition for developing kusala of
> the level of satipatthana, the kind of kusala that
> helps to eradicate wrong view.
> 
> Jon
> 
> 
> --- bruce  wrote: > hi
> jonathan
> > 
> > thanks for a sharp reply....
> > 
> > 
> > At 10:52 2001/05/14 +0800, you wrote:
> > > Hi Bruce
> > > Nice to see you back again
> > > 
> > > --- bruce  wrote: > hi
> > jon
> > > > 
> > > > At 16:47 2001/05/13 +0800, you wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > > Mistaking akusala for kusala would surely be
> > fatal
> > > > to
> > > > > the development of understanding or any form
> > of
> > > > kusala
> > > > > for that matter.  
> > > > 
> > > > of course! but how are we to differentiate
> > kusala
> > > > cetana from akusala? 
> > > > 
> > > > bruce
> > > 
> > > I had meant to come in on your earlier posts, but
> > ran
> > > out of steam last night ...
> > > 
> > > Here is a question to ponder in reply to your's: 
> > Why
> > > is it important to be able to make this
> > > differentiation?
> > 
> > well, for a start, it would certainly help to know
> > what to cultivate and
> > what to avoid, re Dhammapada 14, 183:
> > 
> > "To avoid all evil, to cultivate good, and to
> > cleanse one's mind -- this is
> > the teaching of the Buddhas."
> > 
> > bruce
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  



 
5286 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Sun May 20, 2001 9:55pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Kusala etc.- Erik

 
  Erik

Just a quick note on a point in your recent post to Sarah.
 
> Other than noting potential pitfalls in meditation, I am not sure 
> what you're getting at here. I am assuming anyone with appropriate 
> instruction and diligence can avoid basic mistakes and make progress 
> with samatha, even samatha cultivated via anapanasati. Especially 
> with this practice. Therefore I think cultivating samatha, for 
> anyone, at any stage of development, is an unalloyed good thing, even 
> if the view is imperfect to start with (as it is, by definition, for 
> everyone entering the path). 
> 
> > We know from the Visuddhimagga that breath as an
> > object of samatha development is extremely difficult.
> 
> What the Visuddhimagga actually says (VIII.155) is that "mindfulness 
> of breathing as a meditation subject--which is foremost among the 
> meditation subjects of all Buddhas, Paccekhabuddhas, and disciples as 
> a basis for attaining distinction and abiding in bliss here & now--is 
> not easy to develop without leaving the neighborhood of villages, 
> which resound with the noises of women, men, elephants, horses, etc., 
> noise being a thorn to jhana, whereas the forest away from a village 
> a meditator can at his ease set about discering this meditation 
> subject and achieve the fourth jhana in mindfulness of breathing; and 
> then, by making that same jhana a basis for comprehension of 
> formations, he can reach arahatship, the highest fruit."
> 
> I do not see here where it says that breath as object of samatha is 
> very difficult, unless one has too many noisy distractions present. 
> Even this, from my own experience, is less an obstacle than I had 
> assumed before, once I was able to find a couple of other practices 
> to help pacify hindrances, such as Tibetan tummo yoga (khumbaka 
> breath-retention), which unlocked jhana meditation for me within days 
> of taking it up, because it engendered enough bliss and pliancy that 
> I was able to concentrate on the aramanna rather than sitting in 
> constant discomfort and distraction. With the addition of one 
> variable--tummo--the body and mind filled with piti enough to 
> overcome other hindrances. I am sure there are other techniques 
> that can effect similar results. This is in spite of living on a 
> noisy NYC block, with the obligatory sirens, car-alarms, drunken 
> yobs on weekends. I realize this is only one data-point, but it is 
> also a part of concrete experience in the very mileu many of us find 
> ourselves in these days.

At Visuddhimagga VIII, 211 it says:
"But this mindfulness of breathing is difficult, difficult to develop, a field in which only the
minds of Buddhas, Paccekabuddhas, and Buddha's sons are at home.  It is no trivial matter, nor can
it be cultivated by trivial persons."

It goes on to explain:  "In proportion as continued attention is given to it, it becomes more
peaceful and more subtle.  So strong mindfulness and understanding are necessary here."

Putting this together with the points you rightly make in your reply above, the conditikons for
the successful development of jhana with breath as object include:
- strong mindfulness and understanding
- monk's life properly lived, and even then avoiding temples etc where other people (including
other monks) reside

What chance any ordinary guy ('trivial person') living the lay life in a big city?

BTW, there is no support in the texts for pranayama (yogic breathing) as a condiiton for samatha. 
The references in the texts to long breath and short breath etc are not references to breathing
exercises.  They are simply ways of conveying the idea that breath of any kind at any time is to
be taken as the object.

 > Also, if anapanasati is so difficult as a meditation subject, then 
> why did the Buddha teach it as the first meditation in the 
> Satipatthana Sutta? Given how widespread teachings on this are, I 
> surmise that the breath is perhaps among the easiest meditation 
> subjects, certainly the most versatile, if one is interested in 
> gaining proficiency in samatha & jhanas. When it is believed "too 
> difficult," this vicikicca directly discourages taking this practice 
> up, even to test it out. 
> 
> "Too difficult" for whom? Unless this practice has been well-tried, 
> it is impossible to know if this is a practice that will bear fruit 
> for oneself or not. Given its versatility and its prominence as the 
> central subject of meditation in Zen and Tibetan systems, as well as 
> being the FIRST meditation subject taught in the Satipatthana Sutta, 
> I think it bears thorough investigation. I think it highly unwise to 
> cast it off simply because of the view, apropos of nothing in the 
> Suttas, that it might be a bit too difficult. And as far as I know, 
> the Buddha never said bhavana and acquiring wisdom were easy. Like 
> everything in the Dhamma, this too is ehipassika. It can be tested 
> out with a bit of confidence it can work and enough persistence to 
> really give it a go.

I know this reflects the view taught by many meditation teachers nowadays, but is it supported by
the texts?

Jon




 
5287 From: Purnomo .   
Date: Mon May 21, 2001 0:15pm
Subject: send me book

 
  please, everybody I wish you help me.
I am Indonesian. My country be more poor every day. You know,  I'm going to 
learn more Buddhism. I read some books and magazines, of course, in 
Indonesian. I want to learn be more Buddhism with some books especially in 
English but I have no money. Could you help me. I wish you send me some 
books. Its FREE! Please , I really need it.

Thank you




 
5288 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Mon May 21, 2001 9:00pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] send me book

 
  Dear Purnomo,

Welcome to DSG!

As a first step, I think it would be helpful if you tell us something about your background and
interest in Buddhism.

Secondly, I suggest you look at one or two of the websites which you can find at the link below
where you can read books in English and see what you are interested in. Perhaps if you read at
least a chapter of one of Nina Van Gorkom's books and give us your comments, we can see if  one of
these would be suitable. Not everyone finds them useful.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/links

This is a discussion list, so you're welcome to ask questions or make comments on dhamma.

Regards,
Sarah

One of these excellent websites is--- "Purnomo ."  wrote: > please,
everybody I wish you help me.
> I am Indonesian. My country be more poor every day. You know,  I'm going to 
> learn more Buddhism. I read some books and magazines, of course, in 
> Indonesian. I want to learn be more Buddhism with some books especially in 
> English but I have no money. Could you help me. I wish you send me some 
> books. Its FREE! Please , I really need it.
> 
> Thank you



 
5289 From: selamat   
Date: Mon May 21, 2001 9:24pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] send me book

 
  Dear Purnomo,
I am from Indonesia too.
Should you have any questions on Buddhism (based on Pali Canon), pls contact
me at: 08158.804805.

with metta,
selamat
----- Original Message -----
From: Purnomo . 
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2001 11:15 AM
Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] send me book


> please, everybody I wish you help me.
> I am Indonesian. My country be more poor every day. You know,  I'm going
to
> learn more Buddhism. I read some books and magazines, of course, in
> Indonesian. I want to learn be more Buddhism with some books especially in
> English but I have no money. Could you help me. I wish you send me some
> books. Its FREE! Please , I really need it.
>
> Thank you


 
5290 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Mon May 21, 2001 9:47pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] send me book

 
  Dear Purnomo,
I am happy to see your interest in the sublime Dhamma. I hope
you can talk with Mister Selamat who is very knowledgeable and
has long experience in Buddhism.
robert
--- selamat <wrote:
> Dear Purnomo,
> I am from Indonesia too.
> Should you have any questions on Buddhism (based on Pali
> Canon), pls contact
> me at: 08158.804805.
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/post?protectID=246123051106207130143218213024192063039048075009077079234238077002109076219176010098180028> 
> with metta,
> selamat
> ----- 


 
5291 From: Sarah and Jonothan Abbott  <Moderators> 
Date: Tue May 22, 2001 3:27pm
Subject: Fwd: RE: Welcome to dhammastudygroup

 
> Subject: RE: Welcome to dhammastudygroup 
> Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 09:13:41 +0200
> 
> Hello and may you all be well and happy.....
> 
> As promised I am back online again... I shifted to a
> new home now....
> working in Robert Bosch (Penang).... Hello and hello
> yet again.... so great
> to be back online again....
> 



 
5292 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Tue May 22, 2001 3:33pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Fwd: RE: Welcome to dhammastudygroup

 
  Hi Loke,

Good to see you back after what seems like a long break! Hope you like your new home and job.
Penang must be a great place to live.....Any time for any dhamma studies recently?

I just forwarded your post from the dsgmod a/c where it ended up by mistake! From now on you can
just press the reply key to any post and it'll get to the list.

Hope to see more of you!

Sarah

p.s Pls correct me if Loke isn't your first name...(?)

Loke wrote: >
 > 
> > Hello and may you all be well and happy.....
> > 
> > As promised I am back online again... I shifted to a
> > new home now....
> > working in Robert Bosch (Penang).... Hello and hello
> > yet again.... so great
> > to be back online again....
> > 



 
5293 From: Binh 
Date: Tue May 22, 2001 5:12pm
Subject: Re: send me book

 
  --- "Purnomo ."  wrote:

> please, everybody I wish you help me.
> I am Indonesian. My country be more poor every day. You know,  I'm 
going to 
> learn more Buddhism. I read some books and magazines, of course, in 
> Indonesian. I want to learn be more Buddhism with some books 
especially in 
> English but I have no money. Could you help me. I wish you send me 
some 
> books. Its FREE! Please , I really need it.

===============================================================

BA: G'day,

You could write to the following addresses:

1) W.A.V.E.
   No. 2, Jalan Chan Ah Tong
   Off Jln Tun Sambanthan
   50470 Kuala Lumpur
   MALAYSIA

2) Buddha Education Foundation
   11F, 55 Hangchow South Road, Sec 1
   Taipei
   TAIWAN - R.O.C.

Or send me an email, at: binh_anson@ hotmail.com 

   Website: http://www.saigon.com/~anson

(I might be able to send you some small books).

Regards,
Binh

 
 
5294 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Tue May 22, 2001 10:41pm
Subject: tapes

 
  Dear Nina W, Rob & Kom,

Nina W. wrote (off-list):
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
I am sorry I missed your discussions but once again conditions were not right for the meeting.  
I hope I can get any tapes of your discussions for evening listening with Charoen. 
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Nina is referring to tapes of discussions (in English) from when we were recently in Bangkok
(28th, 29th Apr, 1st May). 

To obtain copies of these tapes (probably unedited), pls send an email to the addresses in the
letter under 'Books and Tapes' in the "Useful Posts' section at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/

(or just go back to post 2493)

They also now have edited copies of the tapes  from when we were in Bkk in Dec (not included in
the Cambodia set). These have been edited by Shin (approx Dec 1st-Dec 12th exc.Cambodia). We've
just received these and only listened to the first one (before we arrived) but has Michael J.,
Jack and others as well as K.Sujin.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
 
Nina wrote:I hope to hear from Joe Cummings but no word yet about whether he will pass through
NKP.
 
Take care and write when you can.
 
Your friend in the dhamma,
Nina
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

We didn't see Joe in Bkk either, but he said he was working on a book in Laos and would be passing
your way!!

Keep enjoying that kusala vipaka you mentioned (with sati of course ;-))

Best wishes to you and Charoen and hope to see you next time. Will try to give more notice!

Sarah





 
5295 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Tue May 22, 2001 10:54pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: send me book

 
  Dear Binh,

A warm welcome to DSG!

I've seen your excellent website: http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebidx.htm
which contains a lot of wonderful material.  I noted when I last looked that you even have Nina
VG's Abhid in Daily Life there which I always recommend and of course many good sutta
translations.

What is the website below?  I tried unsuccessfully to reach it.

You're probably well known to many members here, but for people like myself, would you kindly tell
us just a little (more is very fine too!) about your background interest in Buddhism. I assume
from the website that you're from a Vietnamese background?

Look forward to hearing more from you and thank you for your kind offer below.

Sarah

Binh wrote: > 

> 
> Or send me an email, at: binh_anson@ hotmail.com 
> 
>    Website: http://www.saigon.com/~anson
> 
> (I might be able to send you some small books).
> 
> Regards,
> Binh
> 



 
5296 From: Alex 
Date: Wed May 23, 2001 4:27am
Subject: Hello anh Bi`nh

 
  Hi anh Bi`nh,
   It's nice to see you here.
Metta,
AT

 
5297 From: Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)   
Date: Wed May 23, 2001 9:12am
Subject: Question...

 
  Dear all,

	Hi and I am back again.... I have this nagging question that I have
been meaning to ask all of you as individuals. I am sure Asian people are
exposed to Buddhism one way or the other.... and taking up Buddhism would be
a matter of time. But for a European/Americans/Caucasians and other
non-Asian people ...... well to be more specific Christians (Protestant or
Catholics), what makes you choose Buddhism and to abandon Christianity which
is being taught and passed down to you when you are young. I would really
like to understand this.... Please reply me off list... and information will
be dealt with privacy. As an Asian I am seeing a trend that is reverse in
European/Americans/Caucasians and other non-Asian country..... more and more
Asian is taking up Christianity... while people in the West is embracing
Buddhism (That is what I have been told by one of my Buddhist friend while
studying abroad). So please reply me ... thank you in advance.... May all of
you be well and happy....

Yours,
CL Loke

 
5298 From: Howard 
Date: Wed May 23, 2001 6:04am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Question...

 
  Hi, CL -

In a message dated 5/22/01 9:19:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
CL Loke writes:


> Dear all,
> 
>     Hi and I am back again.... I have this nagging question that I have
> been meaning to ask all of you as individuals. I am sure Asian people are
> exposed to Buddhism one way or the other.... and taking up Buddhism would be
> a matter of time. But for a European/Americans/Caucasians and other
> non-Asian people ...... well to be more specific Christians (Protestant or
> Catholics), what makes you choose Buddhism and to abandon Christianity which
> is being taught and passed down to you when you are young. I would really
> like to understand this.... Please reply me off list... and information will
> be dealt with privacy. As an Asian I am seeing a trend that is reverse in
> European/Americans/Caucasians and other non-Asian country..... more and more
> Asian is taking up Christianity... while people in the West is embracing
> Buddhism (That is what I have been told by one of my Buddhist friend while
> studying abroad). So please reply me ... thank you in advance.... May all of
> you be well and happy....
> 
> Yours,
> CL Loke
> 
> 
==============================
       Speaking for myself, I have adopted Buddhism because, for me it is a 
wonderful path, in fact it is a path that I truly love. Ironically, as a 
result of my Buddhist practice and study my appreciation of other religions 
has grown in the process, including my birth religion of Judaism.
       But as far as the general question you raise, one explanation - a 
valid one, I think, though not admirable - may be found in the old adages: 
"Familiarity breeds contempt" and "The grass is always greener on the other 
side of the fence".

With metta,
Howard


/Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble 
in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a 
phantom, and a dream./            (From the Diamond Sutra)                    
            
                                         



 
5299 From: Herman 
Date: Wed May 23, 2001 10:35am
Subject: Re: Question...

 
  Dear CL Loke,

Welcome to the group and thank you for asking an open question.

From my limited experience as an ex-Christian, I would say that 
children are brought up with the practise of their culture's faith 
first. Then when they become adults they learn the theory of their 
culture's faith. Then they see the huge gap that exists between the 
theory and the practise. They see what is as opposed to what should 
be. Then they become disillusioned. Then they seek, and come in 
contact with the theory of the faith of another culture. This is 
generally more satisfactory because the new practise and new theory 
are only selectively, partially adopted, and modified to incorporate 
what was learnt as child. 

I hope the above makes sense, and if not, I will be happy to clarify, 
but it will always remain an opinion.

With lovingkindness


Herman


--- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" 
wrote:
> Dear all,
> 
> 	Hi and I am back again.... I have this nagging question that 
I have
> been meaning to ask all of you as individuals. I am sure Asian 
people are
> exposed to Buddhism one way or the other.... and taking up Buddhism 
would be
> a matter of time. But for a European/Americans/Caucasians and other
> non-Asian people ...... well to be more specific Christians 
(Protestant or
> Catholics), what makes you choose Buddhism and to abandon 
Christianity which
> is being taught and passed down to you when you are young. I would 
really
> like to understand this.... Please reply me off list... and 
information will
> be dealt with privacy. As an Asian I am seeing a trend that is 
reverse in
> European/Americans/Caucasians and other non-Asian country..... more 
and more
> Asian is taking up Christianity... while people in the West is 
embracing
> Buddhism (That is what I have been told by one of my Buddhist 
friend while
> studying abroad). So please reply me ... thank you in advance.... 
May all of
> you be well and happy....
> 
> Yours,
> CL Loke

 
5300 From: Jonothan Abbott 
Date: Wed May 23, 2001 10:41am
Subject: Re: understanding the "self" concept

 
  Betty and Howard

Betty, I thought your post put the position very well.  As I 
understand it, panna is the very antithesis of moha and wrong view, 
and so needs no supplementary conceptualising to do its job.

Of course, becoming aware (in the conventional sense) of the many 
guises and forms that the misconception of self can take is no bad 
thing and can only be a supporting condition in the long run for the 
exposure of that view to the light of understanding.  Howard, I think 
this is your point and I am in full agreement on it.

Betty, do you know of any sutta or commentary references that bear on 
this general question?

Jon

--- "Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala" 
 wrote:
> Dear Howard,
> I have enjoyed reading your many posts and wish to address the 
question of
> whether it is necessary to understand to any degree the exact 
nature of the
> "self" concept before one can experience satipatthana. Though I 
have only
> been studying with Acharn Sujin only a short time and am not well 
versed in
> the Tipitika, I have come to realize that when panna does indeed 
arise,
> there is not only a gradual "letting go" of the "self" concept, but 
there is
> also a deeper and increasing realization of that which we had 
been "taking"
> for self all along and of the various ways it is so deeply 
entrenched.
> Therefore, when panna arises it also gives us an increased 
understanding of
> the nature and extent of the "self" concept. So, just by being 
aware of the
> realities as they arise, from moment to moment, as Acharn teaches, 
is
> enough, and when the conditions are right, panna will rise and 
allow further
> understanding of the nature of "self" and the gradual eroding of 
the concept
> will occur.
> 
> With metta,
> Betty

 
5301 From: Binh 
Date: Wed May 23, 2001 11:07am
Subject: G'day from Perth ... Re: send me book

 
  G'day Khun Sarah, Alex T, Loke, and other Dhamma friends, 

Thanks for the kind words and welcoming messages. I have been lurking 
in this list for some weeks, and I glad to see that the list is well
managed by sincere and knowledgeable Buddhist farangs! :-) Sadhu! 

[for non-Thai readers: "farangs" means "Westerners", in Thai 
language] 

Due to my heavy commitments to many other Dhamma activities, I may not
be able to contribute much to the DSG list, but if permitted, I might
chip in from time to time, to learn and to share with you. 

Below are my humble responses to some of the recent posts: 

-----------------------------------------------------------------

From:  "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" 

<< .... I have this nagging question that I have been meaning to ask 
all
of you as individuals. I am sure Asian people are exposed to Buddhism
one way or the other.... and taking up Buddhism would be a matter of
time. But for a European/Americans/Caucasians and other non-Asian 
people
...... well to be more specific Christians (Protestant or Catholics),
what makes you choose Buddhism and to abandon Christianity which is
being taught and passed down to you when you are young. I would really
like to understand this.... >>

-------------------

BA: Two years ago, Yu-Ban Lee of the Dhamma-List@ set up a similar
project and asked members of that list to contribute their personal
experience. They were compiled and stored at the website "Finding the
Way", which you and other friends may like to have a look: 

    http://www.quantrum.com.my/duta/way/index.htm 

(I also contributed mine at that site)

=================================================================
 
From:  Sarah Procter Abbott 

<<... 
I've seen your excellent website: http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebidx.htm
which contains a lot of wonderful material. I noted when I last looked
that you even have Nina VG's Abhid in Daily Life there which I always
recommend and of course many good sutta translations. 

What is the website below? I tried unsuccessfully to reach it. 

You're probably well known to many members here, but for people like
myself, would you kindly tell us just a little (more is very fine 
too!)
about your background interest in Buddhism. I assume from the website
that you're from a Vietnamese background? ...>>

-----------------------

BA: Few points following:

1) The 2 URLs http://www.budsas.org/ and http://www.saigon.com/~anson
leading to the same site. The site should be up for accessing now. 

It is only a small site operated from San Jose, USA, and might have 
some technical problems in the last 24 hrs. 

2) As I wrote in the other list, Nina's Abhidhamma book was one of the
first book in this subject which I read some 20+ years ago and it was
very beneficial to me ... 

I'm grateful that Khun Nina and your group have made it available on 
the Net. 

By the way, the Vietnamese translator of that book, Bhikkhu Thien-Minh
of Jetavana-Vihara in Saigon, will be spending the coming Rains 
Retreat (Vassa) at Ajahn Sumedho's monastery in England. Hopefully we 
would be able to hear more from him. 

3) As mentioned above, I wrote a small article on how I came to 
Buddhism for Yu-Ban Lee's web page, and you might like to have a look 
at:

   http://www.quantrum.com.my/duta/way/index.htm 

   (you can also see my photo there)

Just briefly: I was born and bred in VN, spending the first 20 yrs
there, the next 5 yrs in Thailand, and the following 25 yrs (till now)
in Australia. 

From my close involvement with the Buddhist Society of Western
Australia, I maintain good contacts with Dhamma teachers and friends 
of Theravadin tradition (Laos, Cambodia, Thailand, Myanmar, Sri Lanka,
...). 

=============================================================

From:  Alex Tran
 
<< Hi anh Bi`nh,
   It's nice to see you here.
Metta,
AT >>

-----------------------

BA: Thanks, Alex. It's nice to know you're also here. Small world! 
:-) 

(by the way, for non-Vietnamese readers: "anh" in "anh Binh" means
"brother", as "phee" in Thai).

Metta,
Binh

 
5302 From: Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)   
Date: Wed May 23, 2001 11:16am
Subject: RE: Question...

 
  Ok ... Maybe I was asking the wrong question here... after the morning break
my minds seems to be working better... anyway.. What ultimately that I
wanted to put to question is this.... What do you see in Buddhism that
Christianity (as in your birth religion) does not have ? For some Buddhist
who convert to Christianity... they will quote of their prayers being
answered or maybe they say they found God ? and the sort... but seldom do I
get to hear from a Westerners point of view ? You are still welcome to email
me back off list.... By the way for some who are still not aware of....
Previously I  was in this newsgroup and then I changed job and along with
new email add.... maybe I shall recap again my introduction... I am a
Malaysian living in Penang... Practicing Buddhist... and still learning....
I am an engineer by profession and training.... so feel free to mail me
back....

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2) 
> Sent:	Wednesday, May 23, 2001 9:13 AM
> Subject:	Question...
> 
> Dear all,
> 
> 	Hi and I am back again.... I have this nagging question that I have
> been meaning to ask all of you as individuals. I am sure Asian people are
> exposed to Buddhism one way or the other.... and taking up Buddhism would
> be a matter of time. But for a European/Americans/Caucasians and other
> non-Asian people ...... well to be more specific Christians (Protestant or
> Catholics), what makes you choose Buddhism and to abandon Christianity
> which is being taught and passed down to you when you are young. I would
> really like to understand this.... Please reply me off list... and
> information will be dealt with privacy. As an Asian I am seeing a trend
> that is reverse in European/Americans/Caucasians and other non-Asian
> country..... more and more Asian is taking up Christianity... while people
> in the West is embracing Buddhism (That is what I have been told by one of
> my Buddhist friend while studying abroad). So please reply me ... thank
> you in advance.... May all of you be well and happy....
> 
> Yours,
> CL Loke

 
5303 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Wed May 23, 2001 0:19pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] G'day from Perth

 
  Binh

G'day, Sawatdee and Jo san 
from an Aussie(Adelaide) born farang (8 years in Thailand) now living in Hong Kong (so I am also a
'gwei lo', as foreigners are known here).

Welcome to the list from me also.  I hope you find your stay with us useful, and I am sure we in
turn will benefit from your presence and participation.

Thanks for your informative answers below.

Jon

--- Binh wrote: >     
> G'day Khun Sarah, Alex T, Loke, and other Dhamma friends, 
> 
> Thanks for the kind words and welcoming messages. I have been lurking 
> in this list for some weeks, and I glad to see that the list is well
> managed by sincere and knowledgeable Buddhist farangs! :-) Sadhu! 
> 
> [for non-Thai readers: "farangs" means "Westerners", in Thai 
> language] 
> 
> Due to my heavy commitments to many other Dhamma activities, I may not
> be able to contribute much to the DSG list, but if permitted, I might
> chip in from time to time, to learn and to share with you. 
> 
> Below are my humble responses to some of the recent posts: 
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> From:  "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" 
> 
> << .... I have this nagging question that I have been meaning to ask 
> all
> of you as individuals. I am sure Asian people are exposed to Buddhism
> one way or the other.... and taking up Buddhism would be a matter of
> time. But for a European/Americans/Caucasians and other non-Asian 
> people
> ...... well to be more specific Christians (Protestant or Catholics),
> what makes you choose Buddhism and to abandon Christianity which is
> being taught and passed down to you when you are young. I would really
> like to understand this.... >>
> 
> -------------------
> 
> BA: Two years ago, Yu-Ban Lee of the Dhamma-List@ set up a similar
> project and asked members of that list to contribute their personal
> experience. They were compiled and stored at the website "Finding the
> Way", which you and other friends may like to have a look: 
> 
>     http://www.quantrum.com.my/duta/way/index.htm 
> 
> (I also contributed mine at that site)
> 
> =================================================================
>  
> From:  Sarah Procter Abbott 
> 
> <<... 
> I've seen your excellent website: http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebidx.htm
> which contains a lot of wonderful material. I noted when I last looked
> that you even have Nina VG's Abhid in Daily Life there which I always
> recommend and of course many good sutta translations. 
> 
> What is the website below? I tried unsuccessfully to reach it. 
> 
> You're probably well known to many members here, but for people like
> myself, would you kindly tell us just a little (more is very fine 
> too!)
> about your background interest in Buddhism. I assume from the website
> that you're from a Vietnamese background? ...>>
> 
> -----------------------
> 
> BA: Few points following:
> 
> 1) The 2 URLs http://www.budsas.org/ and http://www.saigon.com/~anson
> leading to the same site. The site should be up for accessing now. 
> 
> It is only a small site operated from San Jose, USA, and might have 
> some technical problems in the last 24 hrs. 
> 
> 2) As I wrote in the other list, Nina's Abhidhamma book was one of the
> first book in this subject which I read some 20+ years ago and it was
> very beneficial to me ... 
> 
> I'm grateful that Khun Nina and your group have made it available on 
> the Net. 
> 
> By the way, the Vietnamese translator of that book, Bhikkhu Thien-Minh
> of Jetavana-Vihara in Saigon, will be spending the coming Rains 
> Retreat (Vassa) at Ajahn Sumedho's monastery in England. Hopefully we 
> would be able to hear more from him. 
> 
> 3) As mentioned above, I wrote a small article on how I came to 
> Buddhism for Yu-Ban Lee's web page, and you might like to have a look 
> at:
> 
>    http://www.quantrum.com.my/duta/way/index.htm 
> 
>    (you can also see my photo there)
> 
> Just briefly: I was born and bred in VN, spending the first 20 yrs
> there, the next 5 yrs in Thailand, and the following 25 yrs (till now)
> in Australia. 
> 
> From my close involvement with the Buddhist Society of Western
> Australia, I maintain good contacts with Dhamma teachers and friends 
> of Theravadin tradition (Laos, Cambodia, Thailand, Myanmar, Sri Lanka,
> ...). 
> 
> =============================================================
> 
> From:  Alex Tran
>  
> << Hi anh Bi`nh,
>    It's nice to see you here.
> Metta,
> AT >>
> 
> -----------------------
> 
> BA: Thanks, Alex. It's nice to know you're also here. Small world! 
> :-) 
> 
> (by the way, for non-Vietnamese readers: "anh" in "anh Binh" means
> "brother", as "phee" in Thai).
> 
> Metta,
> Binh 



 
5304 From: Herman 
Date: Wed May 23, 2001 3:06pm
Subject: Screen , Mind, both are blank

 
  Hi all,

Some humour.

In Japan, they have replaced the impersonal and unhelpful Microsoft 
Error messages with Haiku poetry messages. Haikus often achieve  a 
wistful yearning and powerful insight through extreme brevity - the 
essence of Zen:

Your file was so big.
It might be very useful.
But now it is gone.

The Web site you seek
Cannot be located,
but Countless more exist.

Chaos reigns within.
Reflect, repent, and reboot.
Order shall return.

Program aborting:
Close all that you have worked on.
You ask far too much.

Windows NT crashed.
I am the Blue Screen of Death.
No one hears your screams.

Yesterday it worked.
Today it is not working.
Windows is like that.

First snow, then silence.
This thousand-dollar screen dies
So beautifully.

With searching comes loss
And the presence of absence:
"My Novel" not found.

The Tao that is seen
Is not the true Tao-until
You bring fresh toner.

Stay the patient course.
Of little worth is your ire.
The network is down.

A crash reduces
Your expensive computer
To a simple stone.

Three things are certain:
Death, taxes and lost data.
Guess which has occurred.

You step in the stream,
But the water has moved on.
This page is not here.

Out of memory.
We wish to hold the whole sky,
But we never will.

Having been erased,
The document you're seeking
Must now be retyped.

Serious error.
All shortcuts have disappeared.
Screen. Mind. Both are blank.


Author unknown

 
5305 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Wed May 23, 2001 3:12pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Kusala etc.-Eric, nibbana

 
  Dear Erik,

Thanks for your long reply to my last post. I may pick up some points later, but we're a little
far apart when it comes to the ease of jhanas and the like, so I think tthat debate will go on for
sometime! Jon gave the Vis ref. which I had in mind btw.

I had meant to also follow up on this point below which I raised in my notes from Bkk (which
Howard also found unsatisfactory). I was glad to read your 'reason'! (My refs below are to the
Abhidhammattha Sangaha, transl by B.Bodhi).

--- Erik wrote: >
> > 9. NIBBANA. Someone asked how a sankhara citta
> > cognizes nibbana, an asankhara reality,. Response 'Why
> > not?"
> 
> I can think of a reason. The very act of cognizing is conditioned, 
> because there is always subject and object. Being conditioned, there 
> is no way citta can apprehend something without marks, like Nibbana. 
> The very act of "marking" it brings it into the realm of the 
> conditioned. Just an observation, and am curious if there are any 
> explanations or any commentaries that address this point. I haven't 
> seen it addressed, and it's been bugging me for a long time now.

I don't quite see the logic here. Why cannot a conditioned citta apprehend an unconditioned
reality? 

          ***********
'Nibbana is a single undifferentiated ultimate reality.  It is exclusively supramundane, and has
one intrinsic nature (sabhava), which is that of being the unconditioned deathless element totally
transcendant to the conditioned world.' (AS.V1,31) 
          **********
In other words, even though it is unconditioned, it has its nature that can be realized. I'm not
sure that I would call the realizing 'marking', but either way, it remains the citta that realizes
or marks and is conditioned. Being realized does not make the unconditioned reality conditioned. 
          ************
'Each stage (of enlightenment) involves two types of citta, path consciousness (maggacitta) and
fruition consciousness (phalacitta).  All supramundane cittas take as object the unconditioned
reality, nibbana, but they differ as paths and fruits acording to their functions.  the path
consciousness has the function of eradicating (or of permanently attenuating) defilements;  the
fruition consciousness has the function of experiencing the degree of liberation made possible by
the corresponding path.  The path consciousnes is a kusalacitta, a wholesome state;  the fruition
consciousnes is a vipakacitta, a resultant...........................

The paths and fruits are attained by the method of meditation called the development of insight
(vipassanabhavana).  This type of meditation involves the strengthening of the faculty of wisdom
(panna).  By sustained attention to the changing phenomena of mind and matter, the meditator
learns to discern their true characteristics of impermanence, sufffering, and non-self.  When
these insights fain full maturity, they issue in the supramundane paths and fruits.' (AS, 1,
26-28)
          **********
I know that none of this is anything new to you, Erik, but I've typed it out because it does again
underscore the importance of panna understanding the different namas and rupas at all stages.

I think it was Kom who pointed out earlier that cittas also experience concepts which are also not
conditioned realities and never become conditioned realities. It is true that panna only
understands realities, but the cittas which think, think about concepts all the time. 

To finish, I'll give just one more quote about nibbana which you might appreciate:
          **********
'Nibbana is called the void (sunnata) because it is devoid of greed, hatred, and delusion, and
because it is devoid of all that is conditioned.  it is called signless (animitta) because it is
free from the signs of greed, etc., and free from the signs of all conditioned things.  it is
called desireless (appanihita) because it is free from the hankering of greed, etc., and because
it is not desired by craving.'
          **********
Best wishes for now, Erik, and many thanks again for all your helpful feedback!

Sarah
> 



 
5306 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Wed May 23, 2001 3:58pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Kusala etc.-Eric, nibbana

 
  ...........OR , to put it poetically  (thanks Herman):

Nibbana, please come soon!
No, that's lobha!
Panna get to work FASTER!

...............

Musavada to some
Is Sam A.Vada to others
Let's debate!

.................




Sarah






 
5307 From: Paul Bail 
Date: Wed May 23, 2001 4:18pm
Subject: Re: Question

 
  Dear Loke,

For me, from an early age, I had difficulty with (1) the notion of a supreme, 
infinite God with a personality, (2) this God creates evil and an eternal 
hell, (3) one must believe many dogmas which cannot be verified 
experientially--blind faith, (4) the more sincere Christians often tend to be 
emotionalistic--less Wisdom dimension, (5) emphasis on converting other 
people, and anyone who does not believe the same as you, including Christians 
of other sects, is damned (the more liberal churches don't believe this).  In 
comparison, Buddhist notions were much more logical and satisfying, (6) 
overemphasis one either (a) the authority of the "infallible" Bible or (b) an 
"infallible" religious figure (the Pope) as being the ultimate decider of all 
questions
(as opposed to oneself investigating).

Of course, there are a lot of diversity of Christian groups and some, such as 
the Quakers, might not fit all the above.  But in the sect that I grew up in 
all these problems were present.

Also, as others have said, being an unfamiliar and "exotic" religion one 
could project unrealistic assumptions on it--for example, that Buddhist 
religious organization and history did not suffer from some of the same 
political and sectarian problems of Christianity.  Of course, one learns 
later that humans have the same tendencies wherever they come from.

Also, some very excellent Buddhist teachers came to the U.S. and provided a 
contrast--in their spiritual qualities--to the run of the mill Christian 
preacher.

Also, in my generation, the sincere spiritual seekers were mostly exploring 
alternatives to Christianity.

Paul Bail

    From: "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" 
 Subject: RE: Question...
 
 Ok ... Maybe I was asking the wrong question here... after the morning break
 my minds seems to be working better... anyway.. What ultimately that I
 wanted to put to question is this.... What do you see in Buddhism that
 Christianity (as in your birth religion) does not have ? For some Buddhist
 who convert to Christianity... they will quote of their prayers being
 answered or maybe they say they found God ? and the sort... but seldom do I
 get to hear from a Westerners point of view ? You are still welcome to email
 me back off list.... By the way for some who are still not aware of....
 Previously I  was in this newsgroup and then I changed job and along with
 new email add.... maybe I shall recap again my introduction... I am a
 Malaysian living in Penang... Practicing Buddhist... and still learning....
 I am an engineer by profession and training.... so feel free to mail me
 back....
  >>

 
5308 From: Paul Bail 
Date: Wed May 23, 2001 4:40pm
Subject: Qestion - P.S.

 
  Dear Loke,

Just thought of something else.  Several years ago in Madison, Wisconsin USA, 
I was on my way to a lecture on Buddhism by H.H. the Dalai Lama and as I was 
walking I saw an old college friend of mine, who was from Japan, and she was 
distributing Christian tracts on the street corner.  She had joined an 
evangelical sect.  I arranged to meet her later to catch up on old times.  
She stated that all her life. growing up as a nominal Japanese Buddhist, she 
had felt guilty, and that she had joined the sect after hearing the 
evangelical message preached, and by accepting a personal savior she had all 
her guilt taken away.  I thought that was interesting, since my experience 
with Christianity was that many people growing up Christian felt very guilty. 
Probably this really didn't have that much to do with either Christianity or 
Buddhism. So, I don't know if you can really understand these trends, because 
human beings are so complex.  

Paul Bail

 
 
5309 From: Sarah and Jonothan Abbott  <Moderators> 
Date: Wed May 23, 2001 9:20pm
Subject: Fwd: Hello! And transfer of merit to the dead

 
  --- celia walter  wrote: > >
Subject: Hello!  And transfer of merit to the dead
> Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 10:40:21 -0000
> 
Hi! My name is Celia. I am a middle aged reference
librarian at the University of Cape Town, South
Africa. I have been attached to a dharma group of one
kind or another for about 10 years (Tibetan and Koren
Zen). In the last few years I have been sitting with a
Theravadin Group. I intend to go to Myanmar in
November to do a month's retreat at Chanmyay Sayadaw's
centre. Any advice on this will be appreciated.

Recently one of my friends died and I have been
feeling a kind of gap about what can be done for the
dead, if anything. I have read about the transfer of
merit to the dead, and have wondered how this squared
with the fact that&nbsp;I alone can "save" myself, and
kamma. I hope this is not a silly question.


 
5310 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Wed May 23, 2001 9:27pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Fwd: Hello! And transfer of merit to the dead

 
  Dear Celia,

I just forwarded this from the moderator mail and I notice that somehow the last couple of lines
and sign- off got lost in the process for which I apologise.

South Africa is very under-represented here (you may be the first ) and i'm glad you've found us.
I look forward to hering more from you and from other members in response to your post below. many
thanks for sharing the interesting details.

In future, you can just press the reply button to send anything to this list direct.

Best wishes for now,

Sarah

--- Sarah and Jonothan Abbott <Moderators> wrote: > --- celia walter
 wrote: > >
> Subject: Hello!  And transfer of merit to the dead
> > Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 10:40:21 -0000
> > 
> Hi! My name is Celia. I am a middle aged reference
> librarian at the University of Cape Town, South
> Africa. I have been attached to a dharma group of one
> kind or another for about 10 years (Tibetan and Koren
> Zen). In the last few years I have been sitting with a
> Theravadin Group. I intend to go to Myanmar in
> November to do a month's retreat at Chanmyay Sayadaw's
> centre. Any advice on this will be appreciated.
> 
> Recently one of my friends died and I have been
> feeling a kind of gap about what can be done for the
> dead, if anything. I have read about the transfer of
> merit to the dead, and have wondered how this squared
> with the fact that&nbsp;I alone can "save" myself, and
> kamma. I hope this is not a silly question.
> 



 
5311 From: Erik 
Date: Wed May 23, 2001 10:02pm
Subject: Re: Kusala etc.-Eric, nibbana

 
  --- Sarah Procter Abbott  

Hi Sarah,

Jeez, spoiling for a fight, eh? (I love it :)

wrote:
> Dear Erik,
> 
> Thanks for your long reply to my last post. I may pick up some 
points later, but we're a little
> far apart when it comes to the ease of jhanas and the like, so I 
think tthat debate will go on for
> sometime! 

Re: "Ease of jhanas." I NEVER said the jhanas were easy. I said 
they're doable, and with the appropriate confidence coupled with 
persistence in sticking with practice, the signs eventually manifest. 
In my own case, I fumbled, spun my wheels, sat on and off (more off, 
out of frustration). This was my first five years of "practice." I 
didn't know what the heck I was doing, basically, and had no good 
instruction (not that I could have used it at the time, my mind was 
too messed up--I was doing stupid stuff like drinking to quell dukkha 
at the time, etc., so not a happy camper, in other words).

What I didn't realize was I'd never make any progress so long as my 
mind was defiled by so much craving, anger, etc. When I was given  
the practice of tonglen (Tibetan metta-bhabvana) it purified so much 
in a few months of practice it got rid of enough of the hindrances to 
make meditation possible. It sure made me feel like a million bucks. 
That, and a little MDMA chemotherapy, which helped me identify 
samatha (helped bring about kaya & citta passadhi and a big AHA!), 
plus the bliss of tummo yoga, brought it all together for me. After 
many years of failed efforts, though. That doesn't sound all that 
easy to me. It does, however, prove it's possible here & now, in 21st 
century society. With a little ingenuity, and unwillingness to take 
others' words for things (meaning test EVERYTHING out and question 
mercilessly), and the persistence to keep with it in spite of  
obstacles, nearly anything is possible. Of course what I see now is 
this the textbook approach of developing the bodhipakkiya-dhammas. 
The appropriate order, dana, sila, bhavana: restraining bad actions 
stopping drinking for example), clearing away defilements by 
purifying the mind (tonglen), and last, bhavana, meditation on 
emptiness once the coarse junk was cleared away from the previous two 
steps (though never abandoning any steps, all must work together all 
the time now).

>Jon gave the Vis ref. which I had in mind btw.
> 
> I had meant to also follow up on this point below which I raised in 
my notes from Bkk (which
> Howard also found unsatisfactory). I was glad to read 
your 'reason'! (My refs below are to the
> Abhidhammattha Sangaha, transl by B.Bodhi).
> 
> --- Erik wrote: >
> > > 9. NIBBANA. Someone asked how a sankhara citta
> > > cognizes nibbana, an asankhara reality,. Response 'Why
> > > not?"
> > 
> > I can think of a reason. The very act of cognizing is 
conditioned, 
> > because there is always subject and object. Being conditioned, 
there 
> > is no way citta can apprehend something without marks, like 
Nibbana. 
> > The very act of "marking" it brings it into the realm of the 
> > conditioned. Just an observation, and am curious if there are any 
> > explanations or any commentaries that address this point. I 
haven't 
> > seen it addressed, and it's been bugging me for a long time now.
> 
> I don't quite see the logic here. Why cannot a conditioned citta 
apprehend an unconditioned
> reality? 
> 
>           ***********
> 'Nibbana is a single undifferentiated ultimate reality.  It is 
exclusively supramundane, and has
> one intrinsic nature (sabhava), which is that of being the 
unconditioned deathless element totally
> transcendant to the conditioned world.' (AS.V1,31) 
>           **********
> In other words, even though it is unconditioned, it has its nature 
that can be realized. I'm not
> sure that I would call the realizing 'marking', but either way, it 
remains the citta that realizes
> or marks and is conditioned. Being realized does not make the 
unconditioned reality conditioned. 

You say the "nature" of nibbana can be realized, and then go on to 
quote things that say nibbana lacks any marks pertaining to sankhara 
dhammas, is unconditioned, etc. I do not disagree with this at all, 
which is why I raise the question of how what is conditioned can 
cognize the unconditioned.

To have a citta that can "cognize" nibbana, if this is true, is an 
oxymoron. How can a citta have the six cetasikas of phassa, vedana, 
etc., against something lacking marks? How can one have phassa 
without creating a division between subject and object? Given nibbana 
is void of subject and object (the implication of it being 
unconditioned) as well as devoid of all that pertains to self, to 
make nibbaba an object through even phassa is to reify it and then, 
there is no nibbana anymore!

It would be the same as saying that you could "cognize" the absence 
of a big purple elephant in the room. Is is possible to directly 
cognize an absence? Can phassa arise in the instance of absence in 
the case of this elephant?

> I think it was Kom who pointed out earlier that cittas also 
experience concepts which are also not
> conditioned realities and never become conditioned realities. 

All pannati are by definition "deceptive realities" in the category 
of samutti sacca. So perhaps we are working with different 
definitions. I am using the division of paramattha vs. samutti sacca 
here. All pannati are samutti sacca, hence, deceptive. How can 
samutti sacca possibly conceive of paramattha sacca, is another way I 
might rephrase he question of how citta can cognize nibbana.

> It is true that panna only
> understands realities, but the cittas which think, think about 
concepts all the time. 
> 
> To finish, I'll give just one more quote about nibbana which you 
might appreciate:
>           **********
> 'Nibbana is called the void (sunnata) because it is devoid of 
greed, hatred, and delusion, and
> because it is devoid of all that is conditioned.

Void of all that is conditioned. And citta is conditioned, as is 
everything not nibbana. So again, how can the conditioned take the 
unconditioned as an object without reifying it right then & there? 
Lokuttara panna arises when the subtlest elaborations are nuked in 
meditation. If there are elaborations, no nibbana. When these 
elaborations that create distinctions among the ten-thousand things 
goes, what is left? Nibbana. Therefore, how can Nibbana, not being 
a "thing" at all, but rather a mere LABEL for the absence of 
independent existence, be "cognized" at all? 

Awaiting your reply!

 
5312 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Wed May 23, 2001 10:41pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Question...

 
  Dear CL

Glad to see you back again.  Thanks for the interesting question.

The fact that some people find interest in teachings that are foreign to their native culture is
as you point out a universal phenomenon.

I believe that the reason why we find this fascinating or puzzling is that we hold the innate view
that a person's make-up is largely the result of his environment and upbringing in this life.  The
Dhamma of course teaches us otherwise, that we are a product of our past deeds and mental states. 
Viewed in this light the phenomenon you describe is not really the least bit surprising.

Even if, after studying the teachings, we accept the likelihood of this truth, the fact is the
contrary view is deeply held and is not removed simply by exposure to the dahmma.

So my short answer to your question is, it is because of interest in the dhamma in the past, and
the good fortune to come across it again in this life, that a person from a non-Buddhist
background takes up the dhamma.  We all of course have our perceived set of reasons or series of
events that led us to 'find'  the dhamma in this life, but these will probalby be of superficial
relevance compared to the influence of past accumulations and deeds.

Jon


--- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)"  wrote: > Dear all,
> 
> 	Hi and I am back again.... I have this nagging question that I have
> been meaning to ask all of you as individuals. I am sure Asian people are
> exposed to Buddhism one way or the other.... and taking up Buddhism would be
> a matter of time. But for a European/Americans/Caucasians and other
> non-Asian people ...... well to be more specific Christians (Protestant or
> Catholics), what makes you choose Buddhism and to abandon Christianity which
> is being taught and passed down to you when you are young. I would really
> like to understand this.... Please reply me off list... and information will
> be dealt with privacy. As an Asian I am seeing a trend that is reverse in
> European/Americans/Caucasians and other non-Asian country..... more and more
> Asian is taking up Christianity... while people in the West is embracing
> Buddhism (That is what I have been told by one of my Buddhist friend while
> studying abroad). So please reply me ... thank you in advance.... May all of
> you be well and happy....
> 
> Yours,
> CL Loke
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 




 
5313 From: Kom Tukovinit   
Date: Wed May 23, 2001 11:06pm
Subject: Re: Fwd: Hello! And transfer of merit to the dead

 
  Dear Sarah (not sure if getting to Celia or not),

Welcome to the group (if you are in the group).

--- Sarah and Jonothan Abbott > Theravadin 
> Group. I intend to go to Myanmar in
> November to do a month's retreat at Chanmyay Sayadaw's
> centre. Any advice on this will be appreciated.

Can't help you here.  Although other members may be able to...

> 
> Recently one of my friends died and I have been
> feeling a kind of gap about what can be done for the
> dead, if anything. I have read about the transfer of
> merit to the dead, and have wondered how this squared
> with the fact that&nbsp;I alone can "save" myself, and
> kamma. I hope this is not a silly question.

The Buddha listed 10 kinds of wholesome deeds that can be done, one
of 
which is to rejoice (anumoddhana) when you know that other people
have 
done wholesome deeds.   When the Thais or other Buddhists say that "a 
merit can be transferred", what is actually done is:

1) The original doer of the wholesome deeds tells those that can know 
(human, devas, ghosts, etc) that a wholesome deed has been done.  
This 
dedication/making-known the wholesome deed is a "merit" accumulation 
for the doer.
2) The entity hearing about the deed rejoices (anumoddhana) the 
wholesome deeds of others.   This rejoicing is a merit accumulation
for the 
person rejoicing.  

There are many stories about the results of rejoicing other's
wholesome 
deeds in the tipitakas including:
1) Being born from the human plane into a deva plane as a result of
doing 
such 
2) Being born from the ghost (peta) plan into a deva plane as a
result of 
doing such

Since other worlds (peta and ghosts) cannot be verified as facts for
most 
people, what can be verified now are:
1) When telling other people about your own or other's good deeds
giving 
the opportunities for the hearers to rejoice about the deeds, the
mind is 
calm (with neutral or pleasant feelings) and is free of unwholesome 
qualities.
2) When rejoicing in other people wholesome deeds, the quality of the 
mind is similar.

kom

 

 
5315 From: Nina van Gorkom   
Date: Thu May 24, 2001 1:02am
Subject: greetings from Nina

 
  Dear group, greetings to you all. First of all great anumodana to Sarah and
Jonothan who lead this group with so much dedication, skill and metta. They
do not have a quiet breakfast because they work already for the group; they
even forego their evening meal and all relaxation such as T.V. for the sake
of their group. It makes me silent when I think of all this. I also wish to
express my appreciation to all members who seriously and sincerely study the
Dhamma with the purpose to have more understanding, and to those who keep on
making an effort to answer questions.
I have to correct something I wrote to Robert a few weeks ago about
awareness of dosa. Sarah had taken this up with Acharn Sujin and pointed
this out to me: I wrote that before realizing the difference between nama
and rupa we cannot be aware of dosa. It should be: we cannot know precisely
the characteristic of dosa as nama. Thus, although we are mixing up nama and
rupa, at least there can be a beginning of awareness of dosa, and this is of
course mixed with many moments of thinking. If there is no beginning, how
can it ever be known as it is.
What Sarah pointed out was an excellent reminder not to neglect awareness of
dosa, even slight degrees, such as a little uneasiness. How beneficial are
reminders from good friends, and I am here with good friends. Nina.

 
5316 From: Num 
Date: Wed May 23, 2001 11:22pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Question...

 
  Hi Jon,

I just finished attending a conference at Vanderbilt, Nashville, Tenessee. I have another 4 hours to catch a flight back home.   I don't think this is a good input but just like to comment sth.

<<<<<<I believe that the reason why we find this fascinating or puzzling is that we
 hold the innate view
 that a person's make-up is largely the result of his environment and
 upbringing in this life.    We all of course have our perceived set of
 reasons or series of
 events that led us to 'find'  the dhamma in this life, but these will
 probalby be of superficial
 relevance compared to the influence of past accumulations and deeds.>>>>

I think this is somewhat tricky reasoning.  Because the future has not yet arrived, so only the present and the past can give an influence on us. Sound infallible to me.   I think that both the accumulation and the environment factor are somewhat almost equal in theier effects.  Every interaction between environment and citta will inevitably become a past accumulation.   In my opinion, good environment supports and interacts with citta (nama, mind, brain, whatever we want to name it).  I wonder, if I born in a environment that food is not sufficient, I have to steal or to fight to make a living, my parents were abusive, I could not afford to go to school, can I have a chance to study Buddhism or meet friends in Dhamma???  I know that I better say "never say never".   But If I born in an environment that there is no knowledge of Buddhism available, I don't think I can become a Buddhist, the dhamma is too deep and too hard for me to understand it on my own. 

Well, that my accomulation, I work in genetic and medical field.  To me environment and gene always interact, and I am still perplex in, I can call it, both conventional and paramattha truth.  

Well, I call myself a wonderer.

Num

 
5317 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Thu May 24, 2001 6:22am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] greetings from Nina

 
  Dear Nina,

We are all very honoured to have you here with us and I can certainly never thank you enough for
your wonderful example and inspiration over the years in terms of your dedication to the teachings
and the excellent books you have written which have helped me so much. At present I'm really
appreciating Survey of Paramattha Dhammas which can be found on these websites:
http://www.abhidhamma.org/
http://www.zolag.co.uk/

You're very, very welcome here and I'm sure you'll be able to point out many mistakes we all make!

Very best wishes as always,
Sarah

p.s. Actually we have lovely breakfasts reading the posts! Many thanks for the comments which
really make me blush - this is a real team effort!

--- Nina van Gorkom  wrote: > Dear group, greetings to you all. First of all
great anumodana to Sarah and
> Jonothan who lead this group with so much dedication, skill and metta. They
> do not have a quiet breakfast because they work already for the group; they
> even forego their evening meal and all relaxation such as T.V. for the sake
> of their group. It makes me silent when I think of all this. I also wish to
> express my appreciation to all members who seriously and sincerely study the
> Dhamma with the purpose to have more understanding, and to those who keep on
> making an effort to answer questions.
> I have to correct something I wrote to Robert a few weeks ago about
> awareness of dosa. Sarah had taken this up with Acharn Sujin and pointed
> this out to me: I wrote that before realizing the difference between nama
> and rupa we cannot be aware of dosa. It should be: we cannot know precisely
> the characteristic of dosa as nama. Thus, although we are mixing up nama and
> rupa, at least there can be a beginning of awareness of dosa, and this is of
> course mixed with many moments of thinking. If there is no beginning, how
> can it ever be known as it is.
> What Sarah pointed out was an excellent reminder not to neglect awareness of
> dosa, even slight degrees, such as a little uneasiness. How beneficial are
> reminders from good friends, and I am here with good friends. Nina.     
> 



 
5318 From: Sarah and Jonothan Abbott  <Moderators> 
Date: Thu May 24, 2001 6:24am
Subject: Fwd: Re: send me book [The Corporate Body of The Buddha Educational Foundation

 
Subject: Re: send me book [The Corporate Body of The
> Buddha Educational Foundation
> 
> > 2) Buddha Education Foundation
> >    11F, 55 Hangchow South Road, Sec 1
> >    Taipei
> >    TAIWAN - R.O.C.
> 
> The Corporate Body of The Buddha Educational
> Foundation,
> 11F, #55, Sec. 1, Hang-Chow S. Rd.,
> 100, Taipei, Taiwan
> TEL: +886-2-2395-1198
> FAX: +886-2-2391-3415
> 
> The above website just established its website last
> year [ 1st Dec 
> 2000 ] here : [ But  it is written in Chinese
> language :-)]
> http://www.budaedu.org.tw/
> 
> You could surf this website for the catalogue of the
> dhamma books free 
> for distribution which are currently available:
> 
> http://www.budaedu.org.tw/books/#foreign
> 
> [I direct translated from the above website how to
> request the dhamma 
> books as it is only written in chinese :-)]
> =================================================
> How to request the dhamma books :
> [1] You are welcome to request  either through
> phone, fax, snail mail 
> or email.
> [2] In order to post the requested dhamma books to
> you, please write 
> your mail address clearly with the relevent
> postcode.
> [3] In order the dhamma books can be easily
> accessible to all the 
> people, all the dhamma books here are for FREE
> distribution. In order 
> the dhamma books can be equally distributed to the
> needed ones, please 
> request the exact amount of the books that you
> really need. The 
> availability of the dhamma books depends on the
> availability of the 
> stock left.
> [4]There is some very few limited items left which
> are  not listed in 
> the above website due to the small amount stock
> left, this are 
> reserved for those right ones to request, so it is
> not convinience to 
> list this items publicly, if you really need this
> not listed items, 
> you are welcome to request through phone, fax, post
> or email to ask 
> for further information.
> [5] When you reqesting through email , please take
> note:
>     [a] for tradition chinese characters dhamma
> books, please write to 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/post?protectID=114233014056099134036102203085243115134248015198209121182190172019106  [domestic@ budaedu.org.tw ]
>     [b] for simplified chinese characters dhamma
> books, please write 
> to http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/post?protectID=029166020185018031172223203085243115134248015198209121182190172019106  [mainland@
> budaedu.org.tw ]
>     [c] apart from the above [a] & [b] for  foreign
> language [english, 
> sri lanka, vietname etc] dhamma books , please write
> to 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/post?protectID=165130192180099198169232203085243115134248015198209121182190172019106   [overseas@ budaedu.org.tw
> ]
> ====================================================
> 
> Normally the catalogue of the dhamma books available
> are updated in a 
> monthly basis. Below are some of the foreign
> language books currently 
> available I took from the above website as some of
> the term are 
> written in chinese:  
> 
> Foreign Language Dhamma Books (Updated :
> 2001.May.01.)
> 
> Book Name     {Author}      [Language]      (Printed
> Amount/units)
> 
> -DHAMMA VIVIENTE <Original English Name: LIVING
> DHAMMA>{Ven. Ajahn 
> Chan}[Spanish] (10,000 units)                       
>                  
> -BUDDHISM IN A NUTSHELL {Ven.NANDA} [English] (5,000
> units)           
> -THE BUDDHA'S ANCENT PATH [English] (5,000 units)
> -MAY FLOWER II [English] (5,000 units)
> -Pure-Land Zen , Zen Pure-Land [English] (5,000
> units)
> -BUDDHISM OF WISDOM & FAITH [English] (5,000 units)
> -THE PATH OF PURIFICATION [English] (3,000 units)
> -BUDDHISM AS AN EDUCATION [English] (5,000 units)
> -THE WAY IT IS [English] (5,000 units)
> -THE FOUR NOBLE TRUTH [English] (4,000 units)
> -BUDDHISM: THE WISDOM OF COMPASSION AND AWAKENING
> [English] (10,000 
> units)
> -TO UNDERSTAND BUDDHISM [English] (10,000 units)
> -AN ELEMENTARY PALI COURSE [English] (2,000 units)
> -On Amidism,To Be Born in a Lotus,A Buddhist Goal
> that can be 
> [English] (4,000 units)
> -EMPTY CLOUD: THE TEACHINGS OF XU YUN AND A
> REMEMBRANCE OF THE GREAT 
> CHINESE ZEN MASTER [English] (4,000 units)
> -THE SUTRA OF BODHISATTYA KSITIGARBHA'S FUNDAMENTAL
> VOWS [English] 
> (5,000 units)
> -THUS HAVE I HEARD [English] (5,000 units)
> -CHANGING DESTINY [English] (10,000 units)
> -VIPASSANA MEDITATION [German]
> -VINAYA TIPITAKA [India Language] {3,000 units)
> -WHY MEDITATION [India Language/Dialect Marathi]
> -MINDFULNESS:THE PATH TO THE DEATH [Italy Language]
> (10,000 units)
> -THE FIELD OF MERIT [Loas Language] [10,000 units]
> -THE PATH OF PURIFICATION [Sri Lanka Pali Language]
> (5,000 units)
> -COMMENTARY ON THE PATH OF PURIFICATION [sri Lanka
> Language] (5,000 
> units)
> -BUDDHISM: ETT LEVANDE BUDSKAP [Sweden Language]
> (10,000 units)  
> 10,000       
> 
> 



 
5319 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Thu May 24, 2001 6:31am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Fwd: Re: send me book [The Corporate Body of The Buddha Educational Foundation

 
  Dear Gaopeng,

Many thanks for this info. Again i forwarded your message from the moderator account where many
posts are ending up at the moment for some reason. (I haven't forwarded the duplicate, but this is
the reason for the delay in this case).

No time for any comments by me as i'm rushing out, but please tell us a little about yourself!

many thanks,
Sarah

p.s as I just said to Celia, from now on you can just hit a 'reply' button to any post to send
direct to the list. 

Kom & all- replies to any of these messages that have been forwarded should be addressed to the
original sender and not to me...they're all here listening in!





 
5320 From: Binh 
Date: Thu May 24, 2001 10:10am
Subject: ... And transfer of merit to the dead

 
  --- celia walter  wrote:

> > Recently one of my friends died and I have been
> > feeling a kind of gap about what can be done for the
> > dead, if anything. I have read about the transfer of
> > merit to the dead, and have wondered how this squared
> > with the fact that&nbsp;I alone can "save" myself, and
> > kamma. 

------------------------------------------------

BA: Venerable Dhammananda wrote a short and concise explanation of 
this issue, which is available at:

==> http://www.budsas.org/ebud/whatbudbeliev/307.htm

  (The Significance of Transference of Merits to the Departed)

By the way, I would also recommend you and other dhamma friends to 
have a look at his book, "What Buddhists Believe", which covers many 
frequently-asked questions on common Buddhist practice. Available at:

==> http://www.budsas.org/ebud/whatbudbeliev/main.htm 

Metta,
Binh

 
5321 From: Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)   
Date: Thu May 24, 2001 11:04am
Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Question

 
  Dear Paul, 
		Thank you for your explanation. Basically what you have said
I agree.. but somehow I seems to be not satisfied as to the answered given..
maybe it is just me... but maybe the situation here in my country or the
environment around is this.... Chinese here in Malaysia consists of
Buddhist, practising and non practising, Practising would be like Dhamma
aware group.. while the other is that a mixture of Taoism, Confucianism and
deva worshipping (I hope I use the correct term) Basically praying to idols
of deities etc etc.... and it seems non focusing type of worship where one
can be praying to up to several deities... so I guess this is less
convincing and substantiating than  Christianity .... where it is easier to
relate to and also all these deities praying tends to get side track to
superstition.... hence opening a better opportunity for conversion...
Christianity offers them a focus point..... to channel and cultivate
spiritual health.. very often I get into discussion with Christian friends
(be it Protestant or Catholics) of course we bear no ill will .....
Furthermore when I was surfing the Net, wanting to look for more information
on topics on life (ie the beginning) somehow or rather.. I end up nil... in
terms of Chrisitianity .. life begins with the will and "the breath of God"
... although I know that the Buddhist would not be bothered by these issues
which does not solve "the poison arrow in the body" problem .. but I am
still wanting to know... maybe can enlighten me on this...

rgds,
LokeCL

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Paul Bail [SMTP:Paul Bail]
> Sent:	Wednesday, May 23, 2001 8:18 PM
> Subject:	[DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Question
> 
> Dear Loke,
> 
> For me, from an early age, I had difficulty with (1) the notion of a
> supreme, 
> infinite God with a personality, (2) this God creates evil and an eternal 
> hell, (3) one must believe many dogmas which cannot be verified 
> experientially--blind faith, (4) the more sincere Christians often tend to
> be 
> emotionalistic--less Wisdom dimension, (5) emphasis on converting other 
> people, and anyone who does not believe the same as you, including
> Christians 
> of other sects, is damned (the more liberal churches don't believe this).
> In 
> comparison, Buddhist notions were much more logical and satisfying, (6) 
> overemphasis one either (a) the authority of the "infallible" Bible or (b)
> an 
> "infallible" religious figure (the Pope) as being the ultimate decider of
> all 
> questions
> (as opposed to oneself investigating).
> 
> Of course, there are a lot of diversity of Christian groups and some, such
> as 
> the Quakers, might not fit all the above.  But in the sect that I grew up
> in 
> all these problems were present.
> 
> Also, as others have said, being an unfamiliar and "exotic" religion one 
> could project unrealistic assumptions on it--for example, that Buddhist 
> religious organization and history did not suffer from some of the same 
> political and sectarian problems of Christianity.  Of course, one learns 
> later that humans have the same tendencies wherever they come from.
> 
> Also, some very excellent Buddhist teachers came to the U.S. and provided
> a 
> contrast--in their spiritual qualities--to the run of the mill Christian 
> preacher.
> 
> Also, in my generation, the sincere spiritual seekers were mostly
> exploring 
> alternatives to Christianity.
> 
> Paul Bail
>

 
5322 From: Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)   
Date: Thu May 24, 2001 11:08am
Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Question...

 
  Dear Jon...

	I am not quenched.... no doubt of past good karma and chance upon it
this life do plays a role.. but however with each different lives conditions
and environments will differ thus.. the mind is evolving... and the actions
in this life is what interests me.. what part that you are not confortable
with that makes you want to change....?  you can reply off list if you
wish... thank you in advance

LokeCL
> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Jonothan Abbott [SMTP:Jon]
> Sent:	Wednesday, May 23, 2001 10:42 PM
> Subject:	Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Question...
> 
> Dear CL
> 
> Glad to see you back again.  Thanks for the interesting question.
> 
> The fact that some people find interest in teachings that are foreign to
> their native culture is
> as you point out a universal phenomenon.
> 
> I believe that the reason why we find this fascinating or puzzling is that
> we hold the innate view
> that a person's make-up is largely the result of his environment and
> upbringing in this life.  The
> Dhamma of course teaches us otherwise, that we are a product of our past
> deeds and mental states. 
> Viewed in this light the phenomenon you describe is not really the least
> bit surprising.
> 
> Even if, after studying the teachings, we accept the likelihood of this
> truth, the fact is the
> contrary view is deeply held and is not removed simply by exposure to the
> dahmma.
> 
> So my short answer to your question is, it is because of interest in the
> dhamma in the past, and
> the good fortune to come across it again in this life, that a person from
> a non-Buddhist
> background takes up the dhamma.  We all of course have our perceived set
> of reasons or series of
> events that led us to 'find'  the dhamma in this life, but these will
> probalby be of superficial
> relevance compared to the influence of past accumulations and deeds.
> 
> Jon
> 
> 
> --- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)"  wrote: >
> Dear all,
> > 
> > 	Hi and I am back again.... I have this nagging question that I have
> > been meaning to ask all of you as individuals. I am sure Asian people
> are
> > exposed to Buddhism one way or the other.... and taking up Buddhism
> would be
> > a matter of time. But for a European/Americans/Caucasians and other
> > non-Asian people ...... well to be more specific Christians (Protestant
> or
> > Catholics), what makes you choose Buddhism and to abandon Christianity
> which
> > is being taught and passed down to you when you are young. I would
> really
> > like to understand this.... Please reply me off list... and information
> will
> > be dealt with privacy. As an Asian I am seeing a trend that is reverse
> in
> > European/Americans/Caucasians and other non-Asian country..... more and
> more
> > Asian is taking up Christianity... while people in the West is embracing
> > Buddhism (That is what I have been told by one of my Buddhist friend
> while
> > studying abroad). So please reply me ... thank you in advance.... May
> all of
> > you be well and happy....
> > 
> > Yours,
> > CL Loke
> > 


 
5323 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Thu May 24, 2001 9:33pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] greetings from Nina

 
  Nina

Welcome to the group from me, and many thanks for your kind words.

Actually my involvement with the list has not been a burden or chore at all, but rather a great
joy, since it has been an occasion for so much more useful reflection than would otherwise have
been the case.  I am very grateful to all who have taken part in the list for making it what it
is. 

We hope that you find your time with us useful, and we look forward very much to your posts.  I
know that you devote most of your energies to your writings, but I hope you will find time to join
in the discussion from time to time.

Jon


--- Nina van Gorkom  wrote: > Dear group, greetings to you all. First of all
great anumodana to Sarah and
> Jonothan who lead this group with so much dedication, skill and metta. They
> do not have a quiet breakfast because they work already for the group; they
> even forego their evening meal and all relaxation such as T.V. for the sake
> of their group. It makes me silent when I think of all this. I also wish to
> express my appreciation to all members who seriously and sincerely study the
> Dhamma with the purpose to have more understanding, and to those who keep on
> making an effort to answer questions.
> I have to correct something I wrote to Robert a few weeks ago about
> awareness of dosa. Sarah had taken this up with Acharn Sujin and pointed
> this out to me: I wrote that before realizing the difference between nama
> and rupa we cannot be aware of dosa. It should be: we cannot know precisely
> the characteristic of dosa as nama. Thus, although we are mixing up nama and
> rupa, at least there can be a beginning of awareness of dosa, and this is of
> course mixed with many moments of thinking. If there is no beginning, how
> can it ever be known as it is.
> What Sarah pointed out was an excellent reminder not to neglect awareness of
> dosa, even slight degrees, such as a little uneasiness. How beneficial are
> reminders from good friends, and I am here with good friends. Nina.     
> 
 
 

 
5324 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Thu May 24, 2001 9:46pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] ... And transfer of merit to the dead

 
  Celia

Welcome to the list, and thank you for bringing up this interesting question.

I've not had a chance yet to check the references helpfully provided by Binh (below), but I think
you will by now have realised that 'transfer of merit' is quite a misnomer, as is the idea that
this is something associated solely with the dead.  This was I thought clearly brought out in
Kom's post.

The wholesome mental state associated with making known to others wholesome deeds done, and
appreciating that when made known by another, is an aspect of wholesomeness that was fairly much
absent from my upbringing and I suspect the upbringing of those in most 'Western' cultures.

Once one knows about it, one can soon find opportunities to develop it in one's daily life. 

I do hope this exchange has helped fill the gap a little.

Jon

--- Binh wrote: > --- celia walter  wrote:
> 
> > > Recently one of my friends died and I have been
> > > feeling a kind of gap about what can be done for the
> > > dead, if anything. I have read about the transfer of
> > > merit to the dead, and have wondered how this squared
> > > with the fact that&nbsp;I alone can "save" myself, and
> > > kamma. 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------
> 
> BA: Venerable Dhammananda wrote a short and concise explanation of 
> this issue, which is available at:
> 
> ==> http://www.budsas.org/ebud/whatbudbeliev/307.htm
> 
>   (The Significance of Transference of Merits to the Departed)
> 
> By the way, I would also recommend you and other dhamma friends to 
> have a look at his book, "What Buddhists Believe", which covers many 
> frequently-asked questions on common Buddhist practice. Available at:
> 
> ==> http://www.budsas.org/ebud/whatbudbeliev/main.htm 
> 
> Metta,
> Binh 
> 



 
5325 From: Num 
Date: Thu May 24, 2001 6:59pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] greetings from Nina

 
  Hi Nina,

May I also say welcome to dsg. Glad to see u here.  

I am very busy lately, but let me ask you and the group something which is 
not clear for me.   

Sorry Sarah, I have not been able to keep up with ur reply.  I have read them 
all though.

<<<I have to correct something I wrote to Robert a few weeks ago about
awareness of dosa. Sarah had taken this up with Acharn Sujin and pointed
this out to me: I wrote that before realizing the difference between nama
and rupa we cannot be aware of dosa. It should be: we cannot know precisely
the characteristic of dosa as nama. Thus, although we are mixing up nama and
rupa, at least there can be a beginning of awareness of dosa, and this is of
course mixed with many moments of thinking. If there is no beginning, how
can it ever be known as it is.
What Sarah pointed out was an excellent reminder not to neglect awareness of
dosa, even slight degrees, such as a little uneasiness. >>>

I am still struggle at thinking level.  Here is my question,  since dosa 
cetasika always and only coarises with domanassa-vedana.  I have a hard time 
seeing what the different between the two.   When I am mad, there are long 
series of feeling arise. I can feel I am angry, I can feel it's kind of 
tension in my various muscles, I feel the heat, uncalmed, uneasy feeling, 
dissatisfaction, impatience and unkindness even at time destructive intention 
(hmmm, sorry I can be a bad guy).   May I ask what exactly is character of 
dosa and also domanassa-vedana?

Alright, have to go. 

Num

PS.  Lately, I have got only sporadic mails from dsg echoed to me, not every 
mail.  Does this happen to other as well ???




 
5326 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Fri May 25, 2001 6:46am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] greetings from Nina

 
  Dear Num,

--- Num wrote:
> (hmmm, sorry I can be a bad guy).   May I ask what exactly is character of 
> dosa and also domanassa-vedana?
> 
> Alright, have to go. 
> 
> Num
> 
> PS.  Lately, I have got only sporadic mails from dsg echoed to me, not every 
> mail.  Does this happen to other as well ???
> 

You always make me laugh!  I miss you when you're not around too! Good question about dosa!

You can always check the website to see if all the messages have come through: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup

or escribe (remember 'metta' is the password):
http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/

Usually I find they all come through but some are delayed, probably because of different servers. 

Have to go too!
Sarah

p.s HOWARD and Num, did my response on phassa, vinnana and the rest help at all?
ERIK, many thanks...I'm not spoiling for a fight and WILL get back to you, probably next week now!
(unless reinforcements come in in the meantime ;-))





 
5327 From: Num 
Date: Fri May 25, 2001 3:56am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] greetings from Nina : Sarah

 
  Hi Sarah,

I just checked the dsg on yahoo group.  I missed a lot of mails actually.  I 
didn't get your mail on "Phassa, ekaggata, manasikara & Vi~n~nana", either.   
Let me checked them out and get in touch with you later.   I usually check my 
mail on AOL only.  I set my mail on other servers to fwd the mail to my aol 
account.  

Num



 
5328 From: Herman 
Date: Fri May 25, 2001 3:25pm
Subject: Re: Ease and stuff

 
  Dear Erik et al ,

I am not attributing the use of the words to you, Erik,  but I wonder 
whether the concepts of difficulty and ease apply at all to jhanas. 
Wouldn't it be fair to say that when the conditions are not right 
jhana cannot arise, and when conditions are right jhana can arise?

An eight year old with certain accumulations may dwell in the jhanas 
at will , while the most learned man with other accumulations may 
never get near that state.

Similarly, I read on dhammastudy.com that it is hard for satipatthana 
to arise. Perhaps it is more meaningful to say that satipatthana does 
not arise as often as other states of mind, again due to the 
conditions that prevail. 

I am now becoming indulgent here, but another one that comes up 
regularly is that cittas arise and fall so rapidly, we can't really 
keep up with them , or words to that effect. Cittas are neither slow 
or fast, each one carries out their function perfectly, neither 
hurried nor slow, just so.

That's what I think. What do you think?


Regards

Herman

--- Erik wrote:
> --- Sarah Procter Abbott  
> 
> 
> Re: "Ease of jhanas." I NEVER said the jhanas were easy. I said 
> they're doable, and with the appropriate confidence coupled with 
> persistence in sticking with practice, the signs eventually 
manifest. 
> In my own case, I fumbled, spun my wheels, sat on and off (more 
off, 
> out of frustration). This was my first five years of "practice." I 
> didn't know what the heck I was doing, basically, and had no good 
> instruction (not that I could have used it at the time, my mind was 
> too messed up--I was doing stupid stuff like drinking to quell 
dukkha 
> at the time, etc., so not a happy camper, in other words).
> 
> What I didn't realize was I'd never make any progress so long as my 
> mind was defiled by so much craving, anger, etc. When I was given  
> the practice of tonglen (Tibetan metta-bhabvana) it purified so 
much 
> in a few months of practice it got rid of enough of the hindrances 
to 
> make meditation possible. It sure made me feel like a million 
bucks. 
> That, and a little MDMA chemotherapy, which helped me identify 
> samatha (helped bring about kaya & citta passadhi and a big AHA!), 
> plus the bliss of tummo yoga, brought it all together for me. After 
> many years of failed efforts, though. That doesn't sound all that 
> easy to me. It does, however, prove it's possible here & now, in 
21st 
> century society. With a little ingenuity, and unwillingness to take 
> others' words for things (meaning test EVERYTHING out and question 
> mercilessly), and the persistence to keep with it in spite of  
> obstacles, nearly anything is possible. Of course what I see now is 
> this the textbook approach of developing the bodhipakkiya-dhammas. 
> The appropriate order, dana, sila, bhavana: restraining bad actions 
> stopping drinking for example), clearing away defilements by 
> purifying the mind (tonglen), and last, bhavana, meditation on 
> emptiness once the coarse junk was cleared away from the previous 
two 
> steps (though never abandoning any steps, all must work together 
all 
> the time now).
>

 
5329 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Fri May 25, 2001 3:47pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Kusala etc.-Eric, nibbana

 
  --- Erik wrote:
> What I didn't realize was I'd never make any progress so long as my 
> mind was defiled by so much craving, anger, etc. When I was given  
> the practice of tonglen (Tibetan metta-bhabvana) it purified so much 
> in a few months of practice it got rid of enough of the hindrances to 
> make meditation possible. It sure made me feel like a million bucks. 
> That, and a little MDMA chemotherapy, which helped me identify 
> samatha (helped bring about kaya & citta passadhi and a big AHA!), 
> plus the bliss of tummo yoga, brought it all together for me.

Erik
Sorry, but what is MDMN chemotherapy?
thanks
JOn


 
5330 From: Erik 
Date: Fri May 25, 2001 6:23pm
Subject: Re: Kusala etc.-Eric, nibbana

 
  --- Jonothan Abbott  wrote:
> --- Erik wrote:
> > What I didn't realize was I'd never make any progress so long as 
my 
> > mind was defiled by so much craving, anger, etc. When I was 
given  
> > the practice of tonglen (Tibetan metta-bhabvana) it purified so 
much 
> > in a few months of practice it got rid of enough of the 
hindrances to 
> > make meditation possible. It sure made me feel like a million 
bucks. 
> > That, and a little MDMA chemotherapy, which helped me identify 
> > samatha (helped bring about kaya & citta passadhi and a big 
AHA!), 
> > plus the bliss of tummo yoga, brought it all together for me.
> 
> Erik
> Sorry, but what is MDMN chemotherapy?

I have no idea what MDMN would be. MDMA is 
methelynedioxymethamphetamine, otherwise known as Ecstasy, X, 
whatever. You know, the stuff they are throwing people in jail for.

 
5331 From: Erik 
Date: Fri May 25, 2001 6:50pm
Subject: Re: Ease and stuff

 
  --- Herman wrote:
> Dear Erik et al ,
> 
> I am not attributing the use of the words to you, Erik,  but I 
wonder 
> whether the concepts of difficulty and ease apply at all to jhanas. 
> Wouldn't it be fair to say that when the conditions are not right 
> jhana cannot arise, and when conditions are right jhana can arise?

I agree "ease" and "difficulty" are not as helpful. That was 
generally my point, that if the appropriate conditions are present, 
the jhanas arise. But the conditions have to be there first. And they 
have to be cultivated in the appropriate order: sila, samadhi, panna.

If there is anything to be learned from the Buddha's teachings on 
dependent origination, it is that if we can identify the conditions 
for the arising of the jhanangas, we can use that knowledge to create 
the appropriate conditions. Without these conditions present, the 
jhanangas will never have cause to arise, no matter what. If 
established, jhana MUST arise.

This is the one consistent reality that keeps striking me as I delve 
more into the Abhidhamma. This is the most amazing technical 
meditation manual ever devised. There is nothing dry about it. I 
never cease to be amazed at the interconnections among things that 
keep appearing. But perhaps the most interesting discovery I have 
made so far is the role of the various conditions, and that by 
knowing the conditions for the arising of certain factors, we gain 
the knowledge to create those conditions ourselves. 

> Similarly, I read on dhammastudy.com that it is hard for 
satipatthana 
> to arise. Perhaps it is more meaningful to say that satipatthana 
does 
> not arise as often as other states of mind, again due to the 
> conditions that prevail. 

That's why creating the appropriate conditions is of the utmost 
importance. I do not speak from my ass on this one. The introduction 
of one eensy-weensy hindrance can destroy jhana practice. I know how 
easy this is, because I lost my entire sitting meditation practice 
for two years because my commute left me just bedraggled enough my 
meditation stalled. There was the presence of a wee bit too much 
uddhacca & kukucca. And that was all it took to go into a death-
spiral where I couldn't meditate for two years, lost all 
psychological armoring, and lived experiencing more dukkha than I'd 
ever experienced before discovering the dhamma or meditation. Far 
more.

Whoops! Those are the real-world implications of ignoring the 
importance of conditions, or being ignorant of them (or being 
cognizant of them and still being unable to do a damn thinga bout 
them anyway). Until I began studying the Abhidhamma I didn't see how 
all these factors fit together. This "failure," though, was actually 
a blessing in disguise, because I had to learn to overcome painful 
situations without the suppression of the nivaranas from jhana 
meditation, using various other strategies to overcome dukkha, which 
I had foolishly believed would be solved by jhana and insight 
meditation alone.

 
5332 From: Howard 
Date: Fri May 25, 2001 3:38pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Ease and stuff

 
  Hi, Herman -

In a message dated 5/25/01 3:41:55 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
Herman writes:


> I am now becoming indulgent here, but another one that comes up 
> regularly is that cittas arise and fall so rapidly, we can't really 
> keep up with them , or words to that effect. Cittas are neither slow 
> or fast, each one carries out their function perfectly, neither 
> hurried nor slow, just so.
> 
==========================
       Well, I guess the question is: fast ot slow as compared to *what*? In 
one sense, it is the flow of cittas that *is* time. In another sense, 
however, we can say that the flow of cittas is fast compared to the flow of 
rupas which are the (primary) objects of the cittas. As I understand it, 
there may be a sequence of many cittas which take "the same" rupa as object, 
and, in that sense the cittas pass by more quickly than their objects. (That 
"same rupa" would actually be an abstraction; I suppose that the reality 
would be that of one citta cognizing one arammana, but when there is little 
or no discernable difference between successive rupas, they will be 
identified with each other by the mind.)

With metta,
Howard


/Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble 
in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a 
phantom, and a dream./            (From the Diamond Sutra)                    
            
                                         



 
5334 From: Dan 
Date: Fri May 25, 2001 7:58pm
Subject: Question

 
  Suppose someone steals a bike. Do they do so because they stole 
things in this and previous lives, and the unwholesome accumulations 
conditioned their stealing today?

 
5335 From: Dan 
Date: Fri May 25, 2001 8:00pm
Subject: Answer

 
  No. Stealing is kamma, not vipaka.

 
5336 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Fri May 25, 2001 8:22pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Kamma-vatta (wasAnswer

 
  dear dan,
There are three rounds : kamma-vatta(action),
vipaka-vatta(result) and kilesa-vatta (defilements such as
greed, aversion, ignorance). The actual moments of experience
through the doorways are vipaka (result) but immediately there
is reaction which is defilement(kilesa) and
this conditions kamma. These rounds are all spinning now,
continually, as they always have in samsara. 
The three rounds are all conditioned and closely related. Kamma
also is conditioned. 
This is a topic that we seldom discuss but these three rounds
can eludicidate much about the Dhamma - and thus about our
lives. 
Someone sees a bike: that is the concept. 
What actually happens is visible object conditions seeing
consciousness (vipaka). this then conditions kilesa which if of
sufficient strenght conditions kamma (stealing). In the future
that act will bring a suitable result... and so the round goes
on and on...
If mother teresa saw a bike she wouldn't have stolen it. There
weren't the strenght of defilements(kilesa) able to condition
that type of action (kamma).
robert


--- Dan wrote:
> No. Stealing is kamma, not vipaka.



 
5337 From: Sarah and Jonothan Abbott  <Moderators> 
Date: Fri May 25, 2001 8:21pm
Subject: Fwd: questions

 
  --- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)"
 wrote: 

> Subject: questions
> Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 10:03:52 +0200
> 
> Dear Sarah & Jonothan,
> 
> 		Recently I have posted questions on the issue of
> converts..
> and doesn't seems to get much response.. I hope I
> haven't offended
> anyone....but some how I cannot shurg off this
> nagging questions.. why a
> bron christians chose to become buddhist believing
> in rebirth whereas the
> birth religion of gwai loh which is christianity
> goes against this idea....
> how do I answer my freinds question of rebirth as
> there are no prove of this
> ideas existence....( which is what is rebutted to
> me)... I know that
> Buddhism usually uses a reverse deduction to come to
> this.... but I wanted
> to know from a more personal level as to the reason
> as in what change ? If
> you don't want to answer this question.. do let me
> know... you are not
> obligated to answer any of this question... either
> this or maybe I haven't
> receiving replies from other group members... thank
> you for your time and
> help...
> 
> may you be well and happy,
> Loke CL



 
5338 From: Dan 
Date: Fri May 25, 2001 8:24pm
Subject: From Abhidhamma

 
  Katha-vatthu XVII 3 (PTS, SZ Aung, CAF Rhys Davids):

"Controverted point: That all this is from kamma. 
Theravadin: 'Do you then include kamma itself as due to kamma (1)? 
And do you imply that all this is simply the result of bygone causes 
(2)? You a committed here to what you must deny. Again, you imply, by 
your proposition, that all this is [not so much kamma as] from the 
reulst of [still earlier] kamma. If you deny (3), you deny your first 
proposition. If you assent (4), you imply that one may commit murder 
throu [not kamma, but] the reusult of kamma. You assent (5)? Then 
murder, [though a result], is itself productive of [kammic] result. 
You assent? Then the result of kamma is productive of result. You 
deny? Then it is barren of result, and murder must a fortiori be 
barren of [kammic] result... This argument applies equally to other 
immoral acts--to theft, to wicked speech--lying, abuse, slander, and 
idle talk--to burglary, raiding, looting, highway robbery, adulatery, 
destorying houses in village or town. It applies equally to moral 
acts: to giving gifts--e.g., giving the four necessaries. If any of 
these is done as the result of kamma, and themselves produce kammic 
result, then [you are on the horns of this dilemma: tha] either 
result-of-kamma can itself produce effects, or any good or bad deed 
has no kammic result.'

(1) This is rejected as fusing kamma with its result---comy.
(2) That the present is merely a series of effect and without 
initiative. See on the erroneous opinion (stated in AN i. 173ff; 
Vibhanga 367) Ledi Sadaw, JPTS, 1913-1914, p. 118.
(3) If all is from kamma, then that causal kamma effcected in a past 
life must have been the result of kamma effected in a still earlier 
life.--comy.
(4) A shoot cannot produce a shoot, but in the continuity of life a 
seed is the product of another seed, and by this analogy kamma is the 
result of previous kamma. So at forst rejecting, he then assents.--
Comy."

 
5339 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Fri May 25, 2001 8:35pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Ease and stuff

 
  Dear herman.
I agree with all this. 
I think we can say cittas fall away incredibly swiftly but as
you indicate they are doing so at exactly the speed they should
- so actually not too fast nor too slow, just enough to do what
they do.
roberrt
--- Herman wrote:
> Dear Erik et al ,
> 
> I am not attributing the use of the words to you, Erik,  but I
> wonder 
> whether the concepts of difficulty and ease apply at all to
> jhanas. 
> Wouldn't it be fair to say that when the conditions are not
> right 
> jhana cannot arise, and when conditions are right jhana can
> arise?
> 
> An eight year old with certain accumulations may dwell in the
> jhanas 
> at will , while the most learned man with other accumulations
> may 
> never get near that state.
> 
> Similarly, I read on dhammastudy.com that it is hard for
> satipatthana 
> to arise. Perhaps it is more meaningful to say that
> satipatthana does 
> not arise as often as other states of mind, again due to the 
> conditions that prevail. 
> 
> I am now becoming indulgent here, but another one that comes
> up 
> regularly is that cittas arise and fall so rapidly, we can't
> really 
> keep up with them , or words to that effect. Cittas are
> neither slow 
> or fast, each one carries out their function perfectly,
> neither 
> hurried nor slow, just so.
> 
> That's what I think. What do you think?
> 
> 
> Regards
> 



 
5340 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Fri May 25, 2001 8:56pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Fwd: questions

 
  Dear C.L.,

I'm quite sure you haven't offended anyone and you asked an interesting question. I don't think
there's any reason for replies or follow-up by you to be off-list and you may get more replies
when others have time. People choose which questions they wish to answer. 

Actually I thought the reponses you got were very helpful, but maybe they weren't what you were
expecting. In the end, as Jon suggested, we can speculate about the reasons for taking an interest
in Buddhism but really there are so many diferent conditions and factors involved. We could spend
our lives trying unsuccessfully to 'work out ' all these different conditions. Even in an Asian
Buddhist family, we will see that one member really studies the Teachings and other members really
show very little interest at all. The more we understand about accumulations and conditions, the
less surprising this is.

For my part, in this life, I was brought up in a very strong Christian family, but found the
'belief system' increasingly frustrating. I was also very interested to understand more about how
the mind worked and studied psychology at universtity for this reason. However I wasn't satisfied
at the end with the scientific and other explanations and found them too limiting. Buddhism
appealed from the start because of the emphasis on testing and proving for oneself and most
important of all because of ANATTA. Later the abhidhamma began to answer all the questions I'd
ever had about life and the way the mind works.

Most if not all religions encourage sila (morality) and many encourage concentration practices.
The teaching of anatta (not self) is unique to the Buddha's Teachings. We can test and prove at
this moment that there is no self or God in the seeing, hearing and other realities.

What is important is to understand more now. We can even talk about the rebirth of each moment of
citta (consciousness) now. Is the seeing now the same as the seeing a moment ago? Is there
happiness one moment and sadness the next? Which is 'me'? This is the way to understand rebirth at
this moment, by beginning to understand these phenomena better. Rebirth at the end of this life is
just another moment too..!

We may have different skin colour or have been brought up in different places, but these Teachings
are universal and the problems and wrong views we start with know no barriers!

Best wishes and I hope to hear from you again.

Sarah

>  wrote: 
> 
> > Subject: questions
> > Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 10:03:52 +0200
> > 
> > Dear Sarah & Jonothan,
> > 
> > 		Recently I have posted questions on the issue of
> > converts..
> > and doesn't seems to get much response.. I hope I
> > haven't offended
> > anyone....but some how I cannot shurg off this
> > nagging questions.. why a
> > bron christians chose to become buddhist believing
> > in rebirth whereas the
> > birth religion of gwai loh which is christianity
> > goes against this idea....
> > how do I answer my freinds question of rebirth as
> > there are no prove of this
> > ideas existence....( which is what is rebutted to
> > me)... I know that
> > Buddhism usually uses a reverse deduction to come to
> > this.... but I wanted
> > to know from a more personal level as to the reason
> > as in what change ? If
> > you don't want to answer this question.. do let me
> > know... you are not
> > obligated to answer any of this question... either
> > this or maybe I haven't
> > receiving replies from other group members... thank
> > you for your time and
> > help...
> > 
> > may you be well and happy,
> > Loke CL



 
5341 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Fri May 25, 2001 9:58pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] greetings from Nina : Sarah

 
  Hi Num,

I used to have the same problem as you (and many others) with another server. Since using the
yahoo one, Y've had none....and find they usually go through without any delays. It 'smaybe a
deliberate policy on yahoo group's part but I won't go into that!

Just take your time...we'll be around for a good while to come! I'm always behind on replies (esp.
difficult ones to you, Kom and Erik!!).

The weather must be getting better for your tennis now! It' s getting pretty hot and humid here.

Speak soon,

Sarah



--- Num wrote: > Hi Sarah,
> 
> I just checked the dsg on yahoo group.  I missed a lot of mails actually.  I 
> didn't get your mail on "Phassa, ekaggata, manasikara & Vi~n~nana", either.   
> Let me checked them out and get in touch with you later.   I usually check my 
> mail on AOL only.  I set my mail on other servers to fwd the mail to my aol 
> account.  
> 
> Num
> 



 
5342 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Sat May 26, 2001 3:29pm
Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Question...

 
  CL

--- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)"  wrote: > Dear Jon...
> 
> 	I am not quenched.... no doubt of past good karma and chance upon it
> this life do plays a role.. but however with each different lives conditions
> and environments will differ thus.. the mind is evolving... and the actions
> in this life is what interests me.. what part that you are not confortable
> with that makes you want to change....?  you can reply off list if you
> wish... thank you in advance

I have no problem discussing this on-list, but if you could explain why you are so keen to hear
about particular individual cases, it might help me in giving a more 'quenching' answer.

Actually, the best source of people's reasons for 'converting' to Buddhism is the suttas, since
all followers in the Buddhas's time were 'converts' (there were no Buddhists before his
enlightenment).  You will see from the suttas that it was by no means always a matter of being
dissatisfied with the person's family religion.  Some who came to meet the Buddha did so thinking
that they could out-debate him, some had led dissolute or criminal lives up to that time, some
continued to follow the traditions of their religion even after considering themselves followers. 
But all those who became enlightened within that lifetime were obviously 'ripe' for enlightenment,
through understanding accumulated in countless previous lives.

All those who declared themselves followers did so on the basis of the light that the dhamma had
shed where previously there had been darkness.  I suspect that the same reason would apply in most
cases today.

CL, please share with us something of your own thinking on this question.

Jon


 
5343 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Sat May 26, 2001 3:45pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Ease and stuff

 
  Herman

On your point about the speed of cittas -

> I am now becoming indulgent here, but another one that comes up 
> regularly is that cittas arise and fall so rapidly, we can't really 
> keep up with them , or words to that effect. Cittas are neither slow 
> or fast, each one carries out their function perfectly, neither 
> hurried nor slow, just so.

I can think of a couple of reasons why the question of the speed of cittas might be brought up
time to time.

The first is to illustrate the fact that the reality (individual moments of consciousness, never
more that one at a time, each falling away completely before the next arises) is completely
different to the apparent (continuous and contemporaneous experiences through multiple doorways).

The second is to counter the belief many people hold that they are able to 'experience' individual
cittas arising and falling away.

Jon

--- Herman wrote: > Dear Erik et al ,
> 
> I am not attributing the use of the words to you, Erik,  but I wonder 
> whether the concepts of difficulty and ease apply at all to jhanas. 
> Wouldn't it be fair to say that when the conditions are not right 
> jhana cannot arise, and when conditions are right jhana can arise?
> 
> An eight year old with certain accumulations may dwell in the jhanas 
> at will , while the most learned man with other accumulations may 
> never get near that state.
> 
> Similarly, I read on dhammastudy.com that it is hard for satipatthana 
> to arise. Perhaps it is more meaningful to say that satipatthana does 
> not arise as often as other states of mind, again due to the 
> conditions that prevail. 



 
5344 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Sat May 26, 2001 3:56pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Kusala etc.-Eric, nibbana

 
  Erik

--- Erik wrote: > --- Jonothan Abbott  wrote:
> > --- Erik wrote:
> > > What I didn't realize was I'd never make any progress so long as 
> my 
> > > mind was defiled by so much craving, anger, etc. When I was 
> given  
> > > the practice of tonglen (Tibetan metta-bhabvana) it purified so 
> much 
> > > in a few months of practice it got rid of enough of the 
> hindrances to 
> > > make meditation possible. It sure made me feel like a million 
> bucks. 
> > > That, and a little MDMA chemotherapy, which helped me identify 
> > > samatha (helped bring about kaya & citta passadhi and a big 
> AHA!), 
> > > plus the bliss of tummo yoga, brought it all together for me.
> > 
> > Erik
> > Sorry, but what is MDMN chemotherapy?
> 
> I have no idea what MDMN would be. MDMA is 
> methelynedioxymethamphetamine, otherwise known as Ecstasy, X, 
> whatever. You know, the stuff they are throwing people in jail for.

And I suppose Timothy Leary was your guru?!

If Ecstacy and yogic breathing helped you see/experience something that your studies of the dhamma
had not led you to see/experience, that would suggest that the something was not the dhamma or
anything to do with kusala.  But no doubt you see it otherwise?

Jon


 
5345 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Sat May 26, 2001 4:08pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Answer

 
  Dan

I believe I understand the question -

> Suppose someone steals a bike. Do they do so because they stole 
> things in this and previous lives, and the unwholesome accumulations 
> conditioned their stealing today?

and I agree with the statement given in the answer -

> No. Stealing is kamma, not vipaka.

But I haven't grasped the reasoning behind the 'No'.  Could you amplify, please.  Thanks.

Jon


 
5346 From: Tori Korshak   
Date: Sat May 26, 2001 7:59pm
Subject: intro and appeal

 
  Dear Group,

I am a lurker here attempting the transition to occasional contributor. I 
live in London with my husband and two grown children who still live at 
home although both are gainfully employed. They are not Buddhists although 
they know a lot of Dhamma from having to live with me, so at least it's not 
like a foreign language.

I gain a lot from this list. In particular, the practical application of 
Abhidhamma has changed my practice. Many people seem to find Abhidhamma 
very dry, enumerative, and abstract, but with your help, I find this is 
less and less true for me, for example Robert's post on Kamma-Vatta from 25 
May. Robert and Sarah have tried to coax me out of my seclusion, but until 
now I haven't been up to it. For me, all theory must be useful and grounded 
in real life experience, stepping out of the merely intellectual  (or 
solipisistic) into the world we live in, otherwise what's it all for?

Many thanks to all.
Metta,
Victoria

P.S. I am concerned about the plight of Cybele who is ill and about to be 
made homeless. I know some members have generously helped her already. If 
there are any others who would like to make even the smallest contribution 
I know it would be much appreciated and carefully used.
Feel free to write me off list if you prefer or write to Cybele directly.

 
5347 From: Dan 
Date: Sat May 26, 2001 8:44pm
Subject: Re: Answer

 
  At the moments of stealing, there are the volition, decision, and 
action to steal. The stealing is done because of present action, not 
past action. This is discussed in the excerpt from Katta-vatthu (and 
comentary) that I posted under the tab "From Abhidhamma."

 
5348 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Sat May 26, 2001 9:00pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Question...

 
  Num

Hi!  Thanks for your comments and thoughts on this topic.

[I said]
> <<<<<<I believe that the reason why we find this fascinating or puzzling is that we
>  hold the innate view
>  that a person's make-up is largely the result of his environment and
>  upbringing in this life.    We all of course have our perceived set of
>  reasons or series of
>  events that led us to 'find'  the dhamma in this life, but these will
>  probalby be of superficial
>  relevance compared to the influence of past accumulations and deeds.>>>>
> 
[You said]
> I think this is somewhat tricky reasoning.  Because the future has not yet arrived, so only the
> present and the past can give an influence on us. Sound infallible to me.  I think that both
> the accumulation and the environment factor are somewhat almost equal in theier effects.

I am not sure about the relative weightings of accumulations vs. environmental factors, or whether
it is possible to generalise about this at all.  I would be interested to know of any references
from the texts on this point.  Otherwise, I am not sure how we could ever be sure about the
answer.

  Every
> interaction between environment and citta will inevitably become a past accumulation.   In my
> opinion, good environment supports and interacts with citta (nama, mind, brain, whatever we want
> to name it).  I wonder, if I born in a environment that food is not sufficient, I have to steal
> or to fight to make a living, my parents were abusive, I could not afford to go to school, can I
> have a chance to study Buddhism or meet friends in Dhamma???  I know that I better say "never
> say never".   But If I born in an environment that there is no knowledge of Buddhism available,
> I don't think I can become a Buddhist, the dhamma is too deep and too hard for me to understand
> it on my own. 

I'm sure what you say is generally true, but it's a question of degree.  Two people born into the
same environment could end up following quite different paths - one may succeed in overcoming the
obstacles you describe, while the other may remain a victim of his/her circumstances for life.

> Well, that my accomulation, I work in genetic and medical field.  To me environment and gene
> always interact, and I am still perplex in, I can call it, both conventional and paramattha
> truth.  

Yes, I can see why this area interests you.  No doubt your training emphasises the influence of
factors in the present life.  There is no reason why you should not carry out your practice in
accordance with the views of medical science, even though as far as your interest in the dhamma is
concerned you accept the possibility of a somewhat different state of affairs than those views
assume.  Does this make sense?

Jon



 
5349 From: Erik 
Date: Sat May 26, 2001 9:12pm
Subject: Re: Kusala etc.-Eric, nibbana

 
  --- Jonothan Abbott  wrote:
> Erik
> 
> --- Erik wrote: > --- Jonothan 
Abbott  wrote:
> > > --- Erik wrote:
> > > > What I didn't realize was I'd never make any progress so long 
as 
> > my 
> > > > mind was defiled by so much craving, anger, etc. When I was 
> > given  
> > > > the practice of tonglen (Tibetan metta-bhabvana) it purified 
so 
> > much 
> > > > in a few months of practice it got rid of enough of the 
> > hindrances to 
> > > > make meditation possible. It sure made me feel like a million 
> > bucks. 
> > > > That, and a little MDMA chemotherapy, which helped me 
identify 
> > > > samatha (helped bring about kaya & citta passadhi and a big 
> > AHA!), 
> > > > plus the bliss of tummo yoga, brought it all together for me.
> > > 
> > > Erik
> > > Sorry, but what is MDMN chemotherapy?
> > 
> > I have no idea what MDMN would be. MDMA is 
> > methelynedioxymethamphetamine, otherwise known as Ecstasy, X, 
> > whatever. You know, the stuff they are throwing people in jail 
for.
> 
> And I suppose Timothy Leary was your guru?!

All psychedelic drugs are my gurus, as are all people and all life 
situations. In my own case, these drugs have served as one of the 
most important tools of my entire practice. I wouldn't even be a 
Buddhist save for the grace of a POWERFUL Dhamma experience with LSD 
at age sixteen, that began the process of destroying the 
indoctrination I receives as a kid into my parents' religion. It is 
powerful medicine to counteract "hardening of the categories." I 
think everyone with a healthy mind should have at least a few 
psychedelic experiences in their lifetime in a controlled setting.

> If Ecstacy and yogic breathing helped you see/experience something 
that your studies of the dhamma
> had not led you to see/experience, that would suggest that the 
something was not the dhamma or
> anything to do with kusala.  

What specifically would suggest it is neither dhamma nor kusala? Do 
psychedelic drugs possess some unique entity in all the triple-realm 
that makes them entirely different from all other phenomena?

I am very curious to see how these composed entities--psychedelic 
drugs--could possibly possess any substantial entity such that they 
MUST be akusala or adhamma by way of their own sabhava. Because that 
is essentially what you are suggesting. And if that is the meaning of 
what you're saying, then it is miccha-ditthi, plain and simple. 
Because it denies both anatta and kamma. It denies anatta by 
suggesting that there are self-existent entities that possess 
intrinsically akusala nature. And it denies kamma at the same time 
via denial of anatta, as well as denial of the fact that all 
experience, kusala or akusala, arises with kamma-vipaka paccaya, 
meaning that there is no inherent reality to these drugs apart from 
kamma-vipaka, and that it is vipaka that determines their relative 
usefulness (or lack thereof). So the only akusala or adhamma I can 
see here is that species of miccha-ditthi that is denying both anatta 
and kamma.

 
5350 From: Nina van Gorkom   
Date: Sat May 26, 2001 10:27pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Digest Number 431. Dosa and unpleasant feeling

 
  o
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 10:59:09 EDT
> From: Num
> Subject: Re: greetings from Nina
> 
> Hi Nina,
> 
> May I also say welcome to dsg. Glad to see u here.
> 
> I am very busy lately, but let me ask you and the group something which is
> not clear for me.
> 
 
> <<<I have to correct something I wrote to Robert a few weeks ago about
> awareness of dosa. Sarah had taken this up with Acharn Sujin and pointed
> this out to me: I wrote that before realizing the difference between nama
> and rupa we cannot be aware of dosa. It should be: we cannot know precisely
> the characteristic of dosa as nama. Thus, although we are mixing up nama and
> rupa, at least there can be a beginning of awareness of dosa, and this is of
> course mixed with many moments of thinking. If there is no beginning, how
> can it ever be known as it is.
> What Sarah pointed out was an excellent reminder not to neglect awareness of
> dosa, even slight degrees, such as a little uneasiness. >>>
> 
> I am still struggle at thinking level.  Here is my question,  since dosa
> cetasika always and only coarises with domanassa-vedana.  I have a hard time
> seeing what the different between the two.   When I am mad, there are long
> series of feeling arise. I can feel I am angry, I can feel it's kind of
> tension in my various muscles, I feel the heat, uncalmed, uneasy feeling,
> dissatisfaction, impatience and unkindness even at time destructive intention
> (hmmm, sorry I can be a bad guy).   May I ask what exactly is character of
> dosa and also domanassa-vedana?
> 
> Alright, have to go.
> 
> Num
> 
> Dear Num, This is a difficult question. There are many mental phenomena, nama,
and physical phenomena, rupa, at the same time. We know in theory that dosa,
aversion, dislikes the object, that the consciousness, citta, accompanied by
aversion knows the object in the unwholesome way, that unpleasant feeling
feels, <tastes or savours> the unpleasant object, that physical phenomena,
rupas, conditioned by aversion are again different realities. But
theoretical knowledge, as you know, is different from direct experience of
characteristics. It cannot be as precise. We all tend to define phenomena,
to name them, to try to catch them. When we think about dosa and unpleasant
feeling, the objects are concepts. When we are thinking, there is not the
direct, precise understanding of a characteristic of reality which appears
now. Thinking is also conditioned, if we had not studied aversion, dosa,
unpleasant feeling, and we had not heard that these namas condition rupa, we
would not be able to think of them now. We should not mind that thinking
arises, it is a reality of daily life, it is dhamma, apppearing now,
non-self. We can begin to investigate thinking when it appears, a reality
which knows something, otherwise it is <my thinking>.
You mention rupas conditioned by dosa and use the words tension of muscles
to describe the hardness it conditions, and mention heat as conditioned by
dosa. If we do not try to locate these rupas and do not name or define them,
they can be realized as just rupas which do not know anything. They are
different from nama which experiences or feels. We are so busy defining
realities, dwelling on them that we may overlook the truth that nama
experiences something and rupa does not know anything. That is all, thank
you for reminding me of this by your question.
The study of different realities like dosa and unpleasant feeling and other
realities is a condition for the development of direct understanding, and as
Robert also said, all the moments of study and investigation are accumulated
and form a condition for the arising of direct awareness, but we do not know
when. 
Acharn Sujin said that dhammas arise and fall away too rapidly for anyone to
do anything, there should be no idea of self who knows; there is at a
particular moment just this or that characteristic. The truth of dhammas
which have arisen already because of conditions can be investigated, no
matter it is nama or rupa.
 We should not mind to be beginners, to begin to investigate. There are so
many realities, not just dosa, there are also stinginess, jealousy and
regret arising with dosa. There is attachment, lobha, conceit, seeing,
hearing. If we fix our attention on a particular reality such as dosa (I do
not say that you do that, Num) we may forget about all the other realities.
To come back to your question: if there is no desire to select particular
realities such as dosa or unpleasant feeling, but awareness of any reality
of the present moment, also thinking, realities can very, very gradually be
known as they are. But not right away. If we try to know the difference
between different realities, we shall not know them, only right
understanding, pa~n~naa, can know this, not we.
<We cannot do anything, realities are beyond control>, when people hear such
words from Acharn Sujin they run away or get desperate, or think of
fatalism. This was discussed already many times here. At the same time
Acharn Sujin stresses energy, viriya, as a perfection that should be
developed. I downloaded the article on this subject, translated by Amara,
Varee, modified by Robert. There should be    < unwavering strength to
examine and know the characteristic of nama dhamma and rupa dhamma under any
circumstances. There is never the thought that the characteristic of nama
dhamma and rupa dhamma cannot be known at a particular moment.>
Energy or effort is not self, we should not forget that, but someone's words
can be the condition for the arising of wholesome effort. That is why the
Buddha said:<do not be neglectful, be mindful>.
Acharn also said that the perfection of energy is indispensable in the
elimination of unwholesomeness: <Even though one knows what is good but one
does not endeavour to pursue it, one can never succeed.>
She often said that we should be brave and cheerful in investigating all
kinds of realities, no matter they are pleasant or unpleasant, wholesome or
unwholesome. She also used the word hero, one has to be heroic. Why? Because
it is a long time development, as Robert also pointed out, it takes endless
lives and the knife handle one holds each day wears away so slowly that one
does not see that it wears away. So it is with ignorance and other
defilements, progress may hardly be noticable.
> ________________________________________________________________________
> ________________________________________________________________________
>

 
5351 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Sat May 26, 2001 10:49pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Kusala etc.-Eric, nibbana

 
  Erik

> > And I suppose Timothy Leary was your guru?!
> 
> All psychedelic drugs are my gurus, as are all people and all life 
> situations. In my own case, these drugs have served as one of the 
> most important tools of my entire practice. I wouldn't even be a 
> Buddhist save for the grace of a POWERFUL Dhamma experience with LSD 
> at age sixteen, that began the process of destroying the 
> indoctrination I receives as a kid into my parents' religion. It is 
> powerful medicine to counteract "hardening of the categories." I 
> think everyone with a healthy mind should have at least a few 
> psychedelic experiences in their lifetime in a controlled setting.

I can see that you feel rather strongly about this.  My lighthearted comment was perhaps out of
place.

> > If Ecstacy and yogic breathing helped you see/experience something 
> that your studies of the dhamma
> > had not led you to see/experience, that would suggest that the 
> something was not the dhamma or
> > anything to do with kusala.  
> 
> What specifically would suggest it is neither dhamma nor kusala? Do 
> psychedelic drugs possess some unique entity in all the triple-realm 
> that makes them entirely different from all other phenomena?
> 
> I am very curious to see how these composed entities--psychedelic 
> drugs--could possibly possess any substantial entity such that they 
> MUST be akusala or adhamma by way of their own sabhava. Because that 
> is essentially what you are suggesting. And if that is the meaning of 
> what you're saying, then it is miccha-ditthi, plain and simple. 
> Because it denies both anatta and kamma. It denies anatta by 
> suggesting that there are self-existent entities that possess 
> intrinsically akusala nature. And it denies kamma at the same time 
> via denial of anatta, as well as denial of the fact that all 
> experience, kusala or akusala, arises with kamma-vipaka paccaya, 
> meaning that there is no inherent reality to these drugs apart from 
> kamma-vipaka, and that it is vipaka that determines their relative 
> usefulness (or lack thereof). So the only akusala or adhamma I can 
> see here is that species of miccha-ditthi that is denying both anatta 
> and kamma.

Erik, I will reflect on what you have said here.

Jon


 
5352 From: Herman 
Date: Sun May 27, 2001 7:44pm
Subject: Re: Ease and stuff

 
  Thank you Jon and everyone else for your comments about this,

--- Jonothan Abbott  wrote:
> Herman
> 
> On your point about the speed of cittas -
> 
> > I am now becoming indulgent here, but another one that comes up 
> > regularly is that cittas arise and fall so rapidly, we can't 
really 
> > keep up with them , or words to that effect. Cittas are neither 
slow 
> > or fast, each one carries out their function perfectly, neither 
> > hurried nor slow, just so.
> 
> I can think of a couple of reasons why the question of the speed of 
cittas might be brought up
> time to time.
> 
> The first is to illustrate the fact that the reality (individual 
moments of consciousness, never
> more that one at a time, each falling away completely before the 
next arises) is completely
> different to the apparent (continuous and contemporaneous 
experiences through multiple doorways).

I trust that  I won't be banned from this group for admitting that 
there is no experience in this five fold mass of cittas at citta 
level. I accept readily that by the time there is any awareness here, 
about a billion cittas with a common theme or object have arisen and 
gone.

> 
> The second is to counter the belief many people hold that they are 
able to 'experience' individual
> cittas arising and falling away.


Yet the reality is that it is the cittas that "experience" the people 
ie the notion of self somehow arises out of the stream of 
consciusness.

Buddhism doesn't seem to be big on origins. As opposed to 
Christianity which will give you accounts of creation etc etc.

Any ideas or texts which explain the ubiquity, pervasiveness of self? 
I do not struggle with not-self, I just wonder why the opposite seems 
to be the easier idea to adopt.

Thanks and Regards


Herman


> 
> Jon
> 
> --- Herman wrote: > Dear Erik et al ,
> > 
> > I am not attributing the use of the words to you, Erik,  but I 
wonder 
> > whether the concepts of difficulty and ease apply at all to 
jhanas. 
> > Wouldn't it be fair to say that when the conditions are not right 
> > jhana cannot arise, and when conditions are right jhana can arise?
> > 
> > An eight year old with certain accumulations may dwell in the 
jhanas 
> > at will , while the most learned man with other accumulations may 
> > never get near that state.
> > 
> > Similarly, I read on dhammastudy.com that it is hard for 
satipatthana 
> > to arise. Perhaps it is more meaningful to say that satipatthana 
does 
> > not arise as often as other states of mind, again due to the 
> > conditions that prevail. 
> 

 
5353 From: Herman 
Date: Sun May 27, 2001 8:01pm
Subject: Re: intro and appeal

 
  Dear Victoria,

Thank you for making yourself known.

The list is up to about 120 members, yet there are probably less than 
10 that post on a regular basis.

What barriers are there that hinder people from participating 
actively, do you think?

(I do not think there is a problen with lurking, it is just that over 
time you get posts from people who are obviously eminently capable 
and erudite, yet they refrain from actively contributing, and I just 
wonder why that is)

Kind Regards

Herman

(My finacee's name is Victoria, her nick is Tori as well, kind of 
cute I thought)



--- Tori Korshak  wrote:
> 
> Dear Group,
> 
> I am a lurker here attempting the transition to occasional 
contributor. I 
> live in London with my husband and two grown children who still 
live at 
> home although both are gainfully employed. They are not Buddhists 
although 
> they know a lot of Dhamma from having to live with me, so at least 
it's not 
> like a foreign language.
> 
> I gain a lot from this list. In particular, the practical 
application of 
> Abhidhamma has changed my practice. Many people seem to find 
Abhidhamma 
> very dry, enumerative, and abstract, but with your help, I find 
this is 
> less and less true for me, for example Robert's post on Kamma-Vatta 
from 25 
> May. Robert and Sarah have tried to coax me out of my seclusion, 
but until 
> now I haven't been up to it. For me, all theory must be useful and 
grounded 
> in real life experience, stepping out of the merely intellectual  
(or 
> solipisistic) into the world we live in, otherwise what's it all 
for?
> 
> Many thanks to all.
> Metta,
> Victoria
> 
> P.S. I am concerned about the plight of Cybele who is ill and about 
to be 
> made homeless. I know some members have generously helped her 
already. If 
> there are any others who would like to make even the smallest 
contribution 
> I know it would be much appreciated and carefully used.
> Feel free to write me off list if you prefer or write to Cybele 
directly.

 
5354 From: Tori Korshak   
Date: Sun May 27, 2001 10:47pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: intro and appeal

 
  Dear Herman,

Thank you for your post and your interest. I really wouldn't want to 
speculate on what reason others might have for not actively contributing. 
For myself, I am still feeling my way in terms of sharing with a group of 
strangers (as opposed to just a few), although this doesn't always seem 
quite right as I take advantage of their sharing. I feel I have so much to 
learn, but I will try to contribute more. It is sometimes a bit daunting to 
contribute because of the high level of knowledge of some members.

Hope to hear from you again.
Metta,
Victoria





At 12:01 PM 5/27/01 +0000, you wrote:
>Dear Victoria,
>
>Thank you for making yourself known.
>
>The list is up to about 120 members, yet there are probably less than
>10 that post on a regular basis.
>
>What barriers are there that hinder people from participating
>actively, do you think?
>
>(I do not think there is a problen with lurking, it is just that over
>time you get posts from people who are obviously eminently capable
>and erudite, yet they refrain from actively contributing, and I just
>wonder why that is)
>
>Kind Regards
>
>Herman
>
>(My finacee's name is Victoria, her nick is Tori as well, kind of
>cute I thought)
>
>
>
>--- Tori Korshak  wrote:
> >
> > Dear Group,
> >
> > I am a lurker here attempting the transition to occasional
>contributor. I
> > live in London with my husband and two grown children who still
>live at
> > home although both are gainfully employed. They are not Buddhists
>although
> > they know a lot of Dhamma from having to live with me, so at least
>it's not
> > like a foreign language.
> >
> > I gain a lot from this list. In particular, the practical
>application of
> > Abhidhamma has changed my practice. Many people seem to find
>Abhidhamma
> > very dry, enumerative, and abstract, but with your help, I find
>this is
> > less and less true for me, for example Robert's post on Kamma-Vatta
>from 25
> > May. Robert and Sarah have tried to coax me out of my seclusion,
>but until
> > now I haven't been up to it. For me, all theory must be useful and
>grounded
> > in real life experience, stepping out of the merely intellectual
>(or
> > solipisistic) into the world we live in, otherwise what's it all
>for?
> >
> > Many thanks to all.
> > Metta,
> > Victoria
> >
> > P.S. I am concerned about the plight of Cybele who is ill and about
>to be
> > made homeless. I know some members have generously helped her
>already. If
> > there are any others who would like to make even the smallest
>contribution
> > I know it would be much appreciated and carefully used.
> > Feel free to write me off list if you prefer or write to Cybele
>directly.
 
 

 
5355 From: jaran 
Date: Mon May 28, 2001 2:55am
Subject: Re: Digest Number 431. Dosa and unpleasant feeling

 
  Nina and Num:

A late welcome to you two. Thank you for a good question from Num and 
a GREAT answer from Nina. It says it all about how dhammas appear to 
different degrees of panna, how panna develops and what it takes.

Thanks again,
jaran

 
5356 From: jaran 
Date: Mon May 28, 2001 3:46am
Subject: Re: intro and appeal

 
  Dear Herman and Victoria:

A (very) late welcome to you two. Good to have you.

Why are other members not contributing? For me, the reasons range 
from laziness to limited knowledge of dhamma, with poor English in 
between. Sometimes many posts concern subjects that are beyond my 
interest and often beyond my understanding.

From my observation, some people find that this dsg group is not for 
them because it does not give them a quick fix for their problems, 
and it does not "sound right" since it does not talk about "formal 
practice".

A note about the purpose of 'dhamma study': the Buddha's teachings 
are not for memorizing or understanding just their theoretical 
stories, but for the listeners to understand the dhammas (realities) 
as they are [appearing right now]. So, after reading the posts, don't 
leave them at the dsg. Examine the things you read about [in dsg] in 
daily life, as pointed out in Nina's latest post. That's where the 
real study is.

It is always good to question every thing, but there are a lot that 
don't help us understand the realities *right now*. It takes right 
understanding to ask the right questions to make the right 
understanding grow further. What are the right understanding and 
questions? These are what you are going to learn about here.

All for now,
jaran


--- Tori Korshak  wrote:
> 
> Dear Herman,
> 
> Thank you for your post and your interest. I really wouldn't want 
to 
> speculate on what reason others might have for not actively 
contributing. 
> For myself, I am still feeling my way in terms of sharing with a 
group of 
> strangers (as opposed to just a few), although this doesn't always 
seem 
> quite right as I take advantage of their sharing. I feel I have so 
much to 
> learn, but I will try to contribute more. It is sometimes a bit 
daunting to 
> contribute because of the high level of knowledge of some members.
> 
> Hope to hear from you again.
> Metta,
> Victoria
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At 12:01 PM 5/27/01 +0000, you wrote:
> >Dear Victoria,
> >
> >Thank you for making yourself known.
> >
> >The list is up to about 120 members, yet there are probably less 
than
> >10 that post on a regular basis.
> >
> >What barriers are there that hinder people from participating
> >actively, do you think?
> >
> >(I do not think there is a problen with lurking, it is just that 
over
> >time you get posts from people who are obviously eminently capable
> >and erudite, yet they refrain from actively contributing, and I 
just
> >wonder why that is)
> >
> >Kind Regards
> >
> >Herman
> >
> >(My finacee's name is Victoria, her nick is Tori as well, kind of
> >cute I thought)
> >
> >
> >
> >--- Tori Korshak  wrote:
> > >
> > > Dear Group,
> > >
> > > I am a lurker here attempting the transition to occasional
> >contributor. I
> > > live in London with my husband and two grown children who still
> >live at
> > > home although both are gainfully employed. They are not 
Buddhists
> >although
> > > they know a lot of Dhamma from having to live with me, so at 
least
> >it's not
> > > like a foreign language.
> > >
> > > I gain a lot from this list. In particular, the practical
> >application of
> > > Abhidhamma has changed my practice. Many people seem to find
> >Abhidhamma
> > > very dry, enumerative, and abstract, but with your help, I find
> >this is
> > > less and less true for me, for example Robert's post on Kamma-
Vatta
> >from 25
> > > May. Robert and Sarah have tried to coax me out of my seclusion,
> >but until
> > > now I haven't been up to it. For me, all theory must be useful 
and
> >grounded
> > > in real life experience, stepping out of the merely intellectual
> >(or
> > > solipisistic) into the world we live in, otherwise what's it all
> >for?
> > >
> > > Many thanks to all.
> > > Metta,
> > > Victoria
> > >
> > > P.S. I am concerned about the plight of Cybele who is ill and 
about
> >to be
> > > made homeless. I know some members have generously helped her
> >already. If
> > > there are any others who would like to make even the smallest
> >contribution
> > > I know it would be much appreciated and carefully used.
> > > Feel free to write me off list if you prefer or write to Cybele
> >directly.
> >

 
5357 From: Antony 
Date: Mon May 28, 2001 0:06pm
Subject: why lurkers lurk and don't post

 
  I'm a bit of a lurker I guess. there's usually so much to read here 
and think about that there's no time for posting.

I think some people lack the confidence to post for their own 
personal reasons. 

I don't mean to be a lurker really but it somehow seems a bit rude to 
push in on a thread and have your say.

then there's the morbid fear of starting your own thread and hoping 
someone feels it's worthy enough to respond.

I guess you could do a whole psychological profile of this situation. 
I think it is very difficult to enculture a list and get enough 
people who are seriously intersted enough to help things along. I 
think that situation does exist here. Of course the road has been 
rocky and the good posters have left with the bad but there is a good 
environment here I think even the hardcore lurkers would agree with 
that. I would think many people lurk because that's what they do.

'Don't look this gift horse (of a list) in the mouth' as they say. I 
think it means if someone gives you a horse for nothing don't look 
for problems with it. Not that some of you haven't put a lot of work 
into making this list worthwhile but if you look at some of the other 
lists for comparison this is a good one. You have few people who post 
reams of quoted material for no particular reason (no-one at the 
moment I think) you have little agressive behaviour, not for a while 
anyway (I've been keeping quiet see) and you have few, if any, 
advertising posters swimming by.

How to encourage more posters? Perhaps you could encourage non-
posters to choose a subject either in person or off-line. Can you see 
who lurks but doesn't post in the administrative part of the list you 
could mail them and say "hey we saw you drop by etc. In one of the 
yahoo clubs that I had participated in some time back they used to 
send an email encouraging participation to all members. Perhaps you 
could have a subject of the week for open posting like: What the hell 
is KUSULA anyway (only an example)

If you are a lurker whey not consider posting something only if it is 
to express your appreciation of something you read here. I've done 
that kind of thing before. Hey that's an interesting conversation 
you're having! Here's an example: "Hey Herman, I like what you've 
been asking in the ease and stuff thread, My self is so pervasive and 
ubiquitous that I really start to think I'm me sometimes. I wouldn't 
mind seeing some textual references on that either."


Antony Brennan

 
5358 From: Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)   
Date: Mon May 28, 2001 1:50pm
Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Fwd: questions

 
  Sarah,

	You mentioned below...
> Most if not all religions encourage sila (morality) and many encourage
> concentration practices.
> The teaching of anatta (not self) is unique to the Buddha's Teachings. We
> can test and prove at
> this moment that there is no self or God in the seeing, hearing and other
> realities.
> 
	[Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)]  
				we can test and prove this moment that there
is no self or God in the seeing, hearing and other realities... HOW ?

 
5359 From: Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)   
Date: Mon May 28, 2001 2:05pm
Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Question...

 
  Dear Jon,

		Regarding on my views on this issues ... well basically .. I
wanted to know the reasons behind a Gwai loh's conversion to Buddhism from
their birth religion like Christianity.. Let me get this out straight
first.. The Reason I raised these questions is NOT to stir yourself in
doubting yourself in choosing the Middle Path... but my own curiosity and
also me seeking for an answer ... the answer of questioning sometimes myself
on where I should stand.... I have been brought up in deity worshipping kind
of scene.. later in high school  I am exposed to the Dhamma.. which has been
guiding and been a major part of my life.... up until few years back.. I
have began to doubt this whole thing that I have embraced.... Knowing this
as impermanence (hence further proving the accuracy of the Dhamma) but
sometimes my heart does not rest well... on of the other reason is being
that I wish to be able to put forward the Buddhist idea when confronted by
Christians on the subject of debates in various aspect of the religions.. I
want to be able to spread the Dhamma better and not just let things be as
they are... (meaning that if I can change  the view points of a person to
embrace Dhamma isn't it good.. I know that this has also to do with the
other person's past karma to be able to expose and except it in this
life.....however when that someone is close to me... it is even more
unsettling to be just sitting by the sideline and watch and observe).. I
want to have you know is that I am not out to convert people .. but I just
doesn't want people close to me to be circling in samsara longer before they
found the Dhamma... and get back on track....

	Jon,
		I hope I didn't confuse you with the fast typing above...
should you require more information please write again...

		And also I have another question.... How do we explain
rebirth (the idea) to a Christian ? Some of my friends agrees that Buddhism
is good and true... except for one lie which is rebirth ? How do I get
around this ?

Thank you for you help

May you be well and happy always,
Loke CL

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Jonothan Abbott [SMTP:Jon]
> Sent:	Saturday, May 26, 2001 3:30 PM
> Subject:	RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Question...
> 
> CL
> 
> --- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)"  wrote: >
> Dear Jon...
> > 
> > 	I am not quenched.... no doubt of past good karma and chance upon it
> > this life do plays a role.. but however with each different lives
> conditions
> > and environments will differ thus.. the mind is evolving... and the
> actions
> > in this life is what interests me.. what part that you are not
> confortable
> > with that makes you want to change....?  you can reply off list if you
> > wish... thank you in advance
> 
> I have no problem discussing this on-list, but if you could explain why
> you are so keen to hear
> about particular individual cases, it might help me in giving a more
> 'quenching' answer.
> 
> Actually, the best source of people's reasons for 'converting' to Buddhism
> is the suttas, since
> all followers in the Buddhas's time were 'converts' (there were no
> Buddhists before his
> enlightenment).  You will see from the suttas that it was by no means
> always a matter of being
> dissatisfied with the person's family religion.  Some who came to meet the
> Buddha did so thinking
> that they could out-debate him, some had led dissolute or criminal lives
> up to that time, some
> continued to follow the traditions of their religion even after
> considering themselves followers. 
> But all those who became enlightened within that lifetime were obviously
> 'ripe' for enlightenment,
> through understanding accumulated in countless previous lives.
> 
> All those who declared themselves followers did so on the basis of the
> light that the dhamma had
> shed where previously there had been darkness.  I suspect that the same
> reason would apply in most
> cases today.
> 
> CL, please share with us something of your own thinking on this question.
> 
> Jon
> 
>

 
5360 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Mon May 28, 2001 2:57pm
Subject: anatta, ease and stuff

 
  Hi Antony, Howard, Herman, Jon, CL and all the others crying out for suttas on this topic:

--- Antony wrote: >  "Hey Herman, I like what you've 
> been asking in the ease and stuff thread, My self is so pervasive and 
> ubiquitous that I really start to think I'm me sometimes. I wouldn't 
> mind seeing some textual references on that either."

This is a great start when there is some idea that this is what is happening!

I think that all the suttas which talk about the 6 doorways and the 'world' as consisting of just
these realities reminds us, everytime there is a moment of awareness (at whatever level) that
these are the 'all'. For example, we read in the Kindred Sayings, Kindred Sayings on Sense, First
fifty,111,23:

"Monks I will teach you the all. Do you listen to it.  And what , monks, is the all?  It is eye
and object, ear and sound, nose and scent, tongue and savour, body and things tangible, mind and
mind-states.  That monks, is called 'the all'.'"

As Understanding and awareness develop and begin to know these realities, it becomes clearer and
clearer what is NOT reality and what is merely an illusion of self:

"I'Il will teach you a teaching, monks, for the abandoning of the all by fully knowing, by
comprehending it.  so you listen to it.  And what monks, is the teaching?

The eye , must be abandoned by fully knowing, by comprehending it. 
Objects..eye-consciousness...eye-contact..that pleasant feeling, unpleasant feeling or neutral
feeling...that also must be abandoned by fully knowing, by comprehending it.

The mind..mind-states..that pleasant feeling, unpleasant feeling or neurtral feeling..that also
must be abandoned by fully knowing it, by comprehending it.' (Par25)"

It may seem too difficult to be aware of realities if we read about the zillions of cittas
passing, but this is thinking. The characteristic of panna (wisdom) is that it can and does know a
reality when it appears to it and sati can be aware of a reality at the same time. I think it's
very helpful as Herman pointed out to begin to realize how very little awareness there really is
and how it's not as easy to develop satipatthana as some may think. On the other hand feeling
discouraged is just thinking with a kind of dosa (aversion) that can also be the object of
awareness!

Betty and Jon pointed out that as panna (wisdom) develops, more and more of the wrong view of self
becomes apparent.

I was just reading the final section in Nina's translation of  Khun Sujin's book 'Summary of PD',
'The Meaning of Anatta'. I'll try to just use extracts, particularly related to the sutta
discussed in this chapter. 

(For newbies, just a reminder that namas refer to mental phenomena or those realities which
experience an object such as seeing, hering, like, dislike. Rupas refer to physical phenomena or
those realities which are experienced and in turn don't experience anything such as visible
object, sound, hardness, softness etc.)

<start quote>
'The paññå which eradicates wrong view knows clearly the characteristics of nåma and rúpa as they
appear through the six doors and it realizes them as non-self. 
We read in the “Kindred Sayings”( IV, Saîåyatana vagga, Kindred Sayings on Sense, Fourth Fifty, Ch
III, § 193, Udåyin):

Once the venerable Ånanda and the venerable Udåyin were staying at Kosambí in Ghosita Park. Then
the venerable Udåyin, rising at eventide from his solitude, went to visit the Venerable Ånanda,
and on coming to him... after the exchange of courtesies, sat down at one side. So seated the
venerable Udåyin said to the venerable Ånanda:
“Is it possible, friend Ånanda, just as this body has in divers ways been defined, explained, set
forth by the Exalted One, as being without the self,-- is it possible in the same way to describe
the consciousness, to show it, make it plain, set it forth, make it clear, analyze and expound it
as being also without the self?”
“Just as this body has in divers ways been defined, explained, set forth by the Exalted One, as
being without the self, friend Udåyin, so also is it possible to describe this consciousness, to
show it, make it plain, set it forth, make it clear, analyze and expound it as being also without
the self.
Owing to the eye and visible object arises seeing-consciousness, does it not, friend?”
“Yes, friend.”
“Well, friend, it is by this method that the Exalted One has explained, opened up, and shown that
this consciousness also is without the self. “
(The same is said with regard to the other doorways.).......................
................................................
Before someone can understand that this body is anattå and that evenso this consciousness is
anattå, the characteristics of nåma and rúpa appearing at this moment must be “described, showed,
made plain, set forth, made clear, analysed and expounded”, as we read in the Sutta.
Characteristics of nåma and rúpa appear at this moment, while we see, hear, smell, taste,
experience tangible object or think. 
It is not easy to be able to penetrate the meaning of anattå, to understand the true nature of all
realities, to realize them as anattå. If Ånanda had not been a sotåpanna, he would not have known
thoroughly the realities which are nåma and rúpa. Only paññå of that degree can eradicate wrong
view which takes nåma and rúpa for self, being or person. If Ånanda had not been a sotåpanna he
could not have said to Udåyin that it is also possible to describe consciousness, to show it, make
it plain, set it forth, make it clear, analyze it and expound it as being anattå. Therefore, the
characteristics of nåma and rúpa are manifest to the degree that paññå has realized the true
nature of dhammas. At this moment realities arise and then fall away very rapidly. If a person has
not realized the true nature of realities, they do not appear to him as they are, even if he says
that, while there is seeing or hearing, nåma is the element which experiences an object. Whereas,
when realities have appeared to him as they are, it is evident that he clearly knows their true
characteristics. 
Ånanda had no doubt about the characteristics of nåma and rúpa, no matter through which doorway
they appeared. If someone at the present time thinks that he should only develop mindfulness of
one of the four Applications of Mindfulness, such as mindfulness of the body, or that he should
only know one type of nåma or rúpa, could he know the true characteristics of nåma and rúpa? If he
would understand the truth of realities, why does he not know, while he is seeing, the nåma which
experiences an object through the eyes, as the element which sees? Why does he not know, while he
is hearing, the nåma which experiences an object through the ears, the element which hears? Why
does he not realize, while thinking, that it is only nåma which knows conceptions or words? If he
would really understand what nåma is, he would be able to understand the true nature of the
element which experiences an object...............................
..............................................
When Ånanda asked Udåyin whether seeing-consciousness arises owing to the eye and visible object,
Udåyin had no doubt about eyesense and the rúpa appearing through the eyes, while seeing at that
moment. We read further on in the Sutta that Ånanda said:

“Well, if the condition, if the cause of the arising of seeing-consciousness should altogether, in
every way, utterly come to cease without remainder, would any seeing-consciousness be evident?” 
“Surely not, friend.”
“Well, it is by this method that the Exalted One has explained, opened up, and shown that this
consciousness also is without the self.”

If one really understands that while there is hearing, there is no seeing, one can know the
characteristics of realities as they are. When there is thinking about different matters there is
no seeing, no hearing. There is only the nåma which thinks at such a moment about different
subjects. In this way the characteristics of realities can be understood as they are. 
As Ånanda said to Udåyin, seeing arises dependent on eyesense and visible object which appears
through the eyes, but, when eyesense and visible object which are impermanent have completely
fallen away, how could seeing arise? Seeing must fall away. 
...................................
Paññå should understand directly the characteristics of realities. It is impossible to enter the
gateway to nibbåna if the characteristic of nåma is not known, and if only the postures of
sitting, lying down, standing or walking are known. If someone knows which posture he has assumed,
he has only remembrance or perception of the rúpas which arise together in different compositions
and constitute a “whole” of a posture. He does not realize the characteristics of nåma and rúpa,
one at a time, as they arise and appear naturally, just as they are, through the different
doorways and then fall away. 
As we read in the Sutta, Ånanda said to Udåyin with reference to seeing-consciousness, that the
Buddha had explained that this is also without the self. Ånanda said to Udåyin: 
“Owing to the eye and visible object arises seeing-consciousness, does it not, friend?”
“Yes, friend.”
“Well, friend, it is by this method that the Exalted One has explained, opened up, and shown that
this consciousness also is without the self. “

He repeated the same about the other sense-cognitions and the consciousness which experiences
objects through the mind-door. ............................
.......................................................... 
We read further on in the Sutta which was quoted above, about a simile Ånanda used. He said to
Udåyin:

Suppose, friend, that a man should roam about in need of heart of wood, searching for heart of
wood, looking for heart of wood, and, taking a sharp axe, should enter a forest. There he sees a
mighty plaintain-trunk, straight up, new-grown, of towering height. He cuts it down at the root.
Having cut it down at the root, he chops it off at the top. Having done so he peels off the outer
skin. But he would find no pith inside, much less would he find heart of wood.
Even so, friend, a monk beholds no trace of the self nor of what pertains to the self in the
sixfold sense-sphere. So beholding, he is not attached to anything in the world. Unattached he is
not troubled. Untroubled, he is of himself utterly set free. So that he realizes, ‘Destroyed is
rebirth. Lived is the righteous life. Done is the task. For life in these conditions there is no
hereafter.’ “ 

We just read that Ånanda said that a man in search for heart of wood enters a forest and sees a
mighty plaintain-trunk, straight up, new-grown, of towering height. So long as it is a
plaintain-trunk it still has the appearance of a “whole”. Then we read, “Having cut it down at the
root, he chops it off as the top. Having done so, he peels off the outer skin.” We should
eliminate clinging to what we are used to taking for a “whole”, for a “thing”, for self. 
We then read, “But he would find no pith inside, much less would he find heart of wood”. Thus he
becomes detached from the idea of plaintain-trunk. It is the same as in the case of a cow which is
still not cut up by a cattle butcher, as we read in the “Papañcasúdåní”, the Commentary to the
“Satipaììhånasutta”. If the cattle butcher does not skin it and cut it up in different parts he is
bound to see it as a cow, he does not see it as different elements. So long as rúpas are still
seen as joined together, one perceives them as a “whole”, or as a whole posture such as the
“sitting rúpa”. People are bound to consider realities as a thing, a self, a being or person who
is there. Only if someone knows nåma and rúpa as they are he does not take them for beings or
people anymore. It is just as after peeling off the skin of the plaintain, any pith in it is not
to be found, much less heart of wood. As we have read, Ånanda said: ”Even so, friend, a monk
beholds no trace of self nor what pertains to the self in the sixfold sense-sphere”.
..............................
I...........................................
If different types of realities are known, one characteristic at a time, as nåma and rúpa, the
wrong view which takes realities for self is eliminated. One will let go of the idea of realities
as a “whole” or a posture. Then it can be understood what it means to have inward peace, because
citta does not become involved in outward matters, such as self, people or beings. There is no
longer the world one used to cling to, the world outside, which is full of people and different
things. There is no longer what one used to take for a particular person, for a thing, for self,
all permanent and lasting. Whenever sati arises paññå can at that moment understand realities
clearly, and then there is inward peace, because there are no people, beings or things. Whereas,
when there are many people, many conceptions in one’s life, there is no peace. If someone sees a
person he is acquainted with or he has a particular relation with, he thinks, as soon as he has
seen him even for a moment, a long “story” about him. If he sees a person he does not know, the
“story” is short; he thinks only for a little while about him and then the “story” is over. He
does not continue to think about him. 
.......................................
.............................................
<end quote>

I've probably quoted too much for some, but for others, do read the whole chapter. Best wishes for
your studies and practice of being aware of realities and removing those 'outer skins'!! (pls let
me know if these sutta references don't make the grade in terms of the questions being asked and
I'll try again ;-))

Sarah




 
5361 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Mon May 28, 2001 3:37pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Kusala etc.-Eric, nibbana

 
  Dear Erik,

--- Erik wrote: > --- Sarah Procter Abbott 

> 
> Hi Sarah,
> 
> Jeez, spoiling for a fight, eh? (I love it :)
> 
> wrote:
> > Dear Erik,
> > 
> > Thanks for your long reply to my last post. I may pick up some 
> points later, but we're a little
> > far apart when it comes to the ease of jhanas and the like, so I 
> think tthat debate will go on for
> > sometime! 
> 
> Re: "Ease of jhanas." I NEVER said the jhanas were easy. I said 
> they're doable.............., 

o.k., o.k., o.k......I twisted your words!! ;-)).. and humbly retreat on this (for now!!)
Thanks for sharing your experiences which I may return to later...

         ***********
> > 'Nibbana is a single undifferentiated ultimate reality.  It is 
> exclusively supramundane, and has
> > one intrinsic nature (sabhava), which is that of being the 
> unconditioned deathless element totally
> > transcendant to the conditioned world.' (AS.V1,31) 
> >           **********
> > In other words, even though it is unconditioned, it has its nature 
> that can be realized. I'm not
> > sure that I would call the realizing 'marking', but either way, it 
> remains the citta that realizes
> > or marks and is conditioned. Being realized does not make the 
> unconditioned reality conditioned. 
> 
> You say the "nature" of nibbana can be realized, and then go on to 
> quote things that say nibbana lacks any marks pertaining to sankhara 
> dhammas, is unconditioned, etc. I do not disagree with this at all, 
> which is why I raise the question of how what is conditioned can 
> cognize the unconditioned.
> 
> To have a citta that can "cognize" nibbana, if this is true, is an 
> oxymoron. How can a citta have the six cetasikas of phassa, vedana, 
> etc., against something lacking marks? How can one have phassa 
> without creating a division between subject and object? Given nibbana 
> is void of subject and object (the implication of it being 
> unconditioned) as well as devoid of all that pertains to self, to 
> make nibbaba an object through even phassa is to reify it and then, 
> there is no nibbana anymore!
> 
> It would be the same as saying that you could "cognize" the absence 
> of a big purple elephant in the room. Is is possible to directly 
> cognize an absence? Can phassa arise in the instance of absence in 
> the case of this elephant?

No, it's not the same as saying you could cognze an absence or a big purple elephant. Nibbana,
even though it's unconditioned, is a reality with its own 'sabhava' even if it lacks many/most the
characteristics of other realities. Because we often use negative terms to describe it (the
un-this and un-that) it's very easy to be left with the idea that there is nothing to be realized.
Although I'm not an expert on nibbana (!!), this isn't true according to my studies. Also, of
course, all realities are not self and yet phassa 'contacts' them..this doesn't make them
non-esistent.

> > I think it was Kom who pointed out earlier that cittas also 
> experience concepts which are also not
> > conditioned realities and never become conditioned realities. 
> 
> All pannati are by definition "deceptive realities" in the category 
> of samutti sacca. So perhaps we are working with different 
> definitions. I am using the division of paramattha vs. samutti sacca 
> here. All pannati are samutti sacca, hence, deceptive. How can 
> samutti sacca possibly conceive of paramattha sacca, is another way I 
> might rephrase he question of how citta can cognize nibbana.

No, I agree, samutti sacca (conventional truths) cannot cognize nibbana, but the citta accompanied
by the very highly developed factors of the 8fold path can. There are no samutti sacca invloved. 
(Whether all pannati (concepts) are samutti sacca is another debate, starting with the big piurple
elephant!!)
> 
 >           **********
> > 'Nibbana is called the void (sunnata) because it is devoid of 
> greed, hatred, and delusion, and
> > because it is devoid of all that is conditioned.
> 
> Void of all that is conditioned. And citta is conditioned, as is 
> everything not nibbana. So again, how can the conditioned take the 
> unconditioned as an object without reifying it right then & there? 
> Lokuttara panna arises when the subtlest elaborations are nuked in 
> meditation. If there are elaborations, no nibbana. When these 
> elaborations that create distinctions among the ten-thousand things 
> goes, what is left? Nibbana. Therefore, how can Nibbana, not being 
> a "thing" at all, but rather a mere LABEL for the absence of 
> independent existence, be "cognized" at all?

By suggesting nibbana is a mere LABEL for something, makes it sound like a concept. The reason
nibbana can be realized is because it is a reality and not a label even though it's nature is not
conditioned. Perhaps others can find some suttas talking about its 'postive' qualities so that it
doesn't sound just like a non-this and that!
> 
> Awaiting your reply!

Hope I haven't disappointed and perhaps Rob or kom or Nina can add more details if I have  
(or I'll happily try again!!). Look forward to your reply too, Erik!!

Best wishes,
Sarah


 
5362 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Mon May 28, 2001 3:52pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: intro and appeal

 
  Dear Tori,

Good to see you 'out' in the open...I know that anything you write is always useful;-))

--- Tori Korshak  wrote: > 
. 
> For myself, I am still feeling my way in terms of sharing with a group of 
> strangers (as opposed to just a few), 

Hope we don't still seem like strangers!! (Actually, Herman, many of that 120 may have chosen the
web only option, like my nephew, and just look in very ocasionally if at all! So, Tori, think of
us as an extended dhamma family...)

although this doesn't always seem 
> quite right as I take advantage of their sharing. I feel I have so much to 
> learn, but I will try to contribute more. It is sometimes a bit daunting to 
> contribute because of the high level of knowledge of some members.

Just as and when you feel inclined.... I don't think anyone here, not even Nina, would think they
have a high level of knowledge. As she says, its good to just think of ourselves as beginners on
this long path...;-)

What I have learnt from this list is that the accumulations of members interested in the dhamma
are so very different in terms of how they find it helpful to study and practice. For some, they
find it really helpful to study a lot of abhidhamma details in order to get a 'feel ' of anatta.
For others, just a few details, well-considered, are more useful. When we compare, it's usually
that mana (pride) again, so it's helpful as Jaran so wisely pointed out to know that it's the
awareness of the realities NOW that counts, no matter in what way we study or what language we
find helpful.
> 
> Hope to hear from you again.

And from you in your kind and honest way. Thanks, Tori,

metta,
Sarah

p.s You kindly showed concern and gave me helpful reminders when my close friend just went in for
surgery. She's doing fine and will be back in Hong Kong soon;-))))



 
5363 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Mon May 28, 2001 4:16pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: intro and Jaran

 
  Hi Jaran,

A big thanks to Herman and Tori for encouraging YOU to un-lurk!!

--- jaran wrote:
> 
> Why are other members not contributing? For me, the reasons range 
> from laziness to limited knowledge of dhamma, with poor English in 
> between. Sometimes many posts concern subjects that are beyond my 
> interest and often beyond my understanding.

See, everyone has their excuses!!
> 
> 
> A note about the purpose of 'dhamma study': the Buddha's teachings 
> are not for memorizing or understanding just their theoretical 
> stories, but for the listeners to understand the dhammas (realities) 
> as they are [appearing right now]. So, after reading the posts, don't 
> leave them at the dsg. Examine the things you read about [in dsg] in 
> daily life, as pointed out in Nina's latest post. That's where the 
> real study is.
> 
> It is always good to question every thing, but there are a lot that 
> don't help us understand the realities *right now*. It takes right 
> understanding to ask the right questions to make the right 
> understanding grow further. What are the right understanding and 
> questions? These are what you are going to learn about here.

Excellent points.... and yes, it's interesting how our questions change over time.....very sharp
comments, Jaran..look f/w to more.

Best wishes,
Sarah

p.s Oh wrote and told me you're travelling a lot...does that mean you're not able to read the
posts together so much? She also said you'd be in Bkk soon, I think...look f/w to some more notes
from you perhaps!?!?




 
5364 From: Jonothan Abbott   
Date: Mon May 28, 2001 4:16pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Answer

 
  Dan

--- Dan wrote: 
> At the moments of stealing, there are the volition, decision, and 
> action to steal. The stealing is done because of present action, not 
> past action. This is discussed in the excerpt from Katta-vatthu (and 
> comentary) that I posted under the tab "From Abhidhamma."

I agree with your first sentence, except that I do not see the need to include
'decision' here since volition (intention) plus the necessary action is surely
sufficient.

The stealing is present action (kamma), which will bring an unpleasant result
(vipaka) in the future.  It is done in part because of tendencies accumulated on
previous occasions of similar action.

Do you see any difference between this position and the Katha-vatthu cited in your
earlier post?

Jon


 
5365 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Mon May 28, 2001 9:15pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] why lurkers lurk and don't post

 
  Nice one Antony!  I agree about hermans nice post too.
robert
--- Antony wrote:
> I'm a bit of a lurker I guess. there's usually so much to read
> here 
> and think about that there's no time for posting.
> 
> I think some people lack the confidence to post for their own 
> personal reasons. 
> 
> I don't mean to be a lurker really but it somehow seems a bit
> rude to 
> push in on a thread and have your say.
> 
> then there's the morbid fear of starting your own thread and
> hoping 
> someone feels it's worthy enough to respond.
> 
> I guess you could do a whole psychological profile of this
> situation. 
> I think it is very difficult to enculture a list and get
> enough 
> people who are seriously intersted enough to help things
> along. I 
> think that situation does exist here. Of course the road has
> been 
> rocky and the good posters have left with the bad but there is
> a good 
> environment here I think even the hardcore lurkers would agree
> with 
> that. I would think many people lurk because that's what they
> do.
> 
> 'Don't look this gift horse (of a list) in the mouth' as they
> say. I 
> think it means if someone gives you a horse for nothing don't
> look 
> for problems with it. Not that some of you haven't put a lot
> of work 
> into making this list worthwhile but if you look at some of
> the other 
> lists for comparison this is a good one. You have few people
> who post 
> reams of quoted material for no particular reason (no-one at
> the 
> moment I think) you have little agressive behaviour, not for a
> while 
> anyway (I've been keeping quiet see) and you have few, if any,
> 
> advertising posters swimming by.
> 
> How to encourage more posters? Perhaps you could encourage
> non-
> posters to choose a subject either in person or off-line. Can
> you see 
> who lurks but doesn't post in the administrative part of the
> list you 
> could mail them and say "hey we saw you drop by etc. In one of
> the 
> yahoo clubs that I had participated in some time back they
> used to 
> send an email encouraging participation to all members.
> Perhaps you 
> could have a subject of the week for open posting like: What
> the hell 
> is KUSULA anyway (only an example)
> 
> If you are a lurker whey not consider posting something only
> if it is 
> to express your appreciation of something you read here. I've
> done 
> that kind of thing before. Hey that's an interesting
> conversation 
> you're having! Here's an example: "Hey Herman, I like what
> you've 
> been asking in the ease and stuff thread, My self is so
> pervasive and 
> ubiquitous that I really start to think I'm me sometimes. I
> wouldn't 
> mind seeing some textual references on that either."
> 
> 
> Antony Brennan
> 


 
5366 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Mon May 28, 2001 9:48pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] anatta, ease and stuff

 
  Dear Group,

--- Sarah Procter Abbott  wrote: > Hi Antony, Howard, Herman, Jon, CL and
all the others crying out for suttas on this topic:

Just a quick apology.....I had no idea until I just printed it out that this post was SO long and
that I had quoted so much from Nina's translation of SURVEY of P.D. Personally I found the padding
around the sutta so good that I was having trouble trimming sufficiently, but really thought it
was only a page or two ;-(.....!

(Anthony, I should have read your post more carefully first about the 'reams of quoted material'!!
...and thanks for all your comments and encouragement to lurkers..I wouldn't call you a lurker
btw)

Sarah




 
5367 From: Tori Korshak   
Date: Mon May 28, 2001 10:51pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] why lurkers lurk and don't post

 
  Antony,

Thanks for your considered and humourous approach-rare enough.

Metta from one lurker to another,
Victoria

At 04:06 AM 5/28/01 +0000, you wrote:
>I'm a bit of a lurker I guess. there's usually so much to read here
>and think about that there's no time for posting.
>
>I think some people lack the confidence to post for their own
>personal reasons.
>
>I don't mean to be a lurker really but it somehow seems a bit rude to
>push in on a thread and have your say.
>
>then there's the morbid fear of starting your own thread and hoping
>someone feels it's worthy enough to respond.
>
>I guess you could do a whole psychological profile of this situation.
>I think it is very difficult to enculture a list and get enough
>people who are seriously intersted enough to help things along. I
>think that situation does exist here. Of course the road has been
>rocky and the good posters have left with the bad but there is a good
>environment here I think even the hardcore lurkers would agree with
>that. I would think many people lurk because that's what they do.
>
>'Don't look this gift horse (of a list) in the mouth' as they say. I
>think it means if someone gives you a horse for nothing don't look
>for problems with it. Not that some of you haven't put a lot of work
>into making this list worthwhile but if you look at some of the other
>lists for comparison this is a good one. You have few people who post
>reams of quoted material for no particular reason (no-one at the
>moment I think) you have little agressive behaviour, not for a while
>anyway (I've been keeping quiet see) and you have few, if any,
>advertising posters swimming by.
>
>How to encourage more posters? Perhaps you could encourage non-
>posters to choose a subject either in person or off-line. Can you see
>who lurks but doesn't post in the administrative part of the list you
>could mail them and say "hey we saw you drop by etc. In one of the
>yahoo clubs that I had participated in some time back they used to
>send an email encouraging participation to all members. Perhaps you
>could have a subject of the week for open posting like: What the hell
>is KUSULA anyway (only an example)
>
>If you are a lurker whey not consider posting something only if it is
>to express your appreciation of something you read here. I've done
>that kind of thing before. Hey that's an interesting conversation
>you're having! Here's an example: "Hey Herman, I like what you've
>been asking in the ease and stuff thread, My self is so pervasive and
>ubiquitous that I really start to think I'm me sometimes. I wouldn't
>mind seeing some textual references on that either."
>
>
>Antony Brennan
>
>
>
>

 
5368 From: Dan Dalthorp   
Date: Tue May 29, 2001 0:56am
Subject: Re: Answer

 
  Dan wrote:
> > At the moments of stealing, there are the volition, decision, and 
> > action to steal. The stealing is done because of present action, 
not 
> > past action. This is discussed in the excerpt from Katta-vatthu 
(and 
> > comentary) that I posted under the tab "From Abhidhamma."

Jon wrote:
> I agree with your first sentence, except that I do not see the need 
to include
> 'decision' here since volition (intention) plus the necessary action 
is surely
> sufficient.
> The stealing is present action (kamma), which will bring an 
unpleasant result
> (vipaka) in the future.  It is done in part because of tendencies 
accumulated on
> previous occasions of similar action.
> 
> Do you see any difference between this position and the Katha-vatthu 
cited in your
> earlier post?

Dan:
By decision, I am referring to adhimokkha, which is certainly involved 
in stealing (and any kusala or akusala cittas, excepting those 
accompanied by doubt). I explicitly included it because sometimes it 
is easy to overlook its importance.

Obviously, under equally conducive situations, some people are more 
likely to steal a bike than other people. Why is that? It's not 
because they have stole before or done similar action. It more because 
ottapa and hiri do not arise with the strength to counteract the lobha 
(or dosa). In someone who steals frequently, ottapa and hiri do tend 
to be weak and infrequent, while lobha (or dosa) tend to be strong. 
But stealing is not a result of previous action; it is kamma, active, 
present. It is accompanied by adhimokkha, cetana, ahiri, and anottapa. 
It is these, and not any past action that give rise to the stealing.

 
5369 From: jaran 
Date: Tue May 29, 2001 9:36am
Subject: Re: intro and Jaran

 
  Hello from Chicago Sarah:

Good to hear from you Sarah! 

Yes I am travelling way too much. And yes, I just came back from a 
one-week business-trip in BKK. I met with TA Sujin, Amara, K. Sukhin 
(spelling?), and all others. I spent two weekends at the fundation. I 
got the priority to ask the all the questions I wanted. :-) (All of 
which have been shared with Kom and P' O yesterday in our BayArea 
dsg.)

I'd love to share with you right now, but I am being kicked out for 
this internet cafe. One intesting thing I notice, however, is that
the 
questions I asked are quite similar to those we (mostly you and Jon) 
asked at the Cambodia trip.

They are throwing me out! I gotta go.

Later,
jaran

--- Sarah Procter Abbott  
wrote:
> Hi Jaran,
> 
> Best wishes,
> Sarah
> 
> p.s Oh wrote and told me you're travelling a lot...does that mean 
you're not able to read the
> posts together so much? She also said you'd be in Bkk soon, I 
think...look f/w to some more notes
> from you perhaps!?!?

 
 
5370 From: Paul Bail 
Date: Tue May 29, 2001 6:35am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Digest Number 434

 
  Dear Loke,

You wrote:

<< on of the other reason is being that I wish to be able to put forward the 
Buddhist idea when confronted by Christians on the subject of debates in 
various aspect of the religions >>

<....And also I have another question.... How do we explain
rebirth (the idea) to a Christian ? Some of my friends agrees that Buddhism
is good and true... except for one lie which is rebirth ? How do I get
around this ?>>

In my experience debate hasn't been too useful in changing people's minds.  I 
think the best you can accomplish is if you can correct any MISINFORMATION 
they may have about Buddhism.  But if you start picking apart their religion, 
they can get very defensive. I know for myself, one of the things that 
attracted me to the Dhamma was the fact that is not (at least, in my 
experience) an aggressively missionary religion.

I think if we develop some genuine understanding of Dhamma, and it begins to 
affect the way we live, then eventually those who are ready will begin asking 
us about the Dhamma.  In the beginning they may not be ready to accept all 
facets of Dhamma, such as rebirth.  But by beginning with some basic 
principles of Dhamma and then seeing the truth of them, little by little the 
may inquire more deeply.

Pau Bail

 
5371 From: Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)   
Date: Tue May 29, 2001 10:56am
Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Digest Number 434

 
  Dear Pau Bail,

		Actually it was not debate.... maybe I put it wrongly
however... people of Christian faiths question me about the rebirth... how
then should I state this concept clearly and accurately as the Christians
don't believe it and rather think it was something against God hence the
doing of Satan.... I know for myself that rebirth is an imminent process
till libration... but how do I put forth its concept and ideas and
workings.... ?

rgds,
Loke CL

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Paul Bail [SMTP:Paul Bail]
> Sent:	Tuesday, May 29, 2001 10:36 AM
> Subject:	Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Digest Number 434
> 
> Dear Loke,
> 
> You wrote:
> 
> << on of the other reason is being that I wish to be able to put forward
> the 
> Buddhist idea when confronted by Christians on the subject of debates in 
> various aspect of the religions >>
> 
> <....And also I have another question.... How do we explain
> rebirth (the idea) to a Christian ? Some of my friends agrees that
> Buddhism
> is good and true... except for one lie which is rebirth ? How do I get
> around this ?>>
> 
> In my experience debate hasn't been too useful in changing people's minds.
> I 
> think the best you can accomplish is if you can correct any MISINFORMATION
> 
> they may have about Buddhism.  But if you start picking apart their
> religion, 
> they can get very defensive. I know for myself, one of the things that 
> attracted me to the Dhamma was the fact that is not (at least, in my 
> experience) an aggressively missionary religion.
> 
> I think if we develop some genuine understanding of Dhamma, and it begins
> to 
> affect the way we live, then eventually those who are ready will begin
> asking 
> us about the Dhamma.  In the beginning they may not be ready to accept all
> 
> facets of Dhamma, such as rebirth.  But by beginning with some basic 
> principles of Dhamma and then seeing the truth of them, little by little
> the 
> may inquire more deeply.
> 
> Pau Bail
> 
>  
> 
>

 
5372 From: Num 
Date: Tue May 29, 2001 9:40am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Questions: Phassa, ekaggata, manasikara & Vi~n~nana

 
  Hi Sarah,

This will be a short mail.

I can see the difference between phassa and vinnana pretty clearly, thinking 
level.

Regarding ekaggata and manasikra, I still cannot grasp the difference that 
clear.  Like dosa and dommanassa, each pair of those cetasika always arise 
together amd share some similarities.   I agree with Nina's very insightful 
response to my question that awareness and thinking or calling the name of 
the reality is a totally different thing.   But to me, personally, if I 
cannot call what I feel, I think I do not really know what I am feeling or 
thinking about.   Long way to go.   

I ask myself at time, should I ask this kind of question.  I do ask myself a 
whole lot more of questions!!!!   Listening, reading, thinking and 
understanding is totally different reality.   There are couple more pairs of 
cetasika, that I still have a doubt.

Thank you and always appreciate your response.

Num

 
5373 From: Erik 
Date: Tue May 29, 2001 7:00pm
Subject: Re: Questions: Phassa, ekaggata, manasikara & Vi~n~nana

 
  --- Num wrote:
> Hi Sarah,
> 
> This will be a short mail.
> 
> I can see the difference between phassa and vinnana pretty clearly, 
thinking 
> level.
> 
> Regarding ekaggata and manasikra, I still cannot grasp the 
difference that 
> clear.  Like dosa and dommanassa, each pair of those cetasika 
always arise 
> together amd share some similarities.   I agree with Nina's very 
insightful 
> response to my question that awareness and thinking or calling the 
name of 
> the reality is a totally different thing.   But to me, personally, 
if I 
> cannot call what I feel, I think I do not really know what I am 
feeling or 
> thinking about.   Long way to go.   

This may degenerate into a case of the blind leading the blind here, 
because you've clearly studied this way more than I have and I wonder 
what I might be missing. That said, that way I've seen the two is 
that ekaggata merely denotes the fact that all cittas remain focused 
on an object. Nothing more.

Manasikara, on the other hand, seems to me the force that marshals 
attention to an object and keeps it there. Manasikara in this case 
determines WHAT aramanna ekagatta is one-pointedly fixed on.

Manasikara is also associated with the function of advertence, and I 
assume from this definition that manasikara is the force behind the 
two dvaravajjana cittas that allows them to perform their function of 
adverting. But please someone correct me if I am wrong here.

I have to ask now, what is the difference between manasikara and the 
group of vitakka & vicara & adhimokkha? Vitakka performs the function 
of applying attention toward an object. Then vicara follows up with 
sustained pressure of attention to the object. Last, adhimokkha keeps 
attention stuck in the object. Gee, that sounds just like manasikara, 
except that perhaps manasikara also includes something that prompts 
the citta to advert. So manasikara seems like another way of 
describing the sequence of sanna(?), vitakka, vicara, and adhimokkha.
At any rate, there appears overlap in function between manasikara and 
the others cetasikas.

 
5374 From: Joyce Short   
Date: Tue May 29, 2001 7:58pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Digest Number 434

 
  > Dear Loke,
> 
> You wrote:
> 
> << on of the other reason is being that I wish to be able to put forward the
> Buddhist idea when confronted by Christians on the subject of debates in
> various aspect of the religions >>
>
> <....And also I have another question.... How do we explain
> rebirth (the idea) to a Christian ?

Same way as to Buddhist friends.  Good to understand it oneself first.
Explain anatta to them


>Some of my friends agrees that Buddhism
> is good and true... except for one lie which is rebirth ? How do I get
> around this ?>>

rebirth=Paticcasamuppada

"Throught the process of Becoming is conditioned Rebirth.

"The problem 'whether man has free will' does not exist for the Buddhist,
since he knows that, apart from these ever changing mental and physical
phenomena, no such entity as 'me' can ever be found, and that 'man' is
merely a name not relating to any reality.  And the question, 'whether will
is free', must be rejected for the reason that 'will' or volition, is a
mental phenomenon flashing forth only for a moment, and that, as such, it
had no existence in the former moment.  For of a thing that is not, or is
not yet, one cannot not properly speaking, ask whether it is free or unfree.
The only admissible question would be whether the arising of 'Will' is
independent of conditions, or whether it be conditioned.  But the same
question would apply to all mental phenomena, as well as to all physical
phenomena, in other words: to everything, and every occurrence whatsoever.
And the answer would be -whether Will arises, or whether Feeling arises, or
whatever mental or physical phenomenon arises, the arising of anything
whatsoever is depedend on conditions, and wihout conditions nothing can ever
arise or enter into existence."  from Nyanatiloka

Metta,

Joyce

 
5375 From: Paul Bail 
Date: Tue May 29, 2001 6:03pm
Subject: Loke's Christian Friends (was RE: Digest Number 434 _

 
  Dear Loke,

If your Christian friends believe what you are talking about is the doing of 
Satan, then they probably will not listen to you. (Actually some early 
Christians, including Origen--one of the original Christian "Church Fathers" 
believed that there are a succession of lives--that a soul reincarnates.  
Your friends probably don't know this. Unfortunately Origne's belief was 
later condemned by one of the Church councils--but he is still considered one 
of the Church fathers.  Also the Hassidic Jews believe in 
reincarnation--though whether their belief stems from the Judaism of Jesus's 
period, or was a later addition from other sources, I do not know.  In India, 
where Buddha was born, reincarnation was already a long established belief.  
However, the Buddha's teaching of rebirth, I think, goes well beyond that 
because he describes a moment to moment process as well as a life to life 
process.  So maybe it is more important to explain the moment to moment 
process to your friends.

From a logical point of view, the problem with the Christian concept of 
no-rebirth is that everything has to be decided in this life.  Unless 
everyone goes to Heaven, some people will have to go to Hell permanently.  No 
rebirth logically leaves Christians with an Eternal Hell as punishment.  This 
is difficult to reconcile with a concept of an All-Loving God.  Of course, 
they try to do so anyway, but I think it is a major weak point.

I guess I wonder whether your friends are questioning you because (1) they 
are trying to convert you, (2) they like to argue, (3) they are giving you a 
hard time, or (4) they have a sincere wish to learn about these things.  If 
they don't have a sincere wish, maybe it is better to steer the discussion 
onto what you have in common (principles of loving-kindness, morality, etc.)? 
If they continue to try an argue, explain why arguing isn't very useful.

Paul Bail

   From: "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" 
Subject: RE: Digest Number 434

Dear Pau Bail,

        Actually it was not debate.... maybe I put it wrongly
however... people of Christian faiths question me about the rebirth... how
then should I state this concept clearly and accurately as the Christians
don't believe it and rather think it was something against God hence the
doing of Satan.... I know for myself that rebirth is an imminent process
till libration... but how do I put forth its concept and ideas and
workings.... ?

rgds,
Loke CL

 
5376 From: North Jersey Mindfulness Community   
Date: Tue May 29, 2001 11:00pm
Subject: lurking, posting

 
  > --- Antony wrote:
> I'm a bit of a lurker I guess. there's usually so much to read
> here and think about that there's no time for posting.

Hi all --
I am a consummate lurker, which is not that odd until you realize
that I have been moderating professional and personal e-lists 
for almost a decade!

I don't have much to say for a number of reasons.  First, much of
what goes on the Dhamma Study Group is new to me, and I really
don't have a lot to add.  I am not much for psychology and don't know
the Abidhamma.  My study has all been in the Suttas, and of course
in the practicalities of meditation.  So I don't post on this list because
I've not much to add 
" -- Don't say anything that doesn't improve on Silence -- "

In other lists I might be tempted to write in, but am more curious about
what others have to say.  I already know what *I* think, after all!  Sometimes
I think that posters are just trying to prove they know something when they
post.  Other times, of course, people really *do* know something and are
doing the rest of the list a favor by sharing what they know.  Me, I mostly
just like to watch --

In some cases -- not on this list, mind you -- I find people really burn me up.
There is a guy over on D-L right now who is driving me up a tree.  Or *was*
driving me up a tree -- he still would be if I still read him.  When I see a post
from that gentleman I just more on -- I get hundreds, literally hundreds, of emails
a day and just don't need to waste my time on people I know are going to make
me angry.  In most cases these people are not approachable anyway;  I am not
capable of convincing them of my view any more than they are of convincing me
of theirs -- so why bother?

An analogous situation is when people talk-talk-talk on retreat, when we are
supposed to be observing noble silence.  I could ask them to shut up, but my
reaction is to leave them alone and keep my own mouth shut.   I'm not saying
this is the "right" way to act on either retreat or an e-list, just saying that's the
way I am --

Metta --
Robert
North Jersey Mindfulness Community
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/post?protectID=091063014098146233169057186176147222018058196234234130188227054
http://satipatthana.org/

 
5377 From: selamat   
Date: Tue May 29, 2001 11:15pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Loke's Christian Friends (was RE: Digest Number 434 _

 
  Dear Paul et. al.

If you or someone need, we would deliver you personally (by direct email
address) an e-file "Beyond Belief" by bhante A.L. De Silva. He wrote the
book for the Buddhists whose saddha might be trembled by evangelist. It also
describe some Basic Important Buddhist concepts. Food for thought for
Christians and Buddhists who like selling the concept of "God" which we have
already realized that There is no God in the ultimate reality; although
"some/many Buddhists" have the concept.

with metta,
dhamma study group bogor


----- Original Message -----
From: <Paul Bail>
Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2001 9:03 PM
Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Loke's Christian Friends (was RE: Digest Number
434 _


> Dear Loke,
>
> If your Christian friends believe what you are talking about is the doing
of
> Satan, then they probably will not listen to you. (Actually some early
> Christians, including Origen--one of the original Christian "Church
Fathers"
> believed that there are a succession of lives--that a soul reincarnates.
> Your friends probably don't know this. Unfortunately Origne's belief was
> later condemned by one of the Church councils--but he is still considered
one
> of the Church fathers.  Also the Hassidic Jews believe in
> reincarnation--though whether their belief stems from the Judaism of
Jesus's
> period, or was a later addition from other sources, I do not know.  In
India,
> where Buddha was born, reincarnation was already a long established
belief.
> However, the Buddha's teaching of rebirth, I think, goes well beyond that
> because he describes a moment to moment process as well as a life to life
> process.  So maybe it is more important to explain the moment to moment
> process to your friends.
>
> From a logical point of view, the problem with the Christian concept of
> no-rebirth is that everything has to be decided in this life.  Unless
> everyone goes to Heaven, some people will have to go to Hell permanently.
No
> rebirth logically leaves Christians with an Eternal Hell as punishment.
This
> is difficult to reconcile with a concept of an All-Loving God.  Of course,
> they try to do so anyway, but I think it is a major weak point.
>
> I guess I wonder whether your friends are questioning you because (1) they
> are trying to convert you, (2) they like to argue, (3) they are giving you
a
> hard time, or (4) they have a sincere wish to learn about these things.
If
> they don't have a sincere wish, maybe it is better to steer the discussion
> onto what you have in common (principles of loving-kindness, morality,
etc.)?
> If they continue to try an argue, explain why arguing isn't very useful.
>
> Paul Bail
>
>    From: "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" 
> Subject: RE: Digest Number 434
>
> Dear Pau Bail,
>
>         Actually it was not debate.... maybe I put it wrongly
> however... people of Christian faiths question me about the rebirth... how
> then should I state this concept clearly and accurately as the Christians
> don't believe it and rather think it was something against God hence the
> doing of Satan.... I know for myself that rebirth is an imminent process
> till libration... but how do I put forth its concept and ideas and
> workings.... ?
>
> rgds,
> Loke CL
>
>
>
>
>

 
5378 From: Num 
Date: Tue May 29, 2001 7:23pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Digest Number 431. Dosa and unpleasant feeling

 
  Hi Nina,

Greatly appreciate your response.  Thanks for pointing out many subtle and 
hidden conditions.   

<<Thinking is also conditioned, if we had not studied aversion, dosa,
unpleasant feeling, and we had not heard that these namas condition rupa, we
would not be able to think of them now. We should not mind that thinking
arises, it is a reality of daily life, it is dhamma, apppearing now,
non-self. We can begin to investigate thinking when it appears, a reality
which knows something, otherwise it is <my thinking>.>>

I totally agree with above.   May be it's my accumulation, I like to think 
critically  back and forth, examine, cross-examine, look from multiple 
different angles to the thing or concept that at time I think I understand 
pretty well.   Dhamma is not easy, reading and listening to dhamma is not 
that hard but it needed a lot of conditions and accumulation to really see 
and understand Dhamma. Thanks for pointing this out.


<<if there is no desire to select particular
realities such as dosa or unpleasant feeling, but awareness of any reality
of the present moment, also thinking, realities can very, very gradually be
known as they are. But not right away. If we try to know the difference
between different realities, we shall not know them, only right
understanding, pa~n~naa, can know this, not we.>>

I like this part of your mail a lot.  It's very easy to be confused and see 
at time that understanding is anatta.  I am used to hard working and 
studying.  The idea of "I" can feed in at every moment.  But I think I 
somewhat know what you tried to say.   I heard someone said, "Doing by not 
working," at first I think that is crazy, but it's actually a truth, simple, 
elegant and that the way it is. 

<<Acharn also said that the perfection of energy is indispensable in the
elimination of unwholesomeness: <Even though one knows what is good but one
does not endeavour to pursue it, one can never succeed.>
She often said that we should be brave and cheerful in investigating all
kinds of realities, no matter they are pleasant or unpleasant, wholesome or
unwholesome. She also used the word hero, one has to be heroic. Why? Because
it is a long time development, as Robert also pointed out, it takes endless
lives and the knife handle one holds each day wears away so slowly that one
does not see that it wears away. So it is with ignorance and other
defilements, progress may hardly be noticable.

Again, "energy (viriya)" is not "mine". I usually do not want to be a hero. I 
think I might have to change my mind from what you just said :)  I usually 
not worry about how long it will take. I think when conditions are ripe, the 
fruit will happen.  Short or long is just a thought. Reality is here and now, 
as you mentioned that "  <<Acharn Sujin said that dhammas arise and fall away 
too rapidly for anyone to
do anything>> "

I think I am going to get your book, Cetasika.  Sarah mentioned that some 
parts in Visuddhimagga have detail regarding cetasika.  I am way far behind 
my schedule reading this book. May be I will ask you some more questions when 
I read to that section.

Appreciate,

Num








 
5379 From: Nina van Gorkom   
Date: Wed May 30, 2001 1:01am
Subject: what is the abhidhamma /

 
  Dear group, I received off list from a Malaysian friend a very basic
question: what is the Abhidhamma.
She wrote: 
<If i'm not mistaken, you're the author of many a Dhamma & Abhidhamma
<books.I've read  a page or two and its quite a heavy subject.What's
<Abhidhamma mostly about?

Since this question is interesting for all of us I like to answer it here.

Dear Dhamma friend,

The Abhidhamma helps you to understand your daily life. Time and again you
see or hear and on account of what you see or hear there is bound to be like
or dislike. Or you are generous and gives things away, there is generosity.
These are realities of your daily life. This is the study of Abhidhamma. The
Abhdidhamma explains in detail about all these realities and it shows the
conditions for all that happens in your life, it shows cause and effect.
Terms are used to explain about realities, but all book learning would be
void if you do not verify in your own life the realities explained by these
terms. You do not have to learn them by heart and it depends on your own
inclination to what extent you want to study them.
Would you like to know your mind? We find it difficult to analyse it,
because it changes all the time. Is it not true that there are at different
times generosity, anger or desire? The Abhidhamma teaches us that when there
is generosity there cannot be at the same time anger or desire, they arise
at different moments. At each moment there is a different mind. We use in
everyday language the word mind, but that term suggests something lasting.
The word moment of consciousness (in Pali citta) is more precise.
Each citta experiences something, it experiences an object. Seeing
experiences what appears through the eyes, visible object. Hearing
experiences what appears through the ears, sound. Seeing is a reality, it is
dhamma. Seeing does not experiences sound. Hearing experiences sound, it
does not experience visible object. Hearing is a reality, it is dhamma.
There are dhammas which know or experience an object, these are mental
phenomena, or in Pali nama. There are dhammas which do not experience
anything such as visible object, sound or hardness, these are physical
phenomena, or in Pali rupa.
You can verify this in your life and you do not need words or names to
verify this, you can experience it. That is the study of Abhidhamma. We tend
to cling to an idea of my mind, we take it for self. Why is that? Because we
have always been ignorant of dhammas and we have distorted views of them. We
have been like that in the past and therefore we are like that today.
But the study of dhammas is the condition to develop more understanding of
them. It can help us in daily life.
You may like to help others or give things away to them. Do you act like
that without expecting anything for yourself, such as praise, or are you not
expecting anything? If we expect something for ourselves, there are moments
of desire, unwholesome moments. We should find out which types of cittas
arise in such situations, are they just pure, wholesome moments or are they
unwholesome? If we find out more about such moments we are studying
Abhidhamma. We do not need to remember terms.
You are eating a meal, and when the food tastes good, what kind of citta
arises? It may be attachment, but when you appreciate someone¹s efforts who
cooked the food there is a wholesome citta. You see that the Abhidhamma
teaches many details, but these are of direct benefit for your life. Should
we not find out more about ourselves? That is the purpose of the study of
the Abhidhamma. 

Our life consists of physical phenomena, rupa, and mental phenomena, nama.
These are real for everybody. The nama which sees is real for everyone, no
matter it is the seeing of a dog or a man. Anger, which is another nama, is
real for everyone, no matter it is the anger of a king or a beggar. Hardness
which is rupa, is real for everyone, no matter it is hardness of the table
or hardness of your leg. We used to think by way of many difficult terms of
our mind, and the world in which we live, but now we learn that our life is
only nama and rupa. The late ven. Dhammadharo used to say < the Dhamma
uncomplicates our life> and that is true. (See his <Be here now> on Robert¹s
Web <Abhidhamma Vipassana>).
You could begin with the two terms nama and rupa, and then very gradually
you could learn more details. When you find out that nama and rupa are
realities of daily life the study will be less burdensome, more interesting.
I could also recommend <Realities and Concepts> from Acharn Sujin¹s Survey
of Paramattha Dhammas, see the Web Zolag or the Web Abhidhamma Vipassana.
If you study just a little at a time you will see that it is less
complicated than you thought at first.

With metta, Nina. 

P.S. I wish to express my appreciation of Torie's remarks about her study of
the Abhdiamma, telling us that at first she found it dry and abstract but
now she sees that it is helpful. I rejoice such remarks. I also like Jaran's
remarks that the real study of Abhidhamma is in daily life, just now. Hallo
Jaran, so nice to hear from you.
 I read in the posts about <lurkers>, but I think that some people may
believe that their question is not good enough, too simple. Any question
relating to the Dhamma is good, no matter whether one has not studied much
or has studied already a little more. Anyway, study is never enough, and
this is for all of us.

 
5380 From: Tori Korshak   
Date: Wed May 30, 2001 2:01am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] what is the abhidhamma /

 
  Dear Nina,

Thank you for your encouragement and elaboration. I am very relieved to 
hear that memorisation is not necessary! Robert has mentioned how  kusala 
moments frequently can be rapidly alternating with lobha, so that we may in 
fact be fooling ourselves when we think we experience alobha. This seems a 
very subtle form of self-deception. Sometimes it's difficult to know what 
we don't know (unless someone points it out to us).

Metta,
Victoria


At 07:01 PM 5/29/01 +0200, you wrote:
>Dear group, I received off list from a Malaysian friend a very basic
>question: what is the Abhidhamma.
>She wrote:
><If i'm not mistaken, you're the author of many a Dhamma & Abhidhamma
><books.I've read  a page or two and its quite a heavy subject.What's
><Abhidhamma mostly about?
>
>Since this question is interesting for all of us I like to answer it here.
>
>Dear Dhamma friend,
>
>The Abhidhamma helps you to understand your daily life. Time and again you
>see or hear and on account of what you see or hear there is bound to be like
>or dislike. Or you are generous and gives things away, there is generosity.
>These are realities of your daily life. This is the study of Abhidhamma. The
>Abhdidhamma explains in detail about all these realities and it shows the
>conditions for all that happens in your life, it shows cause and effect.
>Terms are used to explain about realities, but all book learning would be
>void if you do not verify in your own life the realities explained by these
>terms. You do not have to learn them by heart and it depends on your own
>inclination to what extent you want to study them.
>Would you like to know your mind? We find it difficult to analyse it,
>because it changes all the time. Is it not true that there are at different
>times generosity, anger or desire? The Abhidhamma teaches us that when there
>is generosity there cannot be at the same time anger or desire, they arise
>at different moments. At each moment there is a different mind. We use in
>everyday language the word mind, but that term suggests something lasting.
>The word moment of consciousness (in Pali citta) is more precise.
>Each citta experiences something, it experiences an object. Seeing
>experiences what appears through the eyes, visible object. Hearing
>experiences what appears through the ears, sound. Seeing is a reality, it is
>dhamma. Seeing does not experiences sound. Hearing experiences sound, it
>does not experience visible object. Hearing is a reality, it is dhamma.
>There are dhammas which know or experience an object, these are mental
>phenomena, or in Pali nama. There are dhammas which do not experience
>anything such as visible object, sound or hardness, these are physical
>phenomena, or in Pali rupa.
>You can verify this in your life and you do not need words or names to
>verify this, you can experience it. That is the study of Abhidhamma. We tend
>to cling to an idea of my mind, we take it for self. Why is that? Because we
>have always been ignorant of dhammas and we have distorted views of them. We
>have been like that in the past and therefore we are like that today.
>But the study of dhammas is the condition to develop more understanding of
>them. It can help us in daily life.
>You may like to help others or give things away to them. Do you act like
>that without expecting anything for yourself, such as praise, or are you not
>expecting anything? If we expect something for ourselves, there are moments
>of desire, unwholesome moments. We should find out which types of cittas
>arise in such situations, are they just pure, wholesome moments or are they
>unwholesome? If we find out more about such moments we are studying
>Abhidhamma. We do not need to remember terms.
>You are eating a meal, and when the food tastes good, what kind of citta
>arises? It may be attachment, but when you appreciate someone¹s efforts who
>cooked the food there is a wholesome citta. You see that the Abhidhamma
>teaches many details, but these are of direct benefit for your life. Should
>we not find out more about ourselves? That is the purpose of the study of
>the Abhidhamma.
>
>Our life consists of physical phenomena, rupa, and mental phenomena, nama.
>These are real for everybody. The nama which sees is real for everyone, no
>matter it is the seeing of a dog or a man. Anger, which is another nama, is
>real for everyone, no matter it is the anger of a king or a beggar. Hardness
>which is rupa, is real for everyone, no matter it is hardness of the table
>or hardness of your leg. We used to think by way of many difficult terms of
>our mind, and the world in which we live, but now we learn that our life is
>only nama and rupa. The late ven. Dhammadharo used to say < the Dhamma
>uncomplicates our life> and that is true. (See his <Be here now> on Robert¹s
>Web <Abhidhamma Vipassana>).
>You could begin with the two terms nama and rupa, and then very gradually
>you could learn more details. When you find out that nama and rupa are
>realities of daily life the study will be less burdensome, more interesting.
>I could also recommend <Realities and Concepts> from Acharn Sujin¹s Survey
>of Paramattha Dhammas, see the Web Zolag or the Web Abhidhamma Vipassana.
>If you study just a little at a time you will see that it is less
>complicated than you thought at first.
>
>With metta, Nina.
>
>P.S. I wish to express my appreciation of Torie's remarks about her study of
>the Abhdiamma, telling us that at first she found it dry and abstract but
>now she sees that it is helpful. I rejoice such remarks. I also like Jaran's
>remarks that the real study of Abhidhamma is in daily life, just now. Hallo
>Jaran, so nice to hear from you.
>  I read in the posts about <lurkers>, but I think that some people may
>believe that their question is not good enough, too simple. Any question
>relating to the Dhamma is good, no matter whether one has not studied much
>or has studied already a little more. Anyway, study is never enough, and
>this is for all of us.
>

 
5381 From: Dan 
Date: Wed May 30, 2001 7:26am
Subject: Discouraging (1.1)

 
  Awhile back, one of our dsg friends posted a short, almost despairing 
note about how discouraged he was feeling in his dhamma studies. At 
the time, I thought each of his twelve points was a sharp observation 
about the tone of some familiar, contemporary Abhidhamma writers' 
(CAW) comments and views. He has since stopped posting to the list. I 
don't know exactly what his comments were about, but I do know they 
are very similar to the thoughts I have when reading CAW's and very 
different from the uplifting, encouraging thoughts I have from 
reading Tipitaka (Vinaya, Suttanta, Abhidhamma). Since our friend's 
famous post, several comments from CAW's have seemed to miss the mark 
about why someone would find their writing discouraging. From my 
memory, some of the comments have been things like: "Oh, no, Dhamma 
is uplifting, but it takes courage to face it." The comments seem to 
betray a confusion between "being discouraged" and "finding someone's 
writing discouraging", and between "a CAW's writing" and "Buddha's 
Dhamma." I never find the suttas or Abhidhamma discouraging, but I 
can't say the same for CAW's. What is the difference? I think April's 
despairing post from our friend outlined the points very clearly. I'd 
like to take his outline and expand on it with my own examples. 
Please note that my examples may well have nothing to do with what 
our friend was thinking when he wrote his post and only represent my 
understanding. 

But first, what exactly is a CAW? I'm going to leave the term 
undefined for now because the comments I will quote will be 
recognizable to most, and I do not want to prejudice those who don't 
recognize the comments.

Discouraging 1.1: "Everything I ever thought I knew or understood 
about the Dhamma is completely wrong." An early lesson in Dhamma is 
that sensual desire (kamacchanda), ill-will (byapada), sloth and 
torpor (thina-middha), restlessness and worry (uddhacca-kukkucca), 
and sceptical doubt (vicikiccha) are hindrances (nivarana) to 
spiritual development, both calm (samatha) and insight (vipassana). 
The suttas and Abhidhamma often refer to the nivarana as obstacles to 
overcome to attain jhana, and I don't think there would be a CAW in 
disagreement there. But they are also obstacles to insight, as is 
clear from both reason and practice. But is that clarity simply 
micchaditthi (wrong view)? 

Some CAW's hold this view: "The nivarana that must be overcome in 
order to attain jhana should not be regarded as the same nivarana 
that need to be overcome in order to attain enlightenment. The 
attainments/goals of the 2 kinds of development are quite different, 
and so the conditions for that development and the obstacles to it 
are also quite different.  The overcoming of the nivarana in the 
attainment of jhana is not necessarily a condition for their being 
overcome in the context of insight." Does this really say that the 
nivarana are not obstacles to insight? Another CAW chimes in: "The 
only hindrance [to satipatthana] is the last one, ignorance. The 
other hindrances are to the development of samatha only."

This certainly goes against my experience, understanding, and 
impression of my study and practice. How does it square with the 
Buddha's Dhamma? After reading, contemplation, reflection, the CAW's 
views do appear to be in contradiction. 

First, from Vissudhimagga (XXII, 57, Nyanamoli trans.): "The 
hindrances are the five, namely lust [ill-will, sloth and torpor, 
restlessness and remorse, and sceptical doubt], in the sense of 
obstructing and hindering and conceling (reality) from 
consciousness." This sure makes it sound like the nivarana are 
obstacles and hindrances to satipatthana, vipassana, and wisdom 
because satipatthana, vipassana, and wisdom require clear vision of 
reality and the hindrances block that clear vision.

Was Buddhagosa just overreaching here, putting his own corrupt view 
on the matter? I don't think so because everything else I've read of 
his is such a reliable reflection of Buddha's Dhamma that I can't 
help but think he's right here too. In any case, let's move on to the 
suttas for confirmation.

AN 5:51: [Referring to the five nivarana]: "There are five 
impediments and hindrances, overgrowths of the mind that stultify 
insight….Without having overcome these five, it is impossible for a 
monk whose insight thus lacks strength and power, to know his own 
true good, the good of others, and the bood of both; nor will he be 
capable of realizing that superhuman state of distinctive 
achievement, the knowledge and vision enabling the attainment of 
sanctity. But if a monk has overcome these five impediments and 
hindrances, these overgrowths of the mind that stultify insight, then 
it is possible that, with his strong insight, he can know his own 
true good…" This is pretty unambiguous: The familiar five nivarana 
are impediments and hindrances to strong insight.

In fact, Vibhanga appears to go even a step further: In the context 
of attaining jhana, Vibhanaga (508, U Thittila trans.) 
states: "Abandoning these five hindrances (that are) mental 
corruptions and attenuation of wisdom, he, aloof from sense 
pleasures, aloof from bad states, attains and dwells in the first 
jhana…" As for the nivarana being the "attenuation of wisdom," 
Vibhanga continues (563): "'Attenuation of wisdom' means: Because of 
these five hindrances wisdom that has not arisen does not arise, also 
wisdom that has arisen ceases. Therefore this is called `attenuation 
of wisdom'." This seems to say that by that very attenuation of 
wisdom, the nivarana prevent the establishment of jhana. 

In this case, the CAW's statements that the nivarana are not 
obstacles to insight seem to be very much at odds with Buddha's 
Dhamma as expressed in the suttas, commentaries, and abhidhamma.

Is it any wonder that after reading CAW's someone might get the idea 
that "Everything I ever thought I knew or understood about the Dhamma 
is completely wrong"? 

This is just one example that might be interesting to discuss. I will 
write about more examples soon, health permitting (the pneumonia has 
returned).

 
5382 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Wed May 30, 2001 7:35am
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Discouraging (1.1)

 
  Hi Dan,

I'm running out the door, so no time for any comments, but:

--- Dan wrote: >
> This is just one example that might be interesting to discuss. I will 
> write about more examples soon, health permitting (the pneumonia has 
> returned).

I'm sure we're all sorry to hear about this.....what a drag!!! Hope you get well soon! In the
meantime, I seem to remember the last attack of pneumonia seemed to be an excellent time for
dhamma reflection and great posts here. I look forward to hearing more from you and others.

Best wishes,
Sarah


 
5383 From: Antony 
Date: Wed May 30, 2001 8:15am
Subject: Re: Discouraging (1.1)

 
  In my own limited understanding it seems like these things are a 
matter of degree. Of course in the beginning the obstacles seem great 
but the more you learn by observation of them and implementing the 
precepts and the eightfold path the lesser of an obstacle they become 
due to the skillfulness you develop in knowing them, recognising 
them, developing a better way of being that stops feeding them, 
seeing into what they are and developing ways that they have less 
capacity to control.

I think discouragement is a significant factor in developing Dhamma 
Practice. This is, I think, why a friend or teacher is neccesary. 
Forums like this list can also be useful in that sense. Although they 
can also be a source of confusion and discouragement.To work without 
consistent guidance takes a particular type of character, I think. To 
work with random guidance from various parties can be confusing and 
discouraging, especially early on in your career. 

Funny thing is that I am usually a little elated to find I have had 
some wrong view or understanding. I feel like I must be developing 
toward a better understanding if I have to deconstruct something I 
have been hanging on to. This is a character thing too I think. That 
is why I think consistency is critical in the beginning, consistency 
of guidance that is.

I love reading about the Dhamma and I read all the time. It often 
puts me in a position where I am reading books from different 
traditions that explain things in what are some time almost 
diametrically opposing ways. Sometimes its a bit like working with a 
Koan (kung-an).

I would suggest that no-one depend on the internet to recieve their 
dhamma teaching. Although this may be possible in the future if co-
ordinated properly it can only be a supplement or an adjunct at the 
most. Find a teacher. I'm sure it's OK to work with them via email or 
a list but a list of general practitioners (in the buddhist sense 
that is) cannot be your teacher. They may perhaps be your support.

I hope I'm speaking [typing] to the subject now as I've been hacking 
away for some time.

Antony Brennan



-- Dan wrote:
> Awhile back, one of our dsg friends posted a short, almost 
despairing 
> note about how discouraged he was feeling in his dhamma studies. At 
> the time, I thought each of his twelve points was a sharp 
observation 
> about the tone of some familiar, contemporary Abhidhamma writers' 
> (CAW) comments and views. He has since stopped posting to the list. 
I 
> don't know exactly what his comments were about, but I do know they 
> are very similar to the thoughts I have when reading CAW's and very 
> different from the uplifting, encouraging thoughts I have from 
> reading Tipitaka (Vinaya, Suttanta, Abhidhamma). Since our friend's 
> famous post, several comments from CAW's have seemed to miss the 
mark 
> about why someone would find their writing discouraging. From my 
> memory, some of the comments have been things like: "Oh, no, Dhamma 
> is uplifting, but it takes courage to face it." The comments seem 
to 
> betray a confusion between "being discouraged" and "finding 
someone's 
> writing discouraging", and between "a CAW's writing" and "Buddha's 
> Dhamma." I never find the suttas or Abhidhamma discouraging, but I 
> can't say the same for CAW's. What is the difference? I think 
April's 
> despairing post from our friend outlined the points very clearly. 
I'd 
> like to take his outline and expand on it with my own examples. 
> Please note that my examples may well have nothing to do with what 
> our friend was thinking when he wrote his post and only represent 
my 
> understanding. 
> 
> But first, what exactly is a CAW? I'm going to leave the term 
> undefined for now because the comments I will quote will be 
> recognizable to most, and I do not want to prejudice those who 
don't 
> recognize the comments.
> 
> Discouraging 1.1: "Everything I ever thought I knew or understood 
> about the Dhamma is completely wrong." An early lesson in Dhamma is 
> that sensual desire (kamacchanda), ill-will (byapada), sloth and 
> torpor (thina-middha), restlessness and worry (uddhacca-kukkucca), 
> and sceptical doubt (vicikiccha) are hindrances (nivarana) to 
> spiritual development, both calm (samatha) and insight (vipassana). 
> The suttas and Abhidhamma often refer to the nivarana as obstacles 
to 
> overcome to attain jhana, and I don't think there would be a CAW in 
> disagreement there. But they are also obstacles to insight, as is 
> clear from both reason and practice. But is that clarity simply 
> micchaditthi (wrong view)? 
> 
> Some CAW's hold this view: "The nivarana that must be overcome in 
> order to attain jhana should not be regarded as the same nivarana 
> that need to be overcome in order to attain enlightenment. The 
> attainments/goals of the 2 kinds of development are quite 
different, 
> and so the conditions for that development and the obstacles to it 
> are also quite different.  The overcoming of the nivarana in the 
> attainment of jhana is not necessarily a condition for their being 
> overcome in the context of insight." Does this really say that the 
> nivarana are not obstacles to insight? Another CAW chimes in: "The 
> only hindrance [to satipatthana] is the last one, ignorance. The 
> other hindrances are to the development of samatha only."
> 
> This certainly goes against my experience, understanding, and 
> impression of my study and practice. How does it square with the 
> Buddha's Dhamma? After reading, contemplation, reflection, the 
CAW's 
> views do appear to be in contradiction. 
> 
> First, from Vissudhimagga (XXII, 57, Nyanamoli trans.): "The 
> hindrances are the five, namely lust [ill-will, sloth and torpor, 
> restlessness and remorse, and sceptical doubt], in the sense of 
> obstructing and hindering and conceling (reality) from 
> consciousness." This sure makes it sound like the nivarana are 
> obstacles and hindrances to satipatthana, vipassana, and wisdom 
> because satipatthana, vipassana, and wisdom require clear vision of 
> reality and the hindrances block that clear vision.
> 
> Was Buddhagosa just overreaching here, putting his own corrupt view 
> on the matter? I don't think so because everything else I've read 
of 
> his is such a reliable reflection of Buddha's Dhamma that I can't 
> help but think he's right here too. In any case, let's move on to 
the 
> suttas for confirmation.
> 
> AN 5:51: [Referring to the five nivarana]: "There are five 
> impediments and hindrances, overgrowths of the mind that stultify 
> insight….Without having overcome these five, it is impossible for a 
> monk whose insight thus lacks strength and power, to know his own 
> true good, the good of others, and the bood of both; nor will he be 
> capable of realizing that superhuman state of distinctive 
> achievement, the knowledge and vision enabling the attainment of 
> sanctity. But if a monk has overcome these five impediments and 
> hindrances, these overgrowths of the mind that stultify insight, 
then 
> it is possible that, with his strong insight, he can know his own 
> true good…" This is pretty unambiguous: The familiar five nivarana 
> are impediments and hindrances to strong insight.
> 
> In fact, Vibhanga appears to go even a step further: In the context 
> of attaining jhana, Vibhanaga (508, U Thittila trans.) 
> states: "Abandoning these five hindrances (that are) mental 
> corruptions and attenuation of wisdom, he, aloof from sense 
> pleasures, aloof from bad states, attains and dwells in the first 
> jhana…" As for the nivarana being the "attenuation of wisdom," 
> Vibhanga continues (563): "'Attenuation of wisdom' means: Because 
of 
> these five hindrances wisdom that has not arisen does not arise, 
also 
> wisdom that has arisen ceases. Therefore this is called 
`attenuation 
> of wisdom'." This seems to say that by that very attenuation of 
> wisdom, the nivarana prevent the establishment of jhana. 
> 
> In this case, the CAW's statements that the nivarana are not 
> obstacles to insight seem to be very much at odds with Buddha's 
> Dhamma as expressed in the suttas, commentaries, and abhidhamma.
> 
> Is it any wonder that after reading CAW's someone might get the 
idea 
> that "Everything I ever thought I knew or understood about the 
Dhamma 
> is completely wrong"? 
> 
> This is just one example that might be interesting to discuss. I 
will 
> write about more examples soon, health permitting (the pneumonia 
has 
> returned).

 
5384 From: Antony 
Date: Wed May 30, 2001 8:16am
Subject: Re: why lurkers lurk and don't post

 
  Thanks Victoria and Robert

lets hear more from other lurkers, what do you like best abou lurking 
on this list.

antony brennan


--- Tori Korshak  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Antony,
> 
> Thanks for your considered and humourous approach-rare enough.
> 
> Metta from one lurker to another,
> Victoria
> 
> At 04:06 AM 5/28/01 +0000, you wrote:
> >I'm a bit of a lurker I guess. there's usually so much to read here
> >and think about that there's no time for posting.
> >
> >I think some people lack the confidence to post for their own
> >personal reasons.
> >
> >I don't mean to be a lurker really but it somehow seems a bit rude 
to
> >push in on a thread and have your say.
> >
> >then there's the morbid fear of starting your own thread and hoping
> >someone feels it's worthy enough to respond.
> >
> >I guess you could do a whole psychological profile of this 
situation.
> >I think it is very difficult to enculture a list and get enough
> >people who are seriously intersted enough to help things along. I
> >think that situation does exist here. Of course the road has been
> >rocky and the good posters have left with the bad but there is a 
good
> >environment here I think even the hardcore lurkers would agree with
> >that. I would think many people lurk because that's what they do.
> >
> >'Don't look this gift horse (of a list) in the mouth' as they say. 
I
> >think it means if someone gives you a horse for nothing don't look
> >for problems with it. Not that some of you haven't put a lot of 
work
> >into making this list worthwhile but if you look at some of the 
other
> >lists for comparison this is a good one. You have few people who 
post
> >reams of quoted material for no particular reason (no-one at the
> >moment I think) you have little agressive behaviour, not for a 
while
> >anyway (I've been keeping quiet see) and you have few, if any,
> >advertising posters swimming by.
> >
> >How to encourage more posters? Perhaps you could encourage non-
> >posters to choose a subject either in person or off-line. Can you 
see
> >who lurks but doesn't post in the administrative part of the list 
you
> >could mail them and say "hey we saw you drop by etc. In one of the
> >yahoo clubs that I had participated in some time back they used to
> >send an email encouraging participation to all members. Perhaps you
> >could have a subject of the week for open posting like: What the 
hell
> >is KUSULA anyway (only an example)
> >
> >If you are a lurker whey not consider posting something only if it 
is
> >to express your appreciation of something you read here. I've done
> >that kind of thing before. Hey that's an interesting conversation
> >you're having! Here's an example: "Hey Herman, I like what you've
> >been asking in the ease and stuff thread, My self is so pervasive 
and
> >ubiquitous that I really start to think I'm me sometimes. I 
wouldn't
> >mind seeing some textual references on that either."
> >
> >
> >Antony Brennan

 

 
5385 From: Antony 
Date: Wed May 30, 2001 8:30am
Subject: Re: lurking, posting

 
  Hello Robert

Happy lurking. I don't think there's anything wrong at all with list 
lurking, after all there's anly so much time in the day.

>I already know what *I* think, after all!  Sometimes
>I think that posters are just trying to prove they know something 
>when they post.  Other times, of course, people really *do* know 
>something and are doing the rest of the list a favor by sharing what 
>they know. 

of course what you say here is so true, not that you know what you 
think already that's conjecture isn't it? :) But that there is 
probablym ore interesting psychology to why people do post as much as 
some do. For me I often feel like I work things out as I write. I've 
written since I was a child and it seems to have developed into 
helping me think things out. I often type out whole posts then say 
MMM that was interesting I didn't know that, then I delete it. I 
wouldn't want to bore everyone with my raving now would I.

there is a lot to be learned by reading here, I think. I read a lot 
and don't post so much.

>There is a guy over on D-L right now who is driving me up a tree.  
>Or *was* driving me up a tree -- he still would be if I still read 
>him.  When I see a post from that gentleman I just more on 


Oh tell me about it  I developed the last confrontation, I wish I had 
your advice then. I only jsut got over feeling bad about being so 
stupid so as to do it. 

Thanks for your comments and I wish you well with your practice.


antony brennan


--- "North Jersey Mindfulness Community" 
 wrote:
> > --- Antony wrote:
> > I'm a bit of a lurker I guess. there's usually so much to read
> > here and think about that there's no time for posting.
> 
> Hi all --
> I am a consummate lurker, which is not that odd until you realize
> that I have been moderating professional and personal e-lists 
> for almost a decade!
> 
> I don't have much to say for a number of reasons.  First, much of
> what goes on the Dhamma Study Group is new to me, and I really
> don't have a lot to add.  I am not much for psychology and don't 
know
> the Abidhamma.  My study has all been in the Suttas, and of course
> in the practicalities of meditation.  So I don't post on this list 
because
> I've not much to add 
> " -- Don't say anything that doesn't improve on Silence -- "
> 
> In other lists I might be tempted to write in, but am more curious 
about
> what others have to say.  I already know what *I* think, after 
all!  Sometimes
> I think that posters are just trying to prove they know something 
when they
> post.  Other times, of course, people really *do* know something 
and are
> doing the rest of the list a favor by sharing what they know.  Me, 
I mostly
> just like to watch --
> 
> In some cases -- not on this list, mind you -- I find people really 
burn me up.
> There is a guy over on D-L right now who is driving me up a tree.  
Or *was*
> driving me up a tree -- he still would be if I still read him.  
When I see a post
> from that gentleman I just more on -- I get hundreds, literally 
hundreds, of emails
> a day and just don't need to waste my time on people I know are 
going to make
> me angry.  In most cases these people are not approachable anyway;  
I am not
> capable of convincing them of my view any more than they are of 
convincing me
> of theirs -- so why bother?
> 
> An analogous situation is when people talk-talk-talk on retreat, 
when we are
> supposed to be observing noble silence.  I could ask them to shut 
up, but my
> reaction is to leave them alone and keep my own mouth shut.   I'm 
not saying
> this is the "right" way to act on either retreat or an e-list, just 
saying that's the
> way I am --
> 
> Metta --
> Robert
> North Jersey Mindfulness Community
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/post?protectID=091063014098146233033082190
> http://satipatthana.org/

 
5386 From: Antony 
Date: Wed May 30, 2001 8:42am
Subject: Re: anatta, ease and stuff

 
  Oh No Sarah I wasn't speaking about your type of really long quoting. 
Yours was in context and part of a thread and supporting the 
discussion. 

I remember previously Mr McCall complaining about Mr Yick flooding 
the list with quotes from books that were not part of a discussion 
and had no immediate context and no comment from himself. Although 
that may spark a discussion it more often gets in the way. 

Antony Lurk



--- Sarah Procter Abbott  
wrote:
> Dear Group,
> 
> --- Sarah Procter Abbott  wrote: > Hi Antony, 
Howard, Herman, Jon, CL and
> all the others crying out for suttas on this topic:
> 
> Just a quick apology.....I had no idea until I just printed it out 
that this post was SO long and
> that I had quoted so much from Nina's translation of SURVEY of P.D. 
Personally I found the padding
> around the sutta so good that I was having trouble trimming 
sufficiently, but really thought it
> was only a page or two ;-(.....!
> 
> (Anthony, I should have read your post more carefully first about 
the 'reams of quoted material'!!
> ...and thanks for all your comments and encouragement to lurkers..I 
wouldn't call you a lurker
> btw)
> 
> Sarah


 
5387 From: Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)   
Date: Wed May 30, 2001 9:29am
Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Loke's Christian Friends (was RE: Digest N umber 434 _

 
  Dear Paul,

	Thank youfor your insight on these matters.... they way you put it
really put my mind at rest thanks again...

May you be well and happy always,
Loke CL

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Paul Bail [SMTP:Paul Bail]
> Sent:	Tuesday, May 29, 2001 10:03 PM
> Subject:	[DhammaStudyGroup] Loke's Christian Friends (was RE: Digest
> Number 434 _
> 
> Dear Loke,
> 
> If your Christian friends believe what you are talking about is the doing
> of 
> Satan, then they probably will not listen to you. (Actually some early 
> Christians, including Origen--one of the original Christian "Church
> Fathers" 
> believed that there are a succession of lives--that a soul reincarnates.  
> Your friends probably don't know this. Unfortunately Origne's belief was 
> later condemned by one of the Church councils--but he is still considered
> one 
> of the Church fathers.  Also the Hassidic Jews believe in 
> reincarnation--though whether their belief stems from the Judaism of
> Jesus's 
> period, or was a later addition from other sources, I do not know.  In
> India, 
> where Buddha was born, reincarnation was already a long established
> belief.  
> However, the Buddha's teaching of rebirth, I think, goes well beyond that 
> because he describes a moment to moment process as well as a life to life 
> process.  So maybe it is more important to explain the moment to moment 
> process to your friends.
> 
> From a logical point of view, the problem with the Christian concept of 
> no-rebirth is that everything has to be decided in this life.  Unless 
> everyone goes to Heaven, some people will have to go to Hell permanently.
> No 
> rebirth logically leaves Christians with an Eternal Hell as punishment.
> This 
> is difficult to reconcile with a concept of an All-Loving God.  Of course,
> 
> they try to do so anyway, but I think it is a major weak point.
> 
> I guess I wonder whether your friends are questioning you because (1) they
> 
> are trying to convert you, (2) they like to argue, (3) they are giving you
> a 
> hard time, or (4) they have a sincere wish to learn about these things.
> If 
> they don't have a sincere wish, maybe it is better to steer the discussion
> 
> onto what you have in common (principles of loving-kindness, morality,
> etc.)? 
> If they continue to try an argue, explain why arguing isn't very useful.
> 
> Paul Bail
> 
>    From: "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" 
> Subject: RE: Digest Number 434
> 
> Dear Pau Bail,
> 
>         Actually it was not debate.... maybe I put it wrongly
> however... people of Christian faiths question me about the rebirth... how
> then should I state this concept clearly and accurately as the Christians
> don't believe it and rather think it was something against God hence the
> doing of Satan.... I know for myself that rebirth is an imminent process
> till libration... but how do I put forth its concept and ideas and
> workings.... ?
> 
> rgds,
> Loke CL
> 
>  
> 
>

 
5388 From: Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)   
Date: Wed May 30, 2001 10:58am
Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Digest Number 434

 
  Thanks for your advice.. however...

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Joyce Short [SMTP:Joyce Short]
> Sent:	Tuesday, May 29, 2001 7:59 PM
> Subject:	Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Digest Number 434
> 
> 
> > Dear Loke,
> > 
> > You wrote:
> > 
> > << on of the other reason is being that I wish to be able to put forward
> the
> > Buddhist idea when confronted by Christians on the subject of debates in
> > various aspect of the religions >>
> >
> > <....And also I have another question.... How do we explain
> > rebirth (the idea) to a Christian ?
> 
> Same way as to Buddhist friends.  Good to understand it oneself first.
> Explain anatta to them
> 
	[Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)]  it will so difficult to explain so dry
a topic to someone from other faith... even I myself though understands it
find it difficult at times to fully grasp the idea (or should I say
penetrate it)

> >Some of my friends agrees that Buddhism
> > is good and true... except for one lie which is rebirth ? How do I get
> > around this ?>>
> 
	[Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)]  no doubt below is true to the Dhamma
point of view.. I am looking for a more simplified and digestiable concept
and idea to bring forth... anyone got any layman term and concept ?

> rebirth=Paticcasamuppada
> 
> "Throught the process of Becoming is conditioned Rebirth.
> 
> "The problem 'whether man has free will' does not exist for the Buddhist,
> since he knows that, apart from these ever changing mental and physical
> phenomena, no such entity as 'me' can ever be found, and that 'man' is
> merely a name not relating to any reality.  And the question, 'whether
> will
> is free', must be rejected for the reason that 'will' or volition, is a
> mental phenomenon flashing forth only for a moment, and that, as such, it
> had no existence in the former moment.  For of a thing that is not, or is
> not yet, one cannot not properly speaking, ask whether it is free or
> unfree.
> The only admissible question would be whether the arising of 'Will' is
> independent of conditions, or whether it be conditioned.  But the same
> question would apply to all mental phenomena, as well as to all physical
> phenomena, in other words: to everything, and every occurrence whatsoever.
> And the answer would be -whether Will arises, or whether Feeling arises,
> or
> whatever mental or physical phenomenon arises, the arising of anything
> whatsoever is depedend on conditions, and wihout conditions nothing can
> ever
> arise or enter into existence."  from Nyanatiloka
> 
> Metta,
> 
> Joyce
> 
> 
>  
> 
>

 
5389 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Wed May 30, 2001 2:28pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] lurking, posting

 
  Hi Robert (NJMC),

GREAT to hear from you and well done Anthony!

--- North Jersey Mindfulness Community  wrote: > > --- Antony
wrote:
 Hi all --
> I am a consummate lurker, which is not that odd until you realize
> that I have been moderating professional and personal e-lists 
> for almost a decade!
> 
Very interesting indeed.......I'm sure you could give us plenty of  tips as newbies! 

> I don't have much to say for a number of reasons.  First, much of
> what goes on the Dhamma Study Group is new to me, and I really
> don't have a lot to add.  I am not much for psychology and don't know
> the Abidhamma.  My study has all been in the Suttas, and of course
> in the practicalities of meditation.  So I don't post on this list because
> I've not much to add 
> " -- Don't say anything that doesn't improve on Silence -- "
> 
> In other lists I might be tempted to write in, but am more curious about
> what others have to say.  I already know what *I* think, after all!  Sometimes
> I think that posters are just trying to prove they know something when they
> post.  Other times, of course, people really *do* know something and are
> doing the rest of the list a favor by sharing what they know.  Me, I mostly
> just like to watch --

Well, just here it sounds like you have some useful contributions to make:-) It's certianly true,
I find, that the motives can be very mixed (just as they can when we keep quiet too!!). The parts
that sound new, do they sound 'interesting new', 'waste of time new' or 'what new'?
> 
> In some cases -- not on this list, mind you -- I find people really burn me up.
> There is a guy over on D-L right now who is driving me up a tree.  Or *was*
> driving me up a tree -- he still would be if I still read him.  When I see a post
> from that gentleman I just more on -- I get hundreds, literally hundreds, of emails
> a day and just don't need to waste my time on people I know are going to make
> me angry.  In most cases these people are not approachable anyway;  I am not
> capable of convincing them of my view any more than they are of convincing me
> of theirs -- so why bother?

Well, I agree, sometimes we need to be selective in what we read. My problem is always lack of
time (or rather juggling too many commitments).
> 
> An analogous situation is when people talk-talk-talk on retreat, when we are
> supposed to be observing noble silence.  I could ask them to shut up, but my
> reaction is to leave them alone and keep my own mouth shut.   I'm not saying
> this is the "right" way to act on either retreat or an e-list, just saying that's the
> way I am --

Yes, very different accumulations!
If you feel like telling us anything about your group( NJMC) all your lists you moderate, that
would be interesting too. Your post is a good reminder for methat there are people skimming
through hundreds of emails a day.......!!

Thanks and look forward to more,

Sarah 

p.s. Please let Jon and myself know off-list anytime if there is any advice you'd like to share
from running all your lists!


 
5390 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Wed May 30, 2001 2:43pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: anatta, ease and stuff

 
  Hi Mr Lurk,

--- Antony wrote: > Oh No Sarah I wasn't speaking about your type of really long
quoting. 
> Yours was in context and part of a thread and supporting the 
> discussion. 

Thanks for this...you're most encouraging. Still, it's good to remember there are many people
here, like Robert,  who receive hundreds of emails a day and well....shorter and sharper is
usually more appreciated by many, I know. Many thanks for reading through.

You're doing a great job of rounding up (or out) the lurkers. Can we formally make you Lurkers
Liaison Lieutenant (LLL)? We've rather let them lurk quietly, but you're welcome to use your far
more motivating talents to encourage them. You could even have a 'Lurkers' Day' for serious
lurkers when the rest of us promise to keep quiet!

Thanks Anthony, 

Sarah

p.s. those evenings must be getting pretty dark Down Under..any more good purchases from the
bookshop? And just how many lists do  YOu follow? I bet you could get as many emails as Robert
(NJMC)!!



 
5391 From: Antony 
Date: Wed May 30, 2001 3:01pm
Subject: Re: anatta, ease and stuff

 
  Lurkers Day... mmm perhpas we can sell little badges.

Calling all Lurkers... Calling all lurkers... what do you think about 
a coming out day. We could have  pro forma lurkers post like this

[you tick werever appropriate


******************************************************
I like to lurk on this list because:

It's really interesting and I can learn something ( )

They talk about really weird things               ( )

I feel like a Buddhist and want to know more      ( )

I've tried to un-suscribe but it doesn't work     ( )

List? what list?                                  ( )

No comment, lurkers have the right to lurk        ( )

I'm being moderated and they don't let any
of my posts through you ***** and ***** *****     ( )

Or type your own personal comments here

.......................................................
.......................................................
.......................................................
.......................................................
.......................................................
.......................................................
.......................................................
.......................................................



antony brennan
LLL



--- Sarah Procter Abbott  
wrote:
> Hi Mr Lurk,
> 
> --- Antony wrote: > Oh No Sarah I wasn't speaking about your 
type of really long
> quoting. 
> > Yours was in context and part of a thread and supporting the 
> > discussion. 
> 
> Thanks for this...you're most encouraging. Still, it's good to 
remember there are many people
> here, like Robert,  who receive hundreds of emails a day and 
well....shorter and sharper is
> usually more appreciated by many, I know. Many thanks for reading 
through.
> 
> You're doing a great job of rounding up (or out) the lurkers. Can 
we formally make you Lurkers
> Liaison Lieutenant (LLL)? We've rather let them lurk quietly, but 
you're welcome to use your far
> more motivating talents to encourage them. You could even have 
a 'Lurkers' Day' for serious
> lurkers when the rest of us promise to keep quiet!
> 
> Thanks Anthony, 
> 
> Sarah
> 
> p.s. those evenings must be getting pretty dark Down Under..any 
more good purchases from the
> bookshop? And just how many lists do  YOu follow? I bet you could 
get as many emails as Robert
> (NJMC)!!
> 


 
5392 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Wed May 30, 2001 3:07pm
Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Fwd: questions

 
  Dear Loke or CL,

(I'm still not clear which you prefer???),

 wrote: 
  
> 				we can test and prove this moment that there
> is no self or God in the seeing, hearing and other realities... HOW ?
> 
> 
By developing awareness and understanding....slowly!
At the moment of seeing, where is the self or God? At the moment of hearing, the same question.
How can self or God be experienced/ Surely only by thinking about the concepts. While we cling to
the idea of a self here, for sure we will cling to the idea of other beings and Gods. It takes a
lot of hearing and considering for understanding to grow. We just try to give each other a little
support here.

I'm enjoying Paul's posts to you and your questions very much. I'm also glad to read the good
advice from Joyce and Salamat too. I know many people on the list here who have partners and
spouses with different beliefs and following other religions. We all have friends too with
different philosophies or religions. Usually it's the attachment ('ours' rather than 'theirs')
that makes it hard if it's hard....Usually it's better to just develop our 'own' understanding and
let them ask when it's the right time. As Paul said I think, you can find areas of agreement for
discussion. This may make for a more harmonious household or friendship!

Keep letting us know how you're getting on.

Sarah




 
5393 From: Sarah Procter Abbott   
Date: Wed May 30, 2001 3:38pm
Subject: pro forma lurkers post from the LLL

 
  Antony (LLL),

What a wit and you did this in the time it took me to make (what I thought) was a quick ph call!
Let's see if anyone sends back the pro forma lurkers post..!

Thanks for a good laugh,
S.




 
5394 From: Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)   
Date: Wed May 30, 2001 5:43pm
Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Fwd: questions

 
  first .. it does not matter if it is Loke or CL... Loke = my family name and
CL = short form for my given name... anything will do.. this never bothers
me..... first and foremost.. thank you all for your generous time and help
in these matters..... I really appreciate it.... maybe if I am a Christian I
would be labelled an evangelist for all my aggressive approach to
Christianities idea and philosophy and idea.... hehehehehhe.... it is so bad
of me.... bad karma of me to be generating trying to force people and
challenge people's faith.... of course there are intention etc etc floating
around. anyway back to the topic developing awareness... the key word here
is SLOWLY... sigh... I think might not be able to achieve in convincing that
Dhamma is the way .. in such a short while.. Dhamma advises on showing the
way by setting an example for oneself.... guess there is no other way huh ?
I agree with you that to develop own understanding for our own good .... but
somehow I am sure with the worldly life's attachments... all of us wants the
best for our loved ones even religion wise even they don't see the
benefits.... what do you think ?

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Sarah Procter Abbott [SMTP:Sarah ]
> Sent:	Wednesday, May 30, 2001 3:08 PM
> Subject:	RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Fwd: questions
> 
> Dear Loke or CL,
> 
> (I'm still not clear which you prefer???),
> 
>  wrote: 
>   
> > 				we can test and prove this moment that there
> > is no self or God in the seeing, hearing and other realities... HOW ?
> > 
> > 
> By developing awareness and understanding....slowly!
> At the moment of seeing, where is the self or God? At the moment of
> hearing, the same question.
> How can self or God be experienced/ Surely only by thinking about the
> concepts. While we cling to
> the idea of a self here, for sure we will cling to the idea of other
> beings and Gods. It takes a
> lot of hearing and considering for understanding to grow. We just try to
> give each other a little
> support here.
> 
> I'm enjoying Paul's posts to you and your questions very much. I'm also
> glad to read the good
> advice from Joyce and Salamat too. I know many people on the list here who
> have partners and
> spouses with different beliefs and following other religions. We all have
> friends too with
> different philosophies or religions. Usually it's the attachment ('ours'
> rather than 'theirs')
> that makes it hard if it's hard....Usually it's better to just develop our
> 'own' understanding and
> let them ask when it's the right time. As Paul said I think, you can find
> areas of agreement for
> discussion. This may make for a more harmonious household or friendship!
> 
> Keep letting us know how you're getting on.
> 
> Sarah
> 

 
5395 From: Robert Kirkpatrick   
Date: Wed May 30, 2001 8:51pm
Subject: Heart problem

 
  dear Group,
A friend wrote to me that the reason they can't believe in the
Atthakatta (commentaries) is because they say the heart is the
base for consciousness. they wrote:
_____
> On the other hand, Buddagosa CONFIRMS in Visuddimagga that the
> seat of the
> Mind is Heart. Now we know, this cannot be possible, through
> lots of
> knowledge we have gained on the functions of the heart and the
> brain and the
> associated central nervous system. If the heart is the seat of
> the
> consciousness, what happens during open heart surgeries where
> the heart is
> kept inactive for hours before activating by an electric shock
> at the end of
> the operation.
> 
> On the other hand, what consciousness a person will have who
> receives a new
> heart from another dead person?
> 
__________________________________________
Dear friend,
 All of us are much conditioned by an age where scientific
discoveries seem so testable and provable. It is natural that
doubts arise on this matter.
The visuddhimagga (viii, 111)says about hadaya-vatthu (heart
basis):
they describe the heart and then note that inside the heart
"there is hollow the size of a punnaga seeds bed where half a
pastata measure of blood is kept, with which as their support
the mind element and mind-consciousness element occur."
Note that it is not the heart itself that is the hadaya-vatthu
NOR is it the blood inside the heart but rather  as the
Paramatthamanjusa (see vis.xiii note 5 ) says "the heart basis
occurs with this blood as its support".
You see the actual hadaya-vatthu is incredibly sublime - in
scientific measure it wouldn't even amount to a tiny fraction of
a gram. It might even be so refined as to be unmeasuarable by
scientific instruments. 
This applies also to the other sense organs (pasada rupa). The
Atthasalini remarks that the very purpose of using the term
pasada is to dismiss the popular misconception of what we think
an eye or an ear is. (see karunadasa p45)The actual sensitive
matter in the eye and ear is very refined. If someone dies then
the ear-sense and eye sense (sotapasada and cakkhu-pasada ) are
immediately no longer produced (they are produced by kamma only)
yet one would not notice much outward change looking at the eye
and ear(at least for the first few minutes before decomposition
sets in). The same applies to the heart - the blood in the heart
would have the same volume after death and yet the hadaya-vatthu
is no longer present.


 I think you accept that consciousness arises soon after
conception. The fetus at that stage is so tiny as to be
invisible to all but the most trained eye (if even that large).
yet consciousness is arising and passing away dependent on some
matter(rupa) somewhere. There is certainly no brain yet but
according to the commentaries the heart basis (hadaya-vattu )
,that extremely subtle, rupa is already present - conditioned by
kamma. This shows how extraordinarily subtle this type of rupa
is. 
There is more that I could write about this. However, I think
one can see how heart transplants etc. make no difference to the
arising and passing of this subtle conditioned rupa.
. 
What does the brain do then? It does something, it is like
wiring center needed for functioning of the body mind - Sure if
you pull out a few wires , just as with a computer, things
aren't going to work so well. One will always be confused about
these problems if one thinks in  stories about people and hearts
and medicine and brain- Even detailed scientific explanations
cannot approach the nature of the true reality of the evanescent
conditioned phenomena we call life. There are only rupas and
namas arising and passing away, and just as with the tipitaka
the commentaries lead us to see this truth .
robert








 
5396 From: Antony 
Date: Wed May 30, 2001 9:44pm
Subject: Re: Heart problem

 
  The following link is to a amazon page for a book called:

The Heart's Code : Tapping the Wisdom and Power of Our Heart Energy : 
The New Findings About Cellular Memories and Their Role in the 
Mind/Body/Spirit

in it is discussed the science behind the growing belief that 
consciousness is based largley in the heart. It is a fascinating 
book. I think anyone who has practiced meditation for long enough 
gets a sense of this in their own experience.

One of the fascinatingthings in the book is the studies that show 
that our hearts may be activley communicating with each other before 
we are even consdiously aware of each others presence. Anyone 
interested in the subject shuld get a copy of the book. I've seen it 
cheap here in OZ as it has been remaindered.



http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0767900952/o/qid=991229879/sr=2
-2/102-8718234-4401734


antony brennan


--- Robert Kirkpatrick 
 wrote:
> dear Group,
> A friend wrote to me that the reason they can't believe in the
> Atthakatta (commentaries) is because they say the heart is the
> base for consciousness. they wrote:

 
5397 From: Gayan Karunaratne   
Date: Wed May 30, 2001 9:54pm
Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Heart problem

 
  Bravo again Robert!

	This is yet another hurdle when switching over to "buddhist"
thinking.
From the childhood , we are fed with "scientific stories" about the brain.
But in the tipitaka , virtually one cannot find anything that explains or
relating to the brain.(other than in the asubha bhavana).
	Swiching station was how I "understood" it too. :o)


Thanks

 
5398 From: Erik 
Date: Wed May 30, 2001 10:38pm
Subject: Digital Abhidhamma Project

 
  Hi all,

As a part of my process of learning the Abhidhamma I am presently 
creating a computerized model of key elements and their relations 
(paccaya). This is a combination of dictionary, concordance, along 
with relations. The "relations" (paccaya) part is what makes this 
unique, I think.

My feeling, from preliminary systems analysis, is that this is 
feasible, and will yield interesting results in terms of analysis of 
dhammas using the Abhidhamma as a canonical reference.

The current data model is broken out as follows: all terms in this 
model are "atoms," or the smallest meaning-units we can work with, 
for example, the term "avijja."

For example, an entry with attributes, using "avijja" as an example, 
looks like:

Entry: "avijja":

1. definitions (multi-language support)
  a. Pali
     I. literal term: avijja
  b. English
     I. literal term: ignorance
    II. Ignorance that conceives of self-essence

(note: all definitions have volume and paragraph references as well: 
ex. "MN.118" or "Vis. XX.10", meaning that all definitions will have 
a hyperlink to the source of the definition for reference if 
available).

2. synonyms
  a. moha

3. relations (paccaya)
  a. root condition for sankhara
  b. prenascence condition for sankhara

4. categories (any number of arbitrary categories)
  a. paticca samuppada

5. groups
  a. akusala

As this entry shows, the term "avijja" contains attributes like
"definitions," which can be in any language, "synonyms," for 
thesaurus-like lookups, and most important, "relations": how "avijja" 
is related to other conceptual "atoms" (not in the Vaisesika sense!) 
via relations.

Modeling these relations programatically means it should be possible 
to "surf" from one relation to the next, much as one navigates the 
Web, through hyperlinking. The idea is to create a hyperlinked 
reference of key terms from the Dhammasangani and Patthana. I have 
already constructed a quick and dirty prototype of this in CSharp 
(the new MS programming language), but found that it came up short. I 
have chosen to implement the protptype using generic Common LISP--an 
artifial intelligence programming language designed for managing 
lists and categories, which is very portable across computing 
architectures and has a simple, powerful, and very flexible
grammar (lambda functions for dynamic rule execution, example).

One aim is to allow the user of this application to create custom 
queries (natural language would be a nice goal, and is well-supported 
in LISP) that navigate from one connection to the next using 
specific "rules," such as "show me all atoms that belong to the 
akusala group." Or, "show me all the parallel factors associate with 
viriyindriya."

Another goal is to be able to take these data structures and 
represent them visually, for example, displaying a tree of the 
primary Abhidhamma categories. Down the road, if time permits, a 
three-dimensional "hyperbrowser" for Abhidhamma concepts may be 
possible.

As I have been considering this project, a number of goals have 
presented themselves:

1. THE DHAMMA MUST BE FREE. NO EXCEPTIONS. NO MACCARIYA, EVER, with 
regard to sharing the Dhamma, as some organizations do (which is 
incomprehensible to me). It must also be universally accessible, via 
the Web, to allow anyone to browse Abhidhamma/Dhamma categories and 
definitions and relations from the comfort of their own homes.

2. It must allow for collaboration. The job of inputting definitions 
is tedious, and no one person in one lifetime can ever do this 
justice. Collaborators MUST be able to edit the database from the 
Web, to submit or modify entries, etc. Another important reason for 
this is that its aim is to provide multi-language support. Language-
specific editors need to be able to create references to source texts 
in a given language, as well as add definitions. There is no limit on 
the number of languages this will support. Each "atom" can have 
definitions if Sanskrit, English, French, etc.

3. It should be able to support concept-spaces across Canons, e.g. 
the terms & concepts in the Tipitaka Abhidhamma should be tied to 
terms and references from the Abhidharmakosa. This would allow for 
cross-referencing between versions and definitions as they appear. 
This will GREATLY facilitate the process of translation, both of the 
Tibetan Kanjur & Tenjur as well as any remaining untranslated 
components of the Abhidhamma. This was my original motivation: to 
provide a concordance and reference, with term hyperlinking. This is 
something I began to explore when working on the Asian Classics Input 
Project (http://www.asianclassics.org/), which was begun by Geshe 
Michael Roach to digitally input all the key texts from the Tibetan 
Canon (see: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/2.08/dharma_pr.html).

4. The structural relations will allow for MUCH interesting 
processing, perhaps even a "meditation advisor" expoert system, which 
like the simple Artifial Intelligence (AI) program Eliza, could ask a 
series of questions and provide feedback from the Abhidhamma, using 
things like relations (paccaya) that show the necessity of certain 
path-factors to meditation, and how to counteract nivaranas one seems 
to have present (based on the advisor's questions). This is just one 
possibility--perhaps a bit hokey--but the potential of computational 
analysis on relations among "atoms" shuold hopefully be clear.

Areas I need some help in:

I am posting this here in hopes that some here can take a look at 
the "atom" definition and see if I'm missing anything. I think a 
combination of attributes and relations hould be enough to define 
an "atom."

Also, at present, given I only have the Visuddimagga as a guide, the 
list of relations there simply won't cut it given the scope of the 
Patthana, for example. To that end, does anyone here have a copy of 
the BUDSIR (from Manidol U.) of ALL the Pali Tipitaka digitized I 
could download? I know it's big (70+M), but I have DSL. I need a core 
reference so I can begin inputting some core definitions from the 
Patthana, if possible.

Comments, suggestions, or digital copies of the Canon in Pali and 
English would all be greatly appreciated. If there is a digital 
version of even the Visuddhimagga and a Pali dictionary it would be a 
great start.

 
5399 From: Jim Anderson   
Date: Wed May 30, 2001 11:44pm
Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Digital Abhidhamma Project

 
  Dear Erik,

>Also, at present, given I only have the Visuddimagga as a guide, the
>list of relations there simply won't cut it given the scope of the
>Patthana, for example. To that end, does anyone here have a copy of
>the BUDSIR (from Manidol U.) of ALL the Pali Tipitaka digitized I
>could download? I know it's big (70+M), but I have DSL. I need a core
>reference so I can begin inputting some core definitions from the
>Patthana, if possible.
>
>Comments, suggestions, or digital copies of the Canon in Pali and
>English would all be greatly appreciated. If there is a digital
>version of even the Visuddhimagga and a Pali dictionary it would be a
>great start.

I would suggest you go to the following website for links to dictionaries
and downloadable Pali texts (Burmese and Sinhalese versions):

http://members.home.net/j-andrew-shaw/pali.htm

The Visuddhimaagga and the whole Abhidhammapitaka with all its
commentaries are already available online for downloading.

Best wishes,
Jim