6800 From: Sukinderpal Narula Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 3:34pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west Dear Erik, > I recall reading somewhere that something like 75% of the Thai bikkhu- > sangha smokes, and I often see a figure of this revered old monk > (whose name I asked one shopkeeper but can no longer recall) around > BKK here, squatting, holding a big fat cigar. Does anyone recall his > name? I found it amusing to see this revered monk smoking en > flagrante this way--so shockingly un-PC for many Westerners, who > can't comperhend the idea that one can be both a smoker and a sincere > spiritual practitioner! :) I recognize the squat but not the smoking, but I think you are talking about Loong Phor Koon. You should listen to him, its worse than his smoking. Sukin. 6801 From: bruce Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 7:04pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west-Derek/slightly related.... hi christine there was an excellent post by ken and visakha on the d-last many months ago explaining why they thought Theravada is definitely *not* dhammakaya.... i'll try to search the archives... bruce > Dhammakaya is Theravadin isn't it, so, if one is a meditator, is this > worthwhile to try? 6802 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 7:04pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west Dear Erik > > > > > >--- Erik wrote: > > > > I still smoke cigarettes, for example > > > > > >Me too! > > > > > >Derek. > > > > > > > Bleah, disgusting! > > I give up any intention of kissing any of you! > >Forget what I said before about not quitting, I finally have some >real incentive to give it up now, Cybele!!! Wow! See I am accumulating merits with my wantoness. This is a perfect example to illustrate how akusala can lead to kusala! Hehehehehehehehehe, gigling, gigling! > > > Please quit very soon. heheheheheh ;-))) > > > > Sorry but I can't resist Sarah....:-) > >(this one is going to keep me giggling all day :) :) :) Hehehe, Sarah says that I flirt with all males in the list but I can't resist. This is like a harem reversed; all males, we are very few women, too tempting for me... :-))))) And the males here are brainy, I go mad for brainy men! hehehehehehe! Love Cybele 6803 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 7:13pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life Hi Derek > >Hi, Tadao, > >Yes. I think it's partly cultural. In Western cultures (and maybe >Japan too? I don't know) we don't see that many dead bodies. But if >you'd lived on the banks of the Ganges all your life, you'd probably >see dead bodies almost every day. However you would smell them. Benares along the river has the smell of death, bodies in decomposition floating in the water and people bathing themselves nearby. India is a spiritual lesson at any corner everyday; you have to SEE the naked truth. Cybele 6804 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 7:51pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! Hi Erik, Even though i was being selective and have done some drastic pruning, this post is still rather long, so I'm slicing it up to help digestion for anyonone other than Erik who needs no help;-) Part 1 >> you were talking >>about >> getting rid of what is unpleasant in life. >Right, which is dukkha. The entire point of the path. There are different meanings of dukkha , but when we talk about (or when the Buddha talks about) dukkha in the 4NT , what is being referred to are ALL conditioned realities which are unsatisfactory because of being impermanent: 'sankhittena pancupadanakkhandha dukkha - briefly, the five factors of attachment are suffering'. The point of the path, as I see it, is to develop understanding of any realities appearing now, not just those trying to get rid of that which seems unpleasant..... > We can easily (and indeed must) at some level speak about > conventional self, dukkha at the conventional level, practice at the > conventional level: that to do this is to get that. When this arises, > that arises; when this ceases, that ceases. It's true we use conventional language and sometimes we can and do misinterpret what others mean by it....here we only have the language to go by, but we begin to get a sense of the views being expressed by each other I think.... > > There is no other way to even discuss practice using language, and > while it is vital to understand WHAT is "self" and what is clung to > as self, there can be a degree of overkill on semantics (which I have > so often observed here) that makes communication very difficult if > too much emphasis is given to the way things are phrased rather than > their deeper meaning. Language is just another fabrication! We must > let even language go! Many would agree with you, but then, as we know, the details need a lot of fine tuning and the language is the means by which we listen and communicate. I don't hold to the school that we don't need to hear the details and should just open our hearts or see the fine example of those who have never listened to or heard the dhamma in detail. I know you don't either Erik and that you appreciate the fine tuning as much as anyone which is why I responded to your message! > What I was driving at here is that we need strategies for effectively > dealing with dukkha in its many aspects, and Right View is simply one > tool among many. What is certain is that insight alone is not enough > to get rid of dukkha until arahata magga. If anyone believes > otherwise they are in for one very rude and nasty shock! The > Sabbasava Sutta for this reason details many other methods the Buddha > expounded for terminating the asavas. I've made my comments about your first point. We read over and over again that it is the noble eightfold path which leads to the cessation of dukkha and that samma-ditthi (right view) is the first and most essential factor.: "Herein a householder is wise: he is endowed with wisdom that understands the arising and cessation (of the five aggregates of existence); he is possessed of the noble penetrating insight that leads to the destruction of suffering. This is called the accomplishment of wisdom." Anguttara Nikaya VIII.54,Vyagghapajja Sutta, Conditions of Welfare http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an08-054.html 6805 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 7:55pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! Hi Erik, Part 2 I'm reading the Sabbasava Sutta (MN2) again as I type. My quotes are from B.Bodhi's translation. (MA refers to the commentary). It discusses in detail how wise attention (yoniso manasikara) attends to what is skilful and understands what is 'unfit for attention'. In other words, comprehends what is kusala and akusala. n36 'MA makes the important point that there is no fixed determination in things themselves as to whether they are fit or unfit for attention. The distinction conisists, rather, in the mode of attention. That mode of attention that is a causal basis for unwholesome states of mind should be avoided, while that mode of attention that is a causal basis for wholesome states should be developed.' In other words it is not the object of citta that matters (however akusala or unpleasant) but the citta and cetasikas (consciousness and mental factors) cognizing it that counts. The four Noble Truths are treated as a 'subject of contemplation and insight'. n41 'MA says that up to the attainment of the path of stream-entry, attention denotes insight (vipassana), but at the moment of the path it denotes path-knowledge. Insight directly apprehends the first two truths, since its objective range is the mental and material phenomena comprised under dukkha and its origin; it can know the latter two truths only inferentially. Path-knowledge makes the truth of cessation its object, apprehending it by penetration as object (arammana). .'..When he attends wisely in this way, three fetters are abandoned in him: personality view, doubt, and adherence to rules and observances. These are called the taints that should be abandoned by seeing.' (n35 'the word 'seeing' (dassana) here refers to the first of the 4 supramundane paths (sotapattimagga) so designated because it offers the first glimpse of Nibbana.' There are one of two points here I'd stress which are relevant and to the nibbana debates, but I'll try not to get side-tracked for now! (I could side-track all day;-) Nowhere here does it say that right view or right attention is one tool among many or that we need strategies. By developing right understanding , it understands what is wholesome, what is unwholesome, what is right view and what is wrong view of self. The Sutta continues to talk about restraint of the senses (with awareness, which as we know accompanies rt understanding). It then discusses other useful 'guidelines' the monks use in their daily life reflections or reminders for living such as avoiding unsuitable places or friends because 'taints, vexation, and fever might arise in one who does not avoid these things'...For example, we read: 'Here a bhikkhu, reflecting wisely, avoids a wild elephant, a wild horse, a wild bull, a wild dog, a snake, a stump, a bramble patch, a chasm, a cliff, a cesspit, a sewer'!! Common sense as we might advise a child ....it doesn't mean there can't be awareness whilst being chased by the wild elephant though! Finally there is a discussion of the 7 bojjhanga (enlightenment factors) 'supported by seclusion, dispassion, and cessation, and ripens in relinquishment...' These factors are developed to realize the higher supramundane paths. BB says (n48) 'The terms 'seclusion' (viveka), 'dispassion' (viraga), and 'cessation' (nirodha) may all be understood as referring to Nibbana. 'MA explains the word vosagga, rendered as 'relinquishment' has the 2 meanings of 'giving up' (pariccaga) i.e. the abandonment of defilements, and 'entering into' (pakkhandana), i.e. culminating in Nibbana.' I just mention these terms as they are often interpreted in other ways. Some people read 'supported by seclusion' and think this means they have to withdraw from ordinary life, for example. Semantics? 6806 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 7:58pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! Hi Erik, Part3 > > In reality, no self, no control, no strategy, no trip...just > realities to be > > known even at these times, however/whatever/wherever conditions > lead us. > > I see we're coming into accord now--at least I think... let's > continue... ;-)) > Okay, that was a tad dogmatic-sounding. I meant this more generally, > that when we're overwhelemed by suffering we're ususually too wrapped > up in notions of "self" and pain to think of much else. I look into > my own mind for this, nowhere else. And of course we can have moments > of insight arising when overwhelmed by dukkha, ;-)) > But some situations ARE more conducive to insight. Please, Sarah, > think carefully about what you're saying here. What you say sounds so > fatalistic, as if there is no reason at all to seek out favorable > conditions for practice! Whoa!!! Why then, is there emphasis on > finding a queit place for meditation, why is there so much emphasis > in the Visuddhimagga, for example, on establishing the appropriate > external conditions conducive to meditation? Please explain your > position to me in light of what the Vis. III.28 speaks of regarding > conditions for meditation. Are these or are these not "situations?" These (as in yr ref) are favourable 'situations' for advanced levels of samatha as discussed in the Vis under the Concentration section, not under the Wisdom or Vipassana section. There have been plenty of discussion on these issues. Where does the Buddha say that for the development of insight (shown to be the 'key) for the eradication of dukkha (as in 4NT) that a certain place or time or position is necessary? It may turn out that in Rob's case there are often more moments of awareness when he's amongst the crowds in the Japanese underground, in a forest or at a karaoke bar. For me it may be that awareness arises when I'm huddled up in cattle-class, listening to my aunt's account of all the coach trips she's been on since I last saw her or playing in the snow in Switzerland. This doesn't mean that we go and try to repeat the experiences..that would show a very strong clinging to sati and wrong view of its conditioned nature....agreed? Hmm... > > Further, your reasoning here and elsewhere suonds dangerously close > to the very serious wrong view rejected by the Buddha that there is > no possibility of controlling our mind in the present via cetana. > This was explicitly refuted by Lord Buddha as a deadly view held by > some teachers, that we are 100% the product of all past actions and > have no volitional control. If I may be so bold, your reasoning sounds like most realities are conditioned and beyond control, but a few really pesky, unpleasant ones, with a little controlling cetana and conventional self should be exterminated or sent running with a few well-trained strategies which are perfectly under control until one is a sotapanna.. (I know I'll get a hammering for this ;-)) > > Volition is EVERYTHING. Please show me a Sutta that says otherwise. > In fact, our volitional "free will" is the only tool we have to get > out of here. Otherwise we may as well toss up our hands and forget > practice altogether, because nothing "we" do will ever make a > difference. Sorry, but cetana is conditioned too..It arises with every citta, even vipaka citta, as you know. It coordinates 'the associated dhammas on the object and has the function of 'willing' in moral (kusala) and immoral (akusala) states. It's perfectly true that nothing 'we' do will make any difference, but this doesn't mean there is anything fatalistic about the path. The factors of the eightfold path can and must be developed. There can be awareness right now if we have heard and considered what it is and and have a clear idea of what the objects of awareness can and should be. However, if we think awareness can be aware of 'sitting' or 'eating' or that another time or place would be more suitable, there certainly won't be any awareness. Cetana (volition or intention) is not a factor of the 8fold path, so without more quotes (I'm already getting v. nervous about the length of this post), how can it be EVERYTHING? > > While it is agreed we can't control vipaka, we can (and MUST, if > we're serious about the path) strive to purify the mind with directed > practice, even practices that will by definition partake of notions > of "self"--until at least sotapatti-magga-nana. ;-((( That is the entire > point of bhavana. We need heaps of merit to even get rid of self-view > in the first place, and I believe in placing the horse before the > cart here and will simply restate the stock formula of dana, sila, > bhavana, in order, one laying the foundation for the next, knowing > that "self view" at some level is ALWAYS present until bhavana is > developed to the degree sakkayaditthi is finally terminated. Different moments..unless there begin to be moments when awareness and understanding penetrate and know realities as they are at this moment as seeing, hearing, hardness or whatever, without any self in the characteristic appearing, then deeper or higher levels of understanding won't develop...of course they will be blurry and infrequent and surrounded by doubts and wrong views in the beginning....but at those moments of insight, there is no wrong view or ignorance. (I'm not talking about anusayas or latent tendencies here). 6807 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 8:07pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! Hi Erik, Part4 > If you believe tears of gratitude and love > are a form of dosa, then I can only say I hope you sometime have the > experience of knowing what such tears of love and joy feel like. I believe there are different realities at these times, Erik. I don't for a moment doubt the genuine gratitude and love you have for your teachers. I'm sure there are many moments of metta too. In my experience, when there are tears, they are an indication of moments of dosa amongst those of metta. Only you can tell and I hope I didn't cause any offence and I certainly didn't mean any disrespect for your teachers or your practice > There are few pracftices which are ther equal of meditation on the > Bhramaviharas. And why, I must ask, is there practicelly NO emphasis > here given to this indispensible practice? It's not like it's even > controversial from the Theravada perspective, and all I can do is > encourage people study the Visuddhimagga IX and meditate, meditate, > meditate on the Four Immeasurables until such tears of joy and > gratitude have the conditions to arise. Can there be metta now? We're trying to help each other and others to appreciate the dhamma....isn't this a good time to show kindness or consideration? What about when you sit on a bus in Bkk? Can there be friendliness and kindness to the other people you have contact with then? I think there is a lot of emphasis on understanding all realities including metta and the other brahmaviharas in Theravada and in developing ALL kinds of wholesomeness, including the brahmaviharas with understanding. ...Another post, but in brief, for me, a lot of what I used to take for metta before I read and heard some details really wasn't metta at all. This is the value of the abhidhamma and I need to hear and read a lot more. > This is the very reason I'm studying > the Abhidhamma, because I see it as a way to "reverse-engineer" many > aspects and experiences of the Dhamma that have arisen in the course > of my own practice, as well as wishing to have a technical way to > unpack, in detail, how and why certain practices perform the > functions they do, and how they all hang together. So we agree here...though I'd say Abhidhamma is not a technical way but the practical way to unpack.......I don't distinguish between abhidhamma and practice..both are about the development of satipatthana now. Have fun unpacking in Bkk, Erik and you never know, we may follow your fine example and get a plane over on a whim too..... Thanks for the encouragement ;-) Pls know that I always enjoy our debates and when I'm unable to continue it's b/c of time restraints only. Sarah 6808 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 8:14pm Subject: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! b --- Erik wrote: > > Volition is EVERYTHING. Please show me a Sutta that says > otherwise. > In fact, our volitional "free will" is the only tool we have > to get > out of here. Otherwise we may as well toss up our hands and > forget > practice altogether, because nothing "we" do will ever make a > difference. > > ___________________ Cetana (volition)is part of sankhara khanda - the aggregate of formations. It is a conditioned phenomena. Visuddhimagga XX83 "There is removal of false view in one who sees "If formations were self, it would be right to take them as self; but being not self they are taken as self. Therefore they are not-self in the sense of no power being exercisable over them.." http://www.abhidhamma.org/majjhima_nikaaya35_i.htm an extract:""Aggivessana, do you say Matter is my self. Feelings are my self. Perceptions are my self. Determinations are my self. Conscioussness is my self.? Good Gotama, I say. matter is my self. Feelings are my self. Perceptions are my self. Determinations are my self. Consciousness is my self, so also this large crowd says it. What does this large crowd say about your view? You should dispute on your view. Good Gotama, I say, matter is my self. Feelings are my self. Perceptions are my self. Determinations are my self, and conscioussness is my self. Then, I will cross question you on this and you may reply, as it pleases you..Aggivessana, do head anointed warrior kings like king Pasenadi of Kosala, king Ajaatasattu of Magadha wield power over their kingdoms, to execute those that have to be executed, to produce those that have to be produced, and to banish those that have to be banished?Yes, good Gotama, the head anointed warrior kings such as king Pasenadi of Kosala and king Ajaatasattu of Magadha wield power in their kingdoms to execute those that have to be executed, to produce those that have to be produced, and to banish those that have to be banished. Even the leaders, gathered here, of the Vajjis and Mallas, wield power in their kingdoms to execute those that have to be executed, to produce those that have to be produced and to banish those that have to be banished, so there are no doubts, about head anointed warrior kings, like king Pasenadi of Kosala and king Ajaatasattu of Magadha. Aggivessana, you say matter is your self, do you wield power over that matter, as may my matter be thus and not thus?. When this was said Saccaka the son of Nigan.tha became silent. For the second time, the Blessed One asked, Aggivessana, you say matter is your self, do you wield power over that matter, as may my matter be thus and not thus?. [and the same for the other aggregates] robert 6809 From: Robert Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 9:48pm Subject: Re: Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message: To Robert Epstein --- Suan wrote: > > > > What do you mean by the phrase " as one's own state"? If you meant > that nibbana is a state of one's consciousness, then the Pali texts > do not support it. I have refuted Professor David Kalupahana on this > point in my research article "Three Abhidhamma Methods Under > Bodhiology" on the bodhiology website. Please go there and check it > out. > ____________ Dear Suan, Thanks for your help on these matters. I also read your excellent article showing that vinnana, citta and mano are indeed synonyms - and have made a link to your site on abhidhamma.org robert 6810 From: Erik Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 10:04pm Subject: Conditions and Insight - Sarah --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: Whew! What a fun (and challenging) this exchange is for me! :) > > But some situations ARE more conducive to insight. Please, Sarah, > > think carefully about what you're saying here. What you say sounds so > > fatalistic, as if there is no reason at all to seek out favorable > > conditions for practice! Whoa!!! Why then, is there emphasis on > > finding a queit place for meditation, why is there so much emphasis > > in the Visuddhimagga, for example, on establishing the appropriate > > external conditions conducive to meditation? Please explain your > > position to me in light of what the Vis. III.28 speaks of regarding > > conditions for meditation. Are these or are these not "situations?" > > These (as in yr ref) are favourable 'situations' for advanced levels of samatha > as discussed in the Vis under the Concentration section, not under the Wisdom > or Vipassana section. As Derek noted, where is Right Vipassana in the Noble Eightfold Path? ;) While there's no point speaking dogmatically by suggesting the approach I've been taught and practiced is the ONLY way, it is impossible to say with certainty other approaches, such as the one you appear to be advocating here, actually work. I remain skeptical and unconvinced, because I have not collected enough evidence demonstrating their efficacy at present. Based on the teachings of my lineage and my interpretation of the suttas, creating favorable conditions for insight is essential. (So is the union of samatha & vipassana, and this has been debated before in detail here.) I remain skeptical of any approach that doesn't give concentration its proper due, and Right Concentration, in my experience, and in the passages from the Suttas, requires appropriate conditions for its arising. The approach I am advocating here--practicing the union of samatha & vipassana--definitely works, and is fully supported in the Suttas, in fact emphasized. And again, Right Concentration is indispensible as a factor of the path; there can be no debate on this point by anyone who calls him or herself a Buddhist: "And what is right concentration? There is the case where a monk -- quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful (mental) qualities -- enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. With the stilling of directed thought & evaluation, he enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of composure, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation -- internal assurance. With the fading of rapture he remains in equanimity, mindful, & fully alert, and physically sensitive of pleasure. He enters & remains in the third jhana, and of him the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasurable abiding.' With the abandoning of pleasure & pain -- as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress -- he enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. This is called right concentration." (SN XLV.8) > There have been plenty of discussion on these issues. Where does the Buddha say > that for the development of insight (shown to be the 'key) for the eradication > of dukkha (as in 4NT) that a certain place or time or position is necessary? Would you accept the Maha-Satipatthana Sutta on this one? "And how does a monk remain focused on the body in & of itself? "There is the case where a monk -- having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building -- sits down folding his legs crosswise, holding his body erect and setting mindfulness to the fore [lit: the front of the chest]. Always mindful, he breathes in; mindful he breathes out." Is this or is this not creating a "situation?" I do not interpret the Satipatthana Sutta saying this is the ONLY way, but if I am interpreting what you're saying correctly, and you're implying that favorable situations aren't helpful or conducive to the path, then this serves as a direct refutation to that notion. Combine this passage with the instruction on Right Concentration above, and there should be little doubt special conditions are, if not extremely beneficial, essential for awakening. And let's get down to brass tacks here. What I'm parroting here is not some random interpretation; it's been demonstrated to work unequivocally--at least in my own experience and interpretation. It also happens to come down one of the most polished teaching lineages in all Tibetan Buddhism. My lama is abbot of the renowned Sera monastery, one of the "Three Pillars of Tibet." He's considered the "first among the first" as Geshe Hlarampa, the highest degree possible in the Gelug-pa lineage (the lineage of the Dalai Lamas), which represents unsurpassed excellence in scholarship and debate (and much, much more), in a lineage renowned for rigorous scholarship and debate, whose (im)personal teachers were the Dalai Lama's private tutors, Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche and Kyabje Ling Rinpoche, as well as the renowned Kyabje Pabongkha Rinpoche. He is considered by many to be a living Buddha. It simply doesn't get any better than this in terms of representing the distilled heart-essence of the Tibetan Dharma, and if one is going to find correct Dharma coming out of Tibet, then this is where it's most likely to be found, because these are the very best possible conditions for it I can think of. And any teacher or teaching I come across will be weighed very carefully against this backdrop. So when I encounter teachings which appear at variance with what's been handed down to me and demonstated to work, then permit me some healthy skepticism. Note I am not going dogmatic and rejecting the importance of watching realities in daily life--that is in fact one important reason I am here, after all, to learn this way of understanding the Dhamma. But know well that now proximity to your teaching lineage is no longer an issue, I will be observing very, very carefully over time for evidence that it is in fact correct Dharma (and I am giving the benefit of the doubt at the moment and assuming it is). > > Further, your reasoning here and elsewhere suonds dangerously close > > to the very serious wrong view rejected by the Buddha that there is > > no possibility of controlling our mind in the present via cetana. > > This was explicitly refuted by Lord Buddha as a deadly view held by > > some teachers, that we are 100% the product of all past actions and > > have no volitional control. > > If I may be so bold, your reasoning sounds like most realities are conditioned > and beyond control, but a few really pesky, unpleasant ones, with a little > controlling cetana and conventional self should be exterminated or sent running > with a few well-trained strategies which are perfectly under control until one > is a sotapanna.. (I know I'll get a hammering for this ;-)) Not "perfectly under control." See my post to Jon earlier--cetana IS conditioned by past action, no disagreement there. But, the fact is we have cetana, volitional choice all the same, and that is the ONLY way we have of getting out of samsara. If there no volition then we'd have no hope at all. May as well put a gun to our collective head and pull the trigger. > It's perfectly true that nothing 'we' do will make any difference, but this > doesn't mean there is anything fatalistic about the path. Choice DOES make a difference, all the difference. Again, we do not disagree cetana is conditioned by accumulations, but we still have a degree of freedom in choosing our responses to situations right now, which is our tiny window of opportunity, the only one we have. > However, if we think awareness can be > aware of 'sitting' or 'eating' or that another time or place would be more > suitable, there certainly won't be any awareness. Sarah, I must strongly disagree with this, again, for the reasons listed above. Do you know for certain what you're saying here is correct? Because this directly contradicts my own experience and that of many others. In my experience suitable conditions are incredibly helpful for the arising of insight, if not necessary (by "conditions" I include everything up from dana, sila, to bhavana, to "external" factors such as time & place, etc.). Anyway, if I'm sounding all fired up in this post it's because I'm thrilled to be in BKK and coming off a high after spending the most delightful afternoon discussing the Dhamma with our friend Sukin, whose unbelievable kindness in giving me the gift of Dhamma is appreciated with the deepest gratitude I know. I again have "Abhidhamma in Daily Life" among my collection of books, as well as Bikkhu Bodhi's take on the "Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma," with all the tables and charts of classifications I've been looking for for so long now. And Sarah, you and Jon need to go with your impulses and hop on that plane (what is it, a three-hour ride?), because you're invited to my apartment-warming this weekend (and besides I want to give a huge hug to everyone). 6811 From: Erik Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 10:37pm Subject: Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > b > --- Erik wrote: > > > Volition is EVERYTHING. Please show me a Sutta that says > > otherwise. > > In fact, our volitional "free will" is the only tool we have > > to get > > out of here. Otherwise we may as well toss up our hands and > > forget > > practice altogether, because nothing "we" do will ever make a > > difference. > > > > ___________________ > > Cetana (volition)is part of sankhara khanda - the aggregate of > formations. It is a conditioned phenomena. > > Visuddhimagga XX83 "There is removal of false view in one who > sees "If formations were self, it would be right to take them as > self; but being not self they are taken as self. Therefore they > are not-self in the sense of no power being exercisable over > them.." Robert, can we choose in a conventional sense? Yes or no? If you say no then you agree with the sectarians the Buddha refuted in the passage I quoted earlier. What is the definition of non-controlling here as a feature of anatta? It all hangs on your interpretation of what that means. I am not suggesting AT ALL there is a "driver" behind actions, because that implies a view of self. That view is explicitly refuted in the Tibetan interpretation as well, one we learn to do away with in "trangye" (study of what constitutes Right vs. wrong view). Yet anatta doesn't mean things don't exist conventionally, and cetana, volition, choice, DOES exist conventionally. If it didn't we'd have no hope of getting out of samsara at all. Thanks to your wonderful inspiration to read the Vis. (I'm still working on it, and haven't read as much lately given I've been very busy) I now know how to return fire using your ordnance, you know. :) Vis. XIX.19: "But he sees clearly with Right View that the wise say 'doer' when there is doing and 'experiencer' when experiencing simply as a mode of common usage." So Phhhhhbt!!!! :) :) :) To further go to the heart of this issue, and on this I think we're in agreement: Hence the Ancients have said: 'There is no doer of a deed or one who reaps a result; Phenomena alone flow on-- No other view than this is right. [...]' So as you can hopefully see by now (let's put this one to bed once and for all), I am not at all denying no-self by talking about volition conventionally. It is an exremely helpful convention indeed, otherwise we'll just get twisted into silly semantic contortions trying to discuss the Dhamma. How else are we to speak of practice other than in terms of mere conventions? All we have is language, and it's by definition deceptive. Again, it is ditthi all the same to get caught up in these very sorts of semantics. That is ditthi just as much as belief in a truly existent "self" or "driver" is ditthi. The Buddha expounded the Middle Way betwen extremes. Can we not use conventional designations helpfully, while not forgetting there is no "core," no ultimate controlling at the same time? That to me represents the Middle Way in terms of this issue of semantics here. 6812 From: Howard Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 6:57pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Hi, Robert (and Erik) - In a message dated 7/24/01 8:37:29 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Robert writes: > --- Erik wrote: > > > Volition is EVERYTHING. Please show me a Sutta that says > > otherwise. > > In fact, our volitional "free will" is the only tool we have > > to get > > out of here. Otherwise we may as well toss up our hands and > > forget > > practice altogether, because nothing "we" do will ever make a > > difference. > > > > ___________________ > > Cetana (volition)is part of sankhara khanda - the aggregate of > formations. It is a conditioned phenomena. > > Visuddhimagga XX83 "There is removal of false view in one who > sees "If formations were self, it would be right to take them as > self; but being not self they are taken as self. Therefore they > are not-self in the sense of no power being exercisable over > them.." > ============================== For sure volition is conditioned. All dhammas other than nibbana are conditioned. If something were to arise without conditions, then its arising would be random. However, how is the path to be followed except by exercise of volition? Progress on the path requires that volition be consistently exercised, a very strong volition, and a very great effort made as a result of that strong volition. 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) 6813 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 11:03pm Subject: Re: Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana:To Derek Cameron Dear Derek How are you? The article can be found by clicking "The Science And Academic Journal Of Bodhiology". When you get there, you will see the Content page". When you click it, the content with a list of categories will appear. The article "Three Abhidhamma Methods Under Bodhiology" is in the category "Academic Articles". If you would like to read an article on Dhamma discussed from the scientific perspective, you simply click on the category "Science Articles". Hope this would help. Now your turn! I once saw your message in Triplegem long time ago with a link to a Tipitaka website when you answered someone's inquiry about "mahabuta". If you still remember it, could you please post that link again on this list for all of us? With regards Suan http://www.bodhiology.org/ --- "Derek Cameron" wrote: > --- Suan wrote: > > I have refuted Professor David Kalupahana on this > > point in my research article "Three Abhidhamma Methods Under > > Bodhiology" on the bodhiology website. Please go there and check it > > out. > > Hi, Suan, > > I tried to go to your site but couldn't see where to click to view > your paper? > > Derek. 6814 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 11:29pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message: To Robert Epstein --- Suan Lu Zaw wrote: > > Dear Robert Epstein > > How are you? I'm pretty well. Thanks for your response! > You wrote: > > "Please correct me if I'm wrong [and I mean that literally, not as an > expression],but it seems to me that what you are saying is that > Nibbana 'itself' [which also makes it sound like an object rather > than an awakened state] is not actually the object of consciousness, > but the concept of it is the object of consciousness both before and > after it has been experienced." > > My answer follows. > > In general, nibbana is the object of consciousness for awakeners at > the moment of transworldly resultant consciousness, for example, > while they (outside that moment) as well as the non-awakeners may > take the idea or concept of nibbana as a stimulus. I'm not quite clear whether I understand the above statement, but it sounds like you're saying that for awakeners and non-awakeners, Nibbana is only apprehended as an idea or concept, but never experienced directly as an object of mind. If that is what you are saying, that is what I thought, that Nibbana being signless could only be apprehended not as itself, but in a secondary form as a concept of idea. But I also contended that this is true of everything, that nothing is apprehended directly by the mind except as an idea or concept, because the mind filters all human experience *except* Nibbana, which overtakes the mind, but never becomes an object *of* the mind except as a concept. In other words, I believe this would mean that one would be saying that Nibbana is the only existent reality that is actual, not fabricated and not indirect. > You wrote: > > "Nibbana itself being signless, would have no way itself of being > apprehended, even while being 'experienced' as one's own state." > > What do you mean by the phrase " as one's own state"? If you meant > that nibbana is a state of one's consciousness, then the Pali texts > do not support it. I guess I'm not clear enough about how to put that, but I simply meant that when one is awakened, that this experience is still not apprehended directly by the mind. If anything the mind would be overtaken by that experience, but that experience would never be objectified by the mind, except as a concept or idea, as you put it, because it is not an object of consciousness. This came out of the discussion over whether Nibbana was the object of higher states of consciousness that were just prior to realization or awakening. My [admittedly uneducated] take on it was that Nibbana being signless, it could never *actually* be an object of any consciousness, although the idea or concept of it could be an object of consciousness which was using it to direct its efforts towards the goal of Nibbana in an advanced stage. But Nibbana itself would only be experienced as a 'reality' [whatever that means.....], not as an object of the mind. I have refuted Professor David Kalupahana on this > point in my research article "Three Abhidhamma Methods Under > Bodhiology" on the bodhiology website. Please go there and check it > out. I will do so. > You wrote: > > " But memory forming a concept in order to mark and communicate the > presence of Nibbana, would refer to the concept as a pointer towards > Nibbana itself." > > I agree with the above statement. I'm glad to hear that, because that makes sense to me. It's hard to conceive of how Nibbana could *actually itself* be directly apprehended by the mind. > I will discuss your other statements at a later date. I will very much look forward to that. Thanks for your clarity on these issues. Best, Robert E. ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6815 From: Robert Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 0:05am Subject: Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! --- Erik wrote: > --- Robert Kirkpatrick > wrote: > > b > > --- Erik wrote: > > > > Volition is EVERYTHING. Please show me a Sutta that says > > > otherwise. > > > In fact, our volitional "free will" is the only tool we have > > > to get > > > out of here. Otherwise we may as well toss up our hands and > > > forget > > > practice altogether, because nothing "we" do will ever make a > > > difference. > > > > > > ___________________ > > > > Cetana (volition)is part of sankhara khanda - the aggregate of > > formations. It is a conditioned phenomena. > > > > Visuddhimagga XX83 "There is removal of false view in one who > > sees "If formations were self, it would be right to take them as > > self; but being not self they are taken as self. Therefore they > > are not-self in the sense of no power being exercisable over > > them.." > So as you can hopefully see by now (let's put this one to bed once > and for all), I am not at all denying no-self by talking about > volition conventionally. It is an exremely helpful convention indeed, > otherwise we'll just get twisted into silly semantic contortions > trying to discuss the Dhamma. How else are we to speak of practice > other than in terms of mere conventions? All we have is language, and > it's by definition deceptive. Again, it is ditthi all the same to get > caught up in these very sorts of semantics. That is ditthi just as > much as belief in a truly existent "self" or "driver" is ditthi. > > The Buddha expounded the Middle Way betwen extremes. Can we not use > conventional designations helpfully, while not forgetting there is > no "core," no ultimate controlling at the same time? That to me > represents the Middle Way in terms of this issue of semantics here. ___________ Dear Erik, I know you feel this is just semantics but I happen to think it goes to the heart of what the Buddha taught. Cetana arises with kusala or akusala. Conventionally, of course, someone might decide " I will get enlightened. I will follow only the true teaching. I will do whatever it takes." They can think that and next week join the moonies and still have this same strong volition. Someone wrote to me a while back who feels that no control is a dangerous idea. They want to stress control and volitional intention which is what they believe that Buddha really taught and they feel uncontrollabilty to be a 'pernicious belief leading to apathy.' "I have a choice whether to get angry in the present moment." the writer said. I replied "Yes, the processes of cittas during anger are new kamma. However, they are also conditioned. The Patthana, the last and most important book of the Abhidhamma, goes into enormous detail about the 24 paccaya (conditions). Some of which are past and some present. But even the present ones do not simply arise out of nothing. Nor do they arise because "I" want them to. The processes of mind are happening at enormous speed and there is no "person" who can do anything to stop them or change them. Even the cittas that are arising at this moment are conditioned by previous cittas as well as well as by other conditions that are present at the same time. This is not the place to go into details but it is well worth studying the Patthana. It gives us a glimpse of the profundity of the path and the wisdom of the Buddha." They further wrote that "we are not just helpless automata acting out our old kamma - that is absurd. I hope the above helps overcome the despair that comes from the belief that we are a slave to our conditioning." I said "This sounds like the debates that western Philosophy used to have (and still does) about Free-will versus Determinism. The Buddha's analysis of the world is neither, it is the middle path. Thus the statement about "we being helpless automata acting out our old kamma" misses the point. There is no "we" to be anything. And kamma is not the only condition. Hearing the teachings of Buddhism - especially the deep teachings on anatta, are a condition for understanding. This understanding leads to energy: energy to hear more, and energy to carry on with the study and practice of vipassana. It leads to the type of determination that will gladly keep developing understanding moment after moment, life after life, aeon after aeon, no matter how long it takes. And if understanding grows then there will be detachment from the idea of self and of control. Then there is no more despair about the path - because "I" have been taken out of the equation. The "I" that we love so much, the "I" that we want to be happy, get enlightened .Then, as the Visuddhimagga says, there is a path but no one on the path." robert 6816 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Jul 24, 2001 11:17pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! Wow, what a great discussion. If we talk about 'self' in language, and accept the idea that this is a convention, the question still arises, what then are we talking about? Are we illuminating that which we are calling 'self' by talking about it, or are we obscuring it by creating a concept which is not 'it', and implicitly substituting that subtle or not-so-subtle concept for the reality of 'self' we are trying to describe? If we talk about Nibbana and even say 'Nibbana is not an object; it is signless', etc., what is created by talking about 'Nibbana' in those statements as if the word refers to something called 'Nibbana'? Even while saying 'Nibbana is formless and signless and not subject to any conditions' the original noun-subject 'Nibbana' slips by in that sentence as an implicit 'thing'. It takes an awfully crafty and wary speaker to speak consciously enough to avoid these implicit concepts, which reduce what we want to illuminate to mere objects of conception in the mind. On the other hand, if we were to speak consciously, realizing that every word we use raises conceptual images in the mind, and actually be mindful of these concepts and images arising, trying to discern them for what they were at the time of speaking, what would be left of our original intention to say something about the realities we strive for? I think we might find that the original intention to say something about that which we call 'Nibbana' would be redirected to an intention to observe the contents of the mind, because that is what we are really in contact with. Mindfulness, I think, dictates that we make firm contact with what we are really involved with at the moment and discern *its* true nature, not the true nature of something that has been reduced to an abstraction. That is why talking about Nibbana and all the other states and signs of progress on the path, although necessary to know what the path *is*, has limited usefulness in moment-to-moment practice, and even obscures the real work when it is overdone. The mind can play freely with philosophical concepts and never get to the task of discerning the true nature of this mind now, and what our true nature really is in this moment. I am happier to use general indicators like 'true nature' and 'the mind' than 'Nibbana' in this context, because they point to what we are generally striving for, but its hard to form an image of 'true nature'. It is just a general description. When I say 'Nibbana' my mind is so full of images of the ultimate state, even though that state may be imagined to be imageless or stateless, it is like a romantic wash across consciousness, full of feelings of relief, pride, spiritual attainment, and images of broad space, emptiness, peace and vastness, what have you. It is laden with hopes and expectations, not to mention mythology. Maybe for you folks who are more seriously instated in the sure stages of the path, and really have made a lot of distinctions between what the spiritual items of the path are and are not, it is not such a false set of images and expectations. But I'll bet there's still a lot of stuff around the attainment of Nibbana. Might be interesting to inventory here what kind of baggage we're all carrying around about such things. On the other hand, the constant task of mindfulness and discernment, which actually distinguishes in the moment what items of consciousness are, and what is real and what is not real, slowly and surely, whether practiced through meditation or contemplative exploration in the mind, creates the real possibility of that which we call 'Nibbana' in this moment, and in future moments that will pick up where these moments of mindfulness leave off. It seems a lot of times that I am more comfortable talking about the flowery attainments of the path, than actually practicing it, and this is something I have to look at. When I stop talking and look at the mind, that reality is difficult, plodding, sometimes boring, and almost always hard work. Clearly to be avoided! Anyway, I hope it doesn't sound like I am anti-talking. I realize that insight can come from sharing and clarifying understandings of all the items of the path. I just think that it's important to practice mindfulness on the subtle level of observing the reality of what is said, and discerning the mental images that gather around our words. And that when we talk about 'self', even knowing that this is a convention, we still let the word 'self' slip by as if beyond the convention there is an object that the word imperfectly refers to. Do we really know 'self' and is it an object? Is there really a 'Nibbana' and can it be attained? Anyway, I'll be interested to hear what anyone has to say. I also found the conversation about volition to be very interesting and important, but I'll save any response to that for another time. Best, Robert E. --------------------------------------- --- Tori Korshak wrote: > > >Dear Sarah and Erik, (Sarah-glad you made it home safely and what a relief > >it must be to have your computer) > > Thank you for this exchange which I find relevant at the moment. > > >Okay, I'm gonna dive in on a point I've been meaning to raise here > >for some time. We talk about "self" and no controlling, so on, so > >forth. But CONVENTIONALLY we have to talk at this level. I see so > >much semantic contortionism here on DSG in HOW things are spoken of, > >that to even speak of something a certain way conventionally implies > >a view of self, etc. NO NO NO!!! Language is the problem here, I > >think, Sarah, and getting hung up on language is to miss the point > >entirely--it's actually getting caught in names & terms--views, > >again! Really. I consider this point a vital one. > > > >We can easily (and indeed must) at some level speak about > >conventional self, dukkha at the conventional level, practice at the > >conventional level: that to do this is to get that. When this arises, > >that arises; when this ceases, that ceases. > > Yes! > > > >There is no other way to even discuss practice using language, and > >while it is vital to understand WHAT is "self" and what is clung to > >as self, there can be a degree of overkill on semantics (which I have > >so often observed here) that makes communication very difficult if > >too much emphasis is given to the way things are phrased rather than > >their deeper meaning. Language is just another fabrication! We must > >let even language go! > > And more yes! > > > >Further, your reasoning here and elsewhere suonds dangerously close > >to the very serious wrong view rejected by the Buddha that there is > >no possibility of controlling our mind in the present via cetana. > >This was explicitly refuted by Lord Buddha as a deadly view held by > >some teachers, that we are 100% the product of all past actions and > >have no volitional control. > > > >Volition is EVERYTHING. Please show me a Sutta that says otherwise. > >In fact, our volitional "free will" is the only tool we have to get > >out of here. Otherwise we may as well toss up our hands and forget > >practice altogether, because nothing "we" do will ever make a > >difference. > > In The Wings to Awakening Thanissaro Bhikku writes: > The fact that the kammic process relies on input from the present moment > means that it is not totally deterministic. Input from the past may place > restrictions on what can be done and known in any particular moment , but > the allowance for new input from the present provides some room for free will. > > It seems that in fact everything we can consciously choose to do must be > within the scope of this present kamma-how we choose to practice and how we > live our lives (obviously not excluding conditions we have no control > over). This does not negate teachings on anatta, but paradoxically is the > means by which we can come to realise the teaching. > > ...And what , monks, is new kamma? Whatever kamma one does now with the > body, with speech or with the intellect. This is called new kamma... And > what is the path of practice leading to the cessation of kamma? Just this > noble eightfold path...this is called the path of practice leading to the > cessation of kamma. S.XXXV.145 > > > Thanissaro continues: > The teaching of dependent origination helps to provide more detailed > instructions on this point, showing precisely where the cycle of kamma > provides openings for more skillful present input. > > '. > > >While it is agreed we can't control vipaka, we can (and MUST, if > >we're serious about the path) strive to purify the mind with directed > >practice, even practices that will by definition partake of notions > >of "self"--until at least sotapatti-magga-nana. That is the entire > >point of bhavana. We need heaps of merit to even get rid of self-view > >in the first place, and I believe in placing the horse before the > >cart here and will simply restate the stock formula of dana, sila, > >bhavana, in order, one laying the foundation for the next, knowing > >that "self view" at some level is ALWAYS present until bhavana is > >developed to the degree sakkayaditthi is finally terminated. > > > >I think of, for example, my arch-nemesis kukuccha, which through a > >number of sessions I was able to pinpoint at the root, so that now, I > >can catch it (mostly, still not always) while it is still tiny, > >before it snowballs into something that drags me into the muck for > >minutes, hours, or longer. Do you realize what a coup this has been > >in my own practice? > > Many congratulations on this kusala accomplishment. I think it is good > practice to recognise these achievements when they occur as it increases > saddha and viriya for you as well as for others. Of course self-delusion is > something we always have to be aware of, but with mindfulness, we can catch > this as well. > > >There are few pracftices which are ther equal of meditation on the > >Bhramaviharas. > > Sadhu X 3 Erik for this reminder. > > >This proclivity to experiment is, I think, a function of nearly- > >insatiable curiosity, > > 'If we are truly curious, we investigate without any preconceptions. We > suspend our beliefs and and just observe, just notice.' > > > and I'm willing to try anything that may be of > >benefit (read conencted with the Goal in some way), even > >tangentially, as a way of getting to the bottom of things, the whys > >and wherefores, in other words. This is the very reason I'm studying > >the Abhidhamma, because I see it as a way to "reverse-engineer" many > >aspects and experiences of the Dhamma that have arisen in the course > >of my own practice, as well as wishing to have a technical way to > >unpack, in detail, how and why certain practices perform the > >functions they do, and how they all hang together. One of the monks > >in my bikkhu-sangha once called me the "mad scientist" because of my > >love of this sort of experimentation. It has held me in good stead so > >far, and I see no reason to stop playing, since there is so much yet > >for me to learn. > > Thanks for the interesting discussion. > Metta, > Victoria ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6817 From: Derek Cameron Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 0:34am Subject: Re: Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana:To Derek Cameron Hi, Suan, --- Suan wrote: > Hope this would help. Yes, I found it, thanks. > I once saw your message in Triplegem long time ago with a link to > a Tipitaka website when you answered someone's inquiry about > "mahabuta". If you still remember it, could you please post that link > again on this list for all of us? I'm sorry, but I don't remember that post or the link. Derek. 6818 From: Christine Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 5:26am Subject: Re: thailand/west-Derek/slightly related.... Hi Bruce, That would be much appreciated. I'll have a look too. metta, Christine --- bruce wrote: > hi christine > > there was an excellent post by ken and visakha on the d-last many months > ago explaining why they thought Theravada is definitely *not* dhammakaya.... > > i'll try to search the archives... > > bruce > > > Dhammakaya is Theravadin isn't it, so, if one is a meditator, is this > > worthwhile to try? 6819 From: ppp Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 1:16am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life Hi, Derek: There must be many many ways of veiwing dead bodies. They may be a condition for aversion, for an indifferent feeling, or for a codition for having a wholesome thought that our body is the same in nature with what we have been seeing. Or if dead bodies are exposed to one who has developed high level of wisdo, then, the dead boy may become a conditioin (in a conventional sense) for his enlightenment. The point is that any object can be a conditon for experiencing either kusala or akusala citta. The sight of the Buddha may condition akusala for some people In contrast, the dead body, which in nature must be asobhana (unpleasant non-beatiful), could induce kusala citta, if one views it in the right frame of mind. So, whether undertakers can or cannot be enlightened in seeing a dead body depends solely on whether he has the right understandind of the Dhamma and on the right path for the development of the Dhamma. tadao 6820 From: Ken Howard Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 1:24pm Subject: Re: note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life Dear Erik and Tadao, Thank you both for responding to my post. Tadao, I didn't mean to imply that the Dhamma includes shocking people into akusala reactions, quite the reverse. However I take your point that the cemetery meditations have a calming effect on people. So that does weaken my theory a little. While we're on the subject, I had to dispose of a rotting bullock carcass on one occasion. The gasses were so thick in the air, I could taste them as much as smell them. I had to keep backing off for fear of vomiting. Without disputing what you say, I am genuinely amazed that this could be calming. Erik, thank you for once again providing me with new and helpful information. I hope to find the Tipitaka origins of the practices you described. Kind regards Ken --- ppp wrote: > To Ken(?): About "Shocks": > (Since I deleted the oritinal mail, I cannot be quire sure whom > I am addressing.) > I do not recall even a single sutta, where the Buddha gives a talk > in order to create dosa/akusala among his listerns. So if he is shocking > his listerns, the shock he is giving cannot be akusala but kusala > (no restlessness, no aversion involved). You may have said that looking > at corpuses with their various states of decay must be quite shocking. > In reality it is not, it is rather poplar oppostie. Seeing > corpuses induce you a calming effect, which may be best described by the term > "serinity". During my Bagkok era, in a semi-regular base, a buch of > foreign monks at Wat Bown used to go to Mahidon Medical University to > obeserve corpuses with verious states of disembodyment (?spelling?). > Besides the feeling of respect to the individuals who passed away, > we always experienced a king of "serinity", knowing that one day we > will be in the same state. > So, if one has the right frame of mind, any so-called shocking > scences can be perceived as the opportunity to > develop kusala, not akusala. tadao 6821 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 2:04pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The meaning of Equanimity Kom --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Jon, > This clarifies what you said. I still have other questions related to > this > area. If you will be with the India trip, maybe I will get an > opportunity to > ask.. I certainly hope to be going to India. So far it still looks likely (but I have not forgotten that I had to pull out of the last trip at very short notice). I'm looking forward very much to meeting you and others and to renewing old acquaintances from the Bay Area group. Why not raise your questions now on the list? Then others can contribute or benefit also. Jon 6822 From: Ken Howard Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 3:09pm Subject: Re: Bruce's question (Ken) Jon I really would like to know the correct approach to the Buddhadhamma. I want to know exactly what those disciples in the suttas meant when they exclaimed, "I take refuge in the Dhamma from this day until life's end!" On many occasions, when I have been reading messages posted by you and other members of this list, the penny has dropped.There are lucid moment when everything seems to fall into place. I wish I could hold on to those moments but they go and I find myself making the same mistakes -- thinking I can control things. I only hope that you will not get tired of giving these explanations. I need to see them time and time again. Regards Ken --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Ken > > Thanks for articulating (below) so clearly and succinctly this concern, > which I now recall has been expressed before. It is indeed a good one. > In addition to your own helpful thoughts, I would like to add my own. > > --- <> wrote: > Dear Bruce, > > I should point out that I am now a convert to the `other > > side' -- happy to toe the party line -- but even so, we seem to > > be seeing the issue from similar perspectives. For example, you are > > asking why it seems to be OK to listen to the Dhamma with the > > delusion that there is a self who is listening, but it is not OK to > > meditate in the same way. > > Actually, neither is OK, if you are talking about moments of actual wrong > view, and perhaps no-one has said exactly that. What might have been said > is one or other of the following (or something close to it)— > > 1. Listening to or studying the dhamma is a necessary condition for the > development of awareness/understanding, while meditating is not. > > 2. Listening to or studying the dhamma is likely to help us to have more > understanding about the false idea of self and about why that notion is > not in accordance with reality, while meditating is not likely to be > conducive to that. > > Nonetheless, the question still arises, why the difference? > > I don't expect my answer to be convincing, since my own understanding of > what is at play here is only tenuous, let alone trying to explain it to > another. The best way I can answer is to say that practice of any kind > that is undertaken with the specific intention of developing awareness or > understanding, or of eradicating the idea of self, simply by virtue of > that practice, would not be conducive to the development of the path, > since there must be an idea of self involved (`if I do this correctly, > awareness/understanding may arise'). > > By `any kind of practice' I would include so-called `daily life' practice > as well as formal/seated practice. And yes, I would even include > listening to/reading the Dhamma for that matter, if done with the same > idea about the arising of awareness. It is not so much that one action is > OK while the other is not. It is rather a matter of the idea or view with > which the action is done. But in the case of, say, a meditation practice, > if the whole rationale of undertaking the practice is to give rise to > awareness or understanding, or to reduce the idea of self, then it is > almost inevitable that there will be a view of self bound up with that > practice. So despite the otherwise sincere intentions of the meditator, > the effort is misdirected and the result will be other than intended. > > I should perhaps elaborate on how listening to or studying the dhamma may > differ from this, but I'm afraid i'm out of time for this session and must > leave it for a later post. > > Ken, I don't know if you think this addresses the question you have > identified. I do know it's bound to be controversial! > > Jon > > > > For all the excellent material on the 6823 From: Victor Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 3:54pm Subject: Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! > The Buddha expounded the Middle Way betwen extremes. Can we not use > conventional designations helpfully, while not forgetting there is > no "core," no ultimate controlling at the same time? That to me > represents the Middle Way in terms of this issue of semantics here. Yes we can use conventional designation skillfully and helpfully. For example, the Buddha taught: "Form is not self." The word "self" can be seen as a pronoun for conventional designation, which is further specified in "Form is to be regarded as it actually is with right discernment thus: 'This is not mine, this is not I, this is not my self.'"* The word "self" can also be used in the expressions of speculative views such as "there is a self" and "there is no self". In these statements, the word "self" is not used for conventional designation as a pronoun. Language is used for communication. Skillful use of language can lead to truth and understanding. Unskillful use of language can be deceiving and confusing. Metta, Victor *Anatta-lakkhana Sutta, The Discourse on the Not-self Characteristic http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn22-059.html 6824 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 5:17pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Derek Derek --- Derek Cameron wrote: > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > This omission of concentration seems to represent a later stage > in > > > the Buddha's teachings. > > I'm not sure what you mean by this, or what you base this on. > Perhaps you > > could elaborate? > > This is my take on the problem of the stratification of the nikaaya- > s. But perhaps this issue would be too academic for most people ... > no? Why don't you give it a try! I'm sure that with your evident skills of exposition, you could summarise the issue for us in a reasonably palatable form, Derek. Jon 6825 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 5:22pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Derek Derek --- Derek Cameron wrote: > Hi, Jon, > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > But as I am sure you will agree, *only* the development of > vipassana leads > > to enlightenment. > > And I am sure you will agree that there is NO step in the Noble > Eightfold Path called Right Vipassanaa! :-) An interesting point! You may like to consider the following. 'Vipassana bhavana' refers to the development of the understanding that knows the characteristic of a reality presently appearing. And as you know, this understanding (aka wisdom) is the cetasika (mental factor) called 'panna'. Now this same panna cetasika is in fact the factor of the Eightfold path called samma ditthi (right view). So there is actually a very direct correlation her. However, I would like to question the significance you seem to place on this connection. You refer to the factors of the Eightfold Path as 'steps', and I believe this is how they are commonly viewed. I think this perception is not particularly accurate or helpful. To my reading of the texts, the statement of the Eightfold Path is given to describe the consciousness at that moment, to tell us *what is happening* at the level of the citta, rather than to tell us *how to develop* towards achievement of that path moment. It is a snapshot of the instant, rather than a roadmap to the destination. It is suttas such as the Satipatthana Sutta that are the roadmap. Thinking of the Eightfold Path as a series of steps, or as a number of separate factors/qualities each to be developed separately, leaves a lot of questions unanswered. For a start, these factors when developed separately can only be developed at a level that is non-path. No matter to what extent they are developed in this manner, they can never somehow 'become' path factors,. A moment of satipatthana, on the other hand, is a moment of mundane path citta, at which moment all 5 path factors (the 8 less the 3 abstinences) arise and are developed together *as path factors* . Jon 6826 From: Erik Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 5:35pm Subject: Re: Bruce's question (Ken) --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: Okay, a little forceful bluntness for you Jon (and please accept this in the appropriate spirit--it is not spoken in anger, but in forceful directness as your true friend in the Dhamma). > 1. Listening to or studying the dhamma is a necessary condition for the > development of awareness/understanding, Agreed. > while meditating is not. Jon, this is definitely wrong understanding of practice. Meditation is an absolutely necessary condition for the type of development that leads to Right View. At the risk of sounding dogmatic THERE IS NO OTHER WAY, unless you consider any of the steps of the Noble Eightfold Path to be optional. What is observing realities here and now if not a form of meditation? There are so many ways to meditate, standing, sitting, you name it. Some types of meditation are definitely more conducive than others to insight, and some, if you accept wha tht Buddha actually taught in the Suttas, such as Right Concentration, are necessary elements of the path. Not optional, in other words. To say otherwise is to deny the necessity of Right Concentration, to deny the Noble Eightfold Path, to deny the most essential teachigns of Lord Buddha! To recap: "And what is right concentration? There is the case where a monk -- quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful (mental) qualities -- enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. With the stilling of directed thought & evaluation, he enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of composure, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation -- internal assurance. With the fading of rapture he remains in equanimity, mindful, & fully alert, and physically sensitive of pleasure. He enters & remains in the third jhana, and of him the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasurable abiding.' With the abandoning of pleasure & pain -- as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress -- he enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. This is called right concentration." (SN XLV.8) Do you agree or disagree with this, Jon? Because the arguments you've provided given flat-out reject what the Buddha acctually taught in the Suttas! To me the above passage is quite unambiguous. Forget the Abhidhamma or anything else you've herd from anyone at the moment. Do you or do you not accept this passage as a canonical teaching of the Buddha? > 2. Listening to or studying the dhamma is likely to help us to have more > understanding about the false idea of self and about why that notion is > not in accordance with reality, Agreed. > while meditating is not likely to be conducive to that. This is totally incorrect! Right Concentration is an essential aspect of the path, if you accept the 4NT an N8FP as the core teachings of the Buddha. If you really mean what you're saying here, your arguments are flat-out denying the necessity of Right Concentration as an aspect of the path, and to draw out the full impliation of your contention, you're essentially rejecting the most essential aspect of the Dhamma, and by extension the Buddha! > I don't expect my answer to be convincing, since my own understanding of > what is at play here is only tenuous, let alone trying to explain it to > another. Then permit me to be blunt here, and say that if your understanding of these realities is unclear, as you say, then I believe it is VERY unwise to make categorical-sounding statements about the lack of need for applied meditation. To say it is your mere opinion would be fine. Then we can debate that. But to speak as if mere opinion is truth is, in my opinion, to fall into serious error, not only for the reason that sort of thinking has a negative effect on one's own understandiong, but can also lead others directly into wrong forms of praice if they take those opinions as gospel. And there are many who may not yet have developed enough understanding of the Dhamma to be able to discern opinion from actual knowledge, and it is for the sake of these sentient beings my reply here is so forceful on these points. I am sorry to respond in a way that sounds so harsh, but as time goes on I am becoming less and less convinced some of the methods being expounded here in DSG can possibly lead to liberation, because what I see are examples of some very serious distortions and misrepresentations and serious omissions of the Buddha's actual, canonical teachings as found in the Pali Suttas, which are accepted by ALL extant schools of Buddhism I know of, Tibetan, Theravada, and Zen included. > The best way I can answer is to say that practice of any kind > that is undertaken with the specific intention of developing awareness or > understanding, or of eradicating the idea of self, simply by virtue of > that practice, would not be conducive to the development of the path, > since there must be an idea of self involved (`if I do this correctly, > awareness/understanding may arise'). This is wrong understanding of practice again. Aagin, over tuime, wrong views are loosened. But this doesn't happen all at once. Only thourhg careful and applied development can this occur. It is "good enough" to work even with wrong view at first. Again, therre needs to be great merit for insight to arise at all. It's not random. We can acccumulate merit even WITH wrong view, and eventually that will lead us to the appropriate teachers, teachings, and understanding. But to simlpy think we can jump into Right View without having established the basics first is seriously in error. There are no doubt SOME who have such wholesome accumulations from the past that their practice can begin observing realities as they arise without spending too much time slogging through the basics of dana and sila and kusala bhavana. But from what I've seen,, and from my own experience (I began in Zen, where they jsut toss you into emptiness without emphasizing these factors--and I made practically NO progress in practice until I adopted the more basic and mundane practices to help accumulate merit and purify heavy dosa), more often than not people seriously overestimate their own abilities in this regard, and think they can just skip the basics and go straightaway into the highest-level practices. > By `any kind of practice' I would include so-called `daily life' practice > as well as formal/seated practice. And yes, I would even include > listening to/reading the Dhamma for that matter, if done with the same > idea about the arising of awareness. It is not so much that one action is > OK while the other is not. It is rather a matter of the idea or view with > which the action is done. This is an important distinction. Again, Jon, we must recognize that there is always sakkayaditthi involved until it's terminated at the moment of sotapatti-magga-nana. So why get uptight about this unavoidable fact? That's just the way it's gonna be until Right View arises. So long as we're aware of this fact, I don't see much of a problem. Of course I believe it is essential to constantly study and meditate on the teachings on Right View, chruning, churning, churning, until the coarsest mistaken conceptions are seen for the delusions they are. And then that should be taken to the deepest levels in actual formal seated meditation whre one can observe these realities in their most subtle aspects, employing the practice of samatha, because by stilling the mind in such a way we have far better conditions for spotting the ever-incresingly subtle wrong understanding that arises in the mind from omoment-to-moment. Without this, the odds of even getting near to right understanding of what paramattha dhammas really are are is quite slim, in my opinion. Just to add a bit of detail, it is vital to understand what anatta really means, what anicca means, what dukkha means intellectually. That is a form of meditation in itself, in fact, this sort of intellectual meditation and pariyatti serves as the basis for knowing precisely what to look for in our concentration practice. I feel it important to emphasize we can't meditate with any expectation of a result (which is definitely wrong practice), nevertheless, it is ESSENTIAL that the appropriate conditions be present for insight to arise. They MUST be present, though even with the appropriate conditions for insight, there is is no guarantee true insight and Right Understanding will arise (which is why clinging to notions of progress in meditation is a hindrance), what IS certain is that if the appropriate conditions are absent, then insight will NEVER have opportunity to arise. This point cannot be emphasized enough. It is a basic fact. > But in the case of, say, a meditation practice, > if the whole rationale of undertaking the practice is to give rise to > awareness or understanding, or to reduce the idea of self, then it is > almost inevitable that there will be a view of self bound up with that > practice. It is inevitable anyway, Jon, but over time, through careful study AND MEDITATION on what we have studied (both in daily life AND in seated meditation where we devlop what the Buddha actually taught in the Suttas as Right Concentration (if we believe the Pali Suttas record the words of the Buddha), we will gradually loosen our fixed conceptions of self, and at some point, all the appropriate conditions will come together and true insight will arise fof the fiirst time and finally put to end all fabrications and conceptions of self. But we have to begin where we are, and that always means we begin with wrong view, with the idea of "self." This is just a simple, unavoidable fact, and again there's no reason to get overwrought about this fact. It just is. It is also key to understand that clinging too tightly to worries about the threat of self view is absolutely a hindrance! Our Dhamma practice need not be perfect, it need merely be "good enough." > So despite the otherwise sincere intentions of the meditator, > the effort is misdirected and the result will be other than intended. I could not possibly disagree more with you on this, and the entire contents of this post, strenuously. Okay, enough harshness for the day! :) As you know I deeply respect you Jonothan, and truly appreciate our exchanges, and as always look forward to more, and especially to meet you in the flesh as soon as possible! :) 6827 From: Erik Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 5:45pm Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Derek --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Derek > > --- Derek Cameron wrote: > Hi, Jon, > > > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > But as I am sure you will agree, *only* the development of > > vipassana leads > > > to enlightenment. > > > > And I am sure you will agree that there is NO step in the Noble > > Eightfold Path called Right Vipassanaa! :-) > > An interesting point! You may like to consider the following. 'Vipassana > bhavana' refers to the development of the understanding that knows the > characteristic of a reality presently appearing. And as you know, this > understanding (aka wisdom) is the cetasika (mental factor) called 'panna'. Actually, I'm not denying the need for vipassana even a little--I just tossed that one out for fun. I interpret dhamma-vicaya, among the bojjhangas, as representing this. > Now this same panna cetasika is in fact the factor of the Eightfold path > called samma ditthi (right view). So there is actually a very direct > correlation her. Agreed. > However, I would like to question the significance you seem to place on > this connection. You refer to the factors of the Eightfold Path as > 'steps', and I believe this is how they are commonly viewed. I think this > perception is not particularly accurate or helpful. Steps, not steps, I see them more holistically, nevertheless, all are necessary. > To my reading of the > texts, the statement of the Eightfold Path is given to describe the > consciousness at that moment, to tell us *what is happening* at the level > of the citta, rather than to tell us *how to develop* towards achievement > of that path moment. It is a snapshot of the instant, rather than a > roadmap to the destination. I see them as representing both ways--the N8FP can be read and understood at many levels, lokiya as well as lokuttara, in terms of path-factors as well as guidelines for bhavana. 6828 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 10:06pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 2:30 PM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders > > Dear Anders > > > > > >Yup. But Nietszche's words are certainly worth noting. > > > > > > Everything is worth noting for me Anders. > > > And is curious you quotate Nietszche on a remark against my assumed > >attack > > > on 'nationalism'. > > > >Yes, isn't it? Nonetheless, the test of those words lies in your own use of > >them, not some German philosopher's. > > > Yes but you cannot dismiss the fact that quotating the philosopher you > burden the message of a particular indeniable significance 'connected'. > Difficult noting without considering the cultural/social aspect in this case > for me. > Cultural conditionings are extremely hard to uproot. All of this that you are talking about here is just the fabrications of your own mind. If I had said that it was said by Ajahn Mun instead, I bet your perception of it would be quite different, wouldn't it? There are no 'but's when it comes to truth. Accept it or deny it, but no buts. 6829 From: m. nease Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 8:41pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! Just thought I'd add this to the thread: "But as for any priests or contemplatives endowed with right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, & right concentration: If they follow the holy life even when having made a wish, they are capable of obtaining results. If they follow the holy life even when having made no wish, they are capable of obtaining results. If they follow the holy life even when both having made a wish and having made no wish, they are capable of obtaining results. If they follow the holy life even when neither having made a wish nor having made no wish, they are capable of obtaining results. Why is that? Because it is an appropriate way of obtaining results. Bhumija Sutta http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn126.html mike 6830 From: Victor Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 9:00pm Subject: Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! > Anyway, I hope it doesn't sound like I am anti-talking. I realize that insight > can come from sharing and clarifying understandings of all the items of the path. > I just think that it's important to practice mindfulness on the subtle level of > observing the reality of what is said, and discerning the mental images that > gather around our words. The reality observed is impermanent, dukkha, to be regarded as it actually is with right discernment thus: "This is not mine, this is not I, this is not my self."* And that when we talk about 'self', even knowing that > this is a convention, we still let the word 'self' slip by as if beyond the > convention there is an object that the word imperfectly refers to. When there is speculation about "what a self is", the word "self" is used beyond the conventional usage as a pronoun. Examples for such usage are the expressions of the views "there is a self" and "there is no self".** Do we really > know 'self' and is it an object? A description of 'self' is a speculative view.*** Metta, Victor *Anatta-lakkhana Sutta, The Discourse on the Not-self Characteristic http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn22-059.html **Ananda Sutta, To Ananda http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn44-010.html ***Maha-Nidana Sutta, The Great Causes Discourse http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/dn15.html 6831 From: cybele chiodi Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 9:41pm Subject: Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) Dear Erik >--- Jonothan Abbott wrote: >Erik: >Okay, a little forceful bluntness for you Jon (and please accept this >in the appropriate spirit--it is not spoken in anger, but in forceful >directness as your true friend in the Dhamma). > >Jon: > > 1. Listening to or studying the dhamma is a necessary condition >for the development of awareness/understanding, > >Agreed. >Jon: > > while meditating is not. > >Eric: >Jon, this is definitely wrong understanding of practice. Meditation >is an absolutely necessary condition for the type of development that >leads to Right View. At the risk of sounding dogmatic THERE IS NO >OTHER WAY, unless you consider any of the steps of the Noble >Eightfold Path to be optional. Erik, I am delighted!!!!!! I declare unconditional love to you! I am your devoted slave! But don't take it too literally...;-) You are my hero, my model, my guru! This is truly wonderful, better than chocolate, better than sex (almost) Pure bliss, I have been projected into Jhana states with this assertion! Celestial visions and peacefulness... Eric you saved my day!!!! I surrender to your wisdom. From your devoted slave Cybele > >What is observing realities here and now if not a form of meditation? >There are so many ways to meditate, standing, sitting, you name it. >Some types of meditation are definitely more conducive than others to >insight, and some, if you accept wha tht Buddha actually taught in >the Suttas, such as Right Concentration, are necessary elements of >the path. Not optional, in other words. To say otherwise is to deny >the necessity of Right Concentration, to deny the Noble Eightfold >Path, to deny the most essential teachigns of Lord Buddha! To recap: > >"And what is right concentration? There is the case where a monk -- >quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful (mental) >qualities -- enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure >born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. >With the stilling of directed thought & evaluation, he enters & >remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of composure, >unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation -- >internal assurance. With the fading of rapture he remains in >equanimity, mindful, & fully alert, and physically sensitive of >pleasure. He enters & remains in the third jhana, and of him the >Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasurable >abiding.' With the abandoning of pleasure & pain -- as with the >earlier disappearance of elation & distress -- he enters & remains in >the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither >pleasure nor pain. This is called right concentration." (SN XLV.8) > >Do you agree or disagree with this, Jon? Because the arguments you've >provided given flat-out reject what the Buddha acctually taught in >the Suttas! To me the above passage is quite unambiguous. Forget the >Abhidhamma or anything else you've herd from anyone at the moment. Do >you or do you not accept this passage as a canonical teaching of the >Buddha? > > > 2. Listening to or studying the dhamma is likely to help us to >have more > > understanding about the false idea of self and about why that >notion is > > not in accordance with reality, > >Agreed. > > > while meditating is not likely to be conducive to that. > >This is totally incorrect! Right Concentration is an essential aspect >of the path, if you accept the 4NT an N8FP as the core teachings of >the Buddha. If you really mean what you're saying here, your >arguments are flat-out denying the necessity of Right Concentration >as an aspect of the path, and to draw out the full impliation of your >contention, you're essentially rejecting the most essential aspect of >the Dhamma, and by extension the Buddha! > > > I don't expect my answer to be convincing, since my own >understanding of > > what is at play here is only tenuous, let alone trying to explain >it to > > another. > >Then permit me to be blunt here, and say that if your understanding >of these realities is unclear, as you say, then I believe it is VERY >unwise to make categorical-sounding statements about the lack of need >for applied meditation. To say it is your mere opinion would be fine. >Then we can debate that. But to speak as if mere opinion is truth is, >in my opinion, to fall into serious error, not only for the reason >that sort of thinking has a negative effect on one's own >understandiong, but can also lead others directly into wrong forms of >praice if they take those opinions as gospel. And there are many who >may not yet have developed enough understanding of the Dhamma to be >able to discern opinion from actual knowledge, and it is for the sake >of these sentient beings my reply here is so forceful on these points. > >I am sorry to respond in a way that sounds so harsh, but as time goes >on I am becoming less and less convinced some of the methods being >expounded here in DSG can possibly lead to liberation, because what I >see are examples of some very serious distortions and >misrepresentations and serious omissions of the Buddha's actual, >canonical teachings as found in the Pali Suttas, which are accepted >by ALL extant schools of Buddhism I know of, Tibetan, Theravada, and >Zen included. > > > The best way I can answer is to say that practice of any kind > > that is undertaken with the specific intention of developing >awareness or > > understanding, or of eradicating the idea of self, simply by virtue >of > > that practice, would not be conducive to the development of the >path, > > since there must be an idea of self involved (`if I do this >correctly, > > awareness/understanding may arise'). > >This is wrong understanding of practice again. Aagin, over tuime, >wrong views are loosened. But this doesn't happen all at once. Only >thourhg careful and applied development can this occur. It is "good >enough" to work even with wrong view at first. Again, therre needs to >be great merit for insight to arise at all. It's not random. We can >acccumulate merit even WITH wrong view, and eventually that will lead >us to the appropriate teachers, teachings, and understanding. But to >simlpy think we can jump into Right View without having established >the basics first is seriously in error. > >There are no doubt SOME who have such wholesome accumulations from >the past that their practice can begin observing realities as they >arise without spending too much time slogging through the basics of >dana and sila and kusala bhavana. But from what I've seen,, and from >my own experience (I began in Zen, where they jsut toss you into >emptiness without emphasizing these factors--and I made practically >NO progress in practice until I adopted the more basic and mundane >practices to help accumulate merit and purify heavy dosa), more often >than not people seriously overestimate their own abilities in this >regard, and think they can just skip the basics and go straightaway >into the highest-level practices. > > > By `any kind of practice' I would include so-called >`daily life' >practice > > as well as formal/seated practice. And yes, I would even include > > listening to/reading the Dhamma for that matter, if done with the >same > > idea about the arising of awareness. It is not so much that one >action is > > OK while the other is not. It is rather a matter of the idea or >view with > > which the action is done. > >This is an important distinction. Again, Jon, we must recognize that >there is always sakkayaditthi involved until it's terminated at the >moment of sotapatti-magga-nana. So why get uptight about this >unavoidable fact? That's just the way it's gonna be until Right View >arises. So long as we're aware of this fact, I don't see much of a >problem. Of course I believe it is essential to constantly study and >meditate on the teachings on Right View, chruning, churning, >churning, until the coarsest mistaken conceptions are seen for the >delusions they are. > >And then that should be taken to the deepest levels in actual formal >seated meditation whre one can observe these realities in their most >subtle aspects, employing the practice of samatha, because by >stilling the mind in such a way we have far better conditions for >spotting the ever-incresingly subtle wrong understanding that arises >in the mind from omoment-to-moment. Without this, the odds of even >getting near to right understanding of what paramattha dhammas really >are are is quite slim, in my opinion. > >Just to add a bit of detail, it is vital to understand what anatta >really means, what anicca means, what dukkha means intellectually. >That is a form of meditation in itself, in fact, this sort of >intellectual meditation and pariyatti serves as the basis for knowing >precisely what to look for in our concentration practice. > >I feel it important to emphasize we can't meditate with any >expectation of a result (which is definitely wrong practice), >nevertheless, it is ESSENTIAL that the appropriate conditions be >present for insight to arise. They MUST be present, though even with >the appropriate conditions for insight, there is is no guarantee true >insight and Right Understanding will arise (which is why clinging to >notions of progress in meditation is a hindrance), what IS certain is >that if the appropriate conditions are absent, then insight will >NEVER have opportunity to arise. This point cannot be emphasized >enough. It is a basic fact. > > > But in the case of, say, a meditation practice, > > if the whole rationale of undertaking the practice is to give rise >to > > awareness or understanding, or to reduce the idea of self, then it >is > > almost inevitable that there will be a view of self bound up with >that > > practice. > >It is inevitable anyway, Jon, but over time, through careful study >AND MEDITATION on what we have studied (both in daily life AND in >seated meditation where we devlop what the Buddha actually taught in >the Suttas as Right Concentration (if we believe the Pali Suttas >record the words of the Buddha), we will gradually loosen our fixed >conceptions of self, and at some point, all the appropriate >conditions will come together and true insight will arise fof the >fiirst time and finally put to end all fabrications and conceptions >of self. > >But we have to begin where we are, and that always means we begin >with wrong view, with the idea of "self." This is just a simple, >unavoidable fact, and again there's no reason to get overwrought >about this fact. It just is. It is also key to understand that >clinging too tightly to worries about the threat of self view is >absolutely a hindrance! Our Dhamma practice need not be perfect, it >need merely be "good enough." > > > So despite the otherwise sincere intentions of the meditator, > > the effort is misdirected and the result will be other than >intended. > >I could not possibly disagree more with you on this, and the entire >contents of this post, strenuously. > >Okay, enough harshness for the day! :) As you know I deeply respect >you Jonothan, and truly appreciate our exchanges, and as always look >forward to more, and especially to meet you in the flesh as soon as >possible! :) > > > 6832 From: cybele chiodi Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 9:54pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders Hi Anders > > Dear Anders > > > > > > > > >Yup. But Nietszche's words are certainly worth noting. > > > > Me: > > > > Everything is worth noting for me Anders. > > > > And is curious you quotate Nietszche on a remark against my > > >> > > > >assumed attack on 'nationalism'. > > > > > >Yes, isn't it? Nonetheless, the test of those words lies in your own >use >of > > >them, not some German philosopher's. > > Me: > > Yes but you cannot dismiss the fact that quotating the philosopher you > > burden the message of a particular indeniable significance 'connected'. > > Difficult noting without considering the cultural/social aspect in this >case > > for me. > > Cultural conditionings are extremely hard to uproot. You: > >All of this that you are talking about here is just the fabrications of >your own mind. If I had said that it was said by Ajahn Mun instead, I bet >your >perception of it would be quite different, wouldn't it? >There are no 'but's when it comes to truth. Accept it or deny it, but no >buts. > I disagreee. You deny social and cultural reality: you deny INTENTIONS. The intentions of what a person declares can pollute the words or distort the significance or reveal another facet of the issue. Things are not so plain and transparent only because we would like them to be so. Conditionings and prejudices are there and manipulate reality. However we live inside a historycal, cultural and social context and being buddhists doesn't change the fact that you have to understand things in the right perspective. As I carry past accumulations and my background and this influence my mentality and choices in life, the very same applies to Nietszche or Ajah Mun. And yourself for that matters. Love Cybele 6833 From: Anders Honoré Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 8:41pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] A Path with heart it was Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 3:54 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] A Path with heart it was Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah > I am ardent, passionate, intuitive, misruled, never abstract, always > referring to actual experience, very openminded to different sources of > knowledge. Sounds very Zen :-) But it's quite ironic that the school which is 'a teaching outside the scriptures' is also the school that has produced the most literature of any Buddhist school in China to this day. Seems the point is missed. > Sometimes communication just doesn't occur, the right conditions are not > there and my skills are limited by my own conditionings and I feel quite > frustrated, powerless. I get impatient. > I try to 'listen' to others and not only to my self just seeking reassurance > on my 'beliefs'. > But often I don't feel 'exchange', there is a kind of impermeability. > Whether no one is listening or I am totally unable to communicate in a > intelligible language for this list. Or both. > Perhaps I should consider the Zen saying: > > Say one word with your mouth shut! I tried, but all I got out was: "moun ouurgh" :-) > And as Erik say mind 'my own bhavana' instead of struggling to communicate. > Anyway whatever I have to express is certainly not so important uttering. Or > listening. I do appreciate your thoughts on the group myself and hope you decide to stay on. I hope that you do learn to be more patient, because that is really all that's needed on a group like this. Kind regards Anders Honore ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* 6834 From: Anders Honoré Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 9:28pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting Scandinavians Re: Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village ... ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 4:19 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting Scandinavians Re: Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village ... > Translate sweetheart, my knowledge of Newton is only worse than my cooking > and I can tell you my cooking is cathastrofic. > > > > >Why limit yourself to males? Is this some sort of moralistic > >repression? :-) If I remember correctly, his fourth law was: For every 'action', a responding an equally strong re-action must take place. Something like that anyway. > Why? Because I am heterosexual but no prejudices. > Now you should ask me why I am so sure of being heterosexual considering > mostly I base my knowledge on actual experience... ;-) One of my gay friends tried to score me last year (he conveniently decided that I should be the first to know he was gay when he started kissing me). I considered it, but it just didn't appeal to me. 6835 From: Anders Honoré Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 8:53pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity ----- Original Message ----- From: Jonothan Abbott Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 4:15 PM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity > OK. I thought perhaps you were referring to kamma and vipaka. But my > comment still applies. I was trying to make the point that understanding > 'cause and effect' is not the same as understanding the characteristic of > a reality presently appearing. Vipassana involves the latter. It is only > this that leads eventually to the eradication of defilements. Our task in > this life is to develop understanding at the level of vipassana to the > degree possible. To what extent there is understanding of dependent > origination is another matter. > Glad you agree, Anders! As I'm sure you know, applicable objects include > rupas as well as mental factors and consciousness, something that people > sometimes overlook. Everyone wants to know the mind, but no-one seems > interested in boring old visible object, sound etc. When you stare at them long enough, your fingers are actually quite visually interesting. :-) > In fact, we have > exactly the same misconceptions (ie. wrong view) about these objects when > they appear as we do about mental objects -- we take them for self (not > always 'our' self, but self nonetheless), so they need to be known as they > are, too. Yup. It's always 'I' am thinking, but that 'I' is another mental construct. A clever one at that, but if the path were easy... > It's there all the time, if only we knew how to recognise it. Again, I > think there is often a tendency, for obvious reasons, to want to see the > realities that are kusala rather than those that are akusala (eg, the > equanimity rather than the clinging). In fact, there is so much of the > latter but so little of the former. Yeah, there is often a tendency to dwell on one's attainments rather than faults, thinking 'I am equanimous about my clingings'. But already you are b eing dragged around around by another clinging when you do that (even though there is no 'I' to be dragged around). > Having the idea that certain realities are more desirable or more worth > knowing about than others can be an obstacle to the arising of awareness > of a reality appearing at the present moment. Yes, I recall a Mahayana Sutra which says: "All defilements are equal [in reality]. I have realized that equality through right practice. Therefore, I neither detach myself from the defilements nor abide in them. If a sramaga or brahmin claims that he has overcome passions and sees other beings as defiled, he has fallen into the two extreme views. What are the two? One is the view of eternalism, maintaining that defilements exist; the other is the view of nihilism, maintaining that defilements do not exist. " (http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/zen-writings/demonstration-of-buddhahood-s utra.htm) That's equanimity as I see it. 6836 From: Anders Honoré Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 9:22pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 1:25 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom > Yet anytime I hear "THIS IS THE ONLY WAY" regarding any aspect of the > path I only recall the last of the Four Bonds that wrongly > believes "This alone is truth..." Four Bonds? Would you mind elaborating on them for me? > I'm not disputing the necessity of insight, and yet, I wonder if it > really IS the only way. Perhaps there are other ways as well. I mean, > the Buddha NEVER went further in his own statements (to my limited > knowledge at least) than saying other teachers' systems and teachings > may not (MAY, not dogmatically WON'T)) to lead to the same result as > the Buddha's way. And that leaves things somewhat open, as I see it. Yup, me too. I'm glad to find that I am not alone in that regard. BTW, could you provide some sutta reference for that point? > Even in Zen, for example, you hear talk > of one's "Original Face" (which I think fits in with some f what > Ansders has been talking about if I read his points as he intended > them) and even, Indra forbid, Self! Even though all Zennists > adamantly deny self-existence and remain in perfect accord on this > point with all other systems of Dharma (this so-called "Self" in this > case has nothing to do with atta, not being "truly" or "inherently" > existent). > Does anyone else here have any thoughts on this? If so, I'd be quite > curious to hear other interpretations. Well, in Zen (and Mahayana in general) the notion of self=Nirvana is actually quite accepted. Those Zennists who claim that Zen teaches that there is no self should start to read some original Zen literature, rather than listening to modern day 'pop' Zen teachers. Hui-neng, the Sixth patriarch, who is generally acknowledged as the 'true' founder of Zen explicitly stated that Nirvana is the self-nature. Nagarjuna, whom most Mahayanist schools trace their lineage back to (or at least they would like to) said the same thing. I can provide tons of quotations, both from Zen and the canon Mahayana Sutras to support this if you would like to. The Shurangama Sutra even says: "If this [true Mind i.e.. Nirvana) is not your true self, then what is?" To tell you the truth, I have yet to find support in the Pali canon for the belief that there is no self. 6837 From: Anders Honoré Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 10:06pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life ----- Original Message ----- From: Derek Cameron Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 6:22 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life > --- ppp wrote: > > Hi, Derek: > > It's very interesting, isn't it? Usually we think that we would be > > disgusted with seeing dead bodies. Somehow we wouldn't. > > (I had hard time living in Sri Lanka, encoutering snakes regulary. > > I HATE snakes. They caused me a real Shock more than a few times. I love snakes! They are so wonderful to touch. You could learn a trick or two from that Australian Steve Irwin fella. He's plain crazy ("Oh, would you look at that. This is one of the most poisonous snake in the world." And of course he has to go and pick it up in front of the camera). 6838 From: Anders Honoré Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 8:54pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nibbana anihilation? (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! ----- Original Message ----- From: Jonothan Abbott Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 5:16 AM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nibbana anihilation? (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! > Anders and Erik > > Sorry to be coming in late (just when you're ready to drop the subject, > Anders). Well, I felt it was a stale-mate :-) > I think this represents the orthodox Theravadin doctrine. Thanks for the input. 6839 From: Anders Honoré Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 10:03pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 5:14 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west > > Dear Erik > Dear Derek > > > > >Erik, > > > >--- Erik wrote: > > > I still smoke cigarettes, for example > > > >Me too! > > > >Derek. > > > > Bleah, disgusting! > I give up any intention of kissing any of you! > Please quit very soon. heheheheheh ;-))) > > Sorry but I can't resist Sarah....:-) Then you'll be happy to know that I only smoke cigars on special occasions. -:) I used to smoke regularly when I was around 14-15. Then I ran out of money and had to quit ("alright! It's either the beers or the cigarettes. What's it gonna be?"). Haven't bothered touching cigarettes since. On the other hand, I am sure my breath could knock down a cow when I wake up in the morning after a night out on bars and discos :-) 6840 From: Anders Honoré Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 9:36pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Ajaan Chaa ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 2:22 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Ajaan Chaa > Hi All, > > Thank you Cybele, Tadao, Bruce for your discussion of the relative > merits of the style and content of the teachings of Ajahn Chah. I > benefit immensely from all the posts on this list, though I lack the > ability to join in the debates. Even unpopular or unsupported views > teach me a lot, because I spend much time with Google seeking out > further information to help me understand. > This time I found a link which may be familiar to all of you, but > which may be helpful to any others like myself still struggling > across the misty flats with the mountain ahead yet to be climbed! > > http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/theravada-writings.htm > > Three or four complete books here by Ajahn Chah, as well as others. Haha, small world. That is actually my website that you managed to come across there. I am surprised that it's found on Google. 6841 From: Anders Honoré Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 9:32pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Erik ----- Original Message ----- From: Derek Cameron Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 4:22 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Erik > Question 2: Is Theravaada Buddhism the only way? > > On that one, it seems that for me personally Theravaada Buddhism is > the best way, the one that's most suited to me. But I wouldn't say it > was the only way for everyone everywhere. I've found wise sayings of > Jesus, and in the Bhagavad Giitaa, and so on. And in real life I've > come across some wonderful teachers, not all of whom have been > Buddhists. Yes, teachings of Christians like Dionysius the Areopagite and Meister Eckart on God are so similar to the Buddha's teachings on Nibbana that I found it hard to believe at first. Different expedient means for different people. 6842 From: Derek Cameron Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 10:26pm Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Derek Hi, Jon, --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Why don't you give it a try! Okay, here goes. There's various clues you can use to differentiate between earlier and later material. Tadao mentioned one a few days ago -- namely, the use of archaic word-forms in early material. I won't list all possible tools used to stratify the nikaaya-s. Instead I'll just refer to those that are relevant to our discussion of the Mahasatipa.t.thaana Sutta (DN 22). (1) Over time, ordinary words become used in specialized, technical meanings. Look at the word dhamma. In the early materials, it just means teaching. But later on it comes to have the specifically Buddhist meaning of mind-object. And in DN 22 we can already see the word used in this later sense. The fourth section of DN 22, the section on dhammaanupassanaa uses the word dhamma not only for teachings, but also for mind-objects such as the five hindrances. So, this is an indication of the lateness of the material. (2) Literary form. The early material consists of simple statements and propositions. Later materials take the form of explanations, analysis and commentary. Now, look at the presentation of the Four Noble Truths toward the end of DN 22. We have the usual statement that birth is suffering, old age is suffering, etc. But THEN in DN 22 we have analysis of each of these terms -- what is birth? what is old age? Each of these terms is commented upon within the sutta itself. The use of the commentarial formal is again an indication of relative lateness. (3) Elaboration of simple ideas comes after the simple ideas themselves. The early material presents sati (mindfulness) without much in the way of elaboration. But here we have a whole discourse on what just this one point means. Again, this suggests it is later than the simple proposition of the Noble Eightfold Path. (4) Absence of concentration meditation as part of the path. The Noble Eightfold Path is a core, early teaching -- it occurs almost everywhere. But in DN 22 we have sati without samaadhi. Since the early teachings and the Buddha's own practice included samaadhi, and this one doesn't, we can infer that DN 22 is late rather than early. Derek. 6843 From: cybele chiodi Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 10:55pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] A Path with heart it was Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah Dear Anders Actually you are the only one who notice my messageand caught my intention, nobody gave a toss - this people here don't indulge to my whinings! ;-) >> > > I am ardent, passionate, intuitive, misruled, never abstract, always > > referring to actual experience, very openminded to different sources of > > knowledge. > >Sounds very Zen :-) But it's quite ironic that the school which is 'a >teaching outside the scriptures' is also the school that has produced the >most literature of any Buddhist school in China to this day. Seems the >point >is missed. Ahi,Ahi, Ahi you dare to read something else than Tipitaka? Horror, scandle, disgraceful, you should be ashamed of yourself!!! In another list I quotated a Zen teacher Charlotte Joko Beck and have been warned that by my heresy I could reborn in a lower realm. I am already resigned to be a cockroach. Well you will keep me company. > > > Sometimes communication just doesn't occur, the right conditions are not > > there and my skills are limited by my own conditionings and I feel quite > > frustrated, powerless. I get impatient. > > I try to 'listen' to others and not only to my self just seeking >reassurance > > on my 'beliefs'. > > But often I don't feel 'exchange', there is a kind of impermeability. > > Whether no one is listening or I am totally unable to communicate in a > > intelligible language for this list. Or both. > > Perhaps I should consider the Zen saying: > > > > Say one word with your mouth shut! >I tried, but all I got out was: "moun ouurgh" :-) My problem is that 'I cannot keep my mouth shut!!!' hehehehehehe > > > And as Erik say mind 'my own bhavana' instead of struggling to >communicate. > > Anyway whatever I have to express is certainly not so important >uttering. >Or listening. > >I do appreciate your thoughts on the group myself and hope you decide to >stay on. I hope that you do learn to be more patient, because that is >really all that's needed on a group like this. > >Kind regards >Anders Honore > Yes please indulge me, yes, yes. Love it! ;-) And regarding patience, is the most important thing on the path, otherwise we 'freak out'! LOve Cybele 6844 From: cybele chiodi Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 11:00pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west Hi Anders > > > > > >--- Erik wrote: > > > > I still smoke cigarettes, for example > > > > > >Me too! > > > > > >Derek. > > > > > > > Bleah, disgusting! > > I give up any intention of kissing any of you! > > Please quit very soon. heheheheheh ;-))) > > > > Sorry but I can't resist Sarah....:-) > >Then you'll be happy to know that I only smoke cigars on special >occasions. -:) I used to smoke regularly when I was around 14-15. Then I >ran >out of money and had to quit ("alright! It's either the beers or the >cigarettes. What's it gonna be?"). Haven't bothered touching cigarettes >since. >On the other hand, I am sure my breath could knock down a cow when I wake >up >in the morning after a night out on bars and discos :-) > My...a bit more of romanticism. Like this you don't inspire me! Ah these scandinavians, no poetry, no latin sugary talk... ;-) Do an effort please. Cybele 6845 From: Anders Honoré Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 11:10pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 3:41 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) > > Dear Erik > > >--- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > >Erik: > >Okay, a little forceful bluntness for you Jon (and please accept this > >in the appropriate spirit--it is not spoken in anger, but in forceful > >directness as your true friend in the Dhamma). > > > >Jon: > > > 1. Listening to or studying the dhamma is a necessary condition > >for the development of awareness/understanding, > > > >Agreed. > > >Jon: > > > while meditating is not. > > > >Eric: > >Jon, this is definitely wrong understanding of practice. Meditation > >is an absolutely necessary condition for the type of development that > >leads to Right View. At the risk of sounding dogmatic THERE IS NO > >OTHER WAY, unless you consider any of the steps of the Noble > >Eightfold Path to be optional. > > > Erik, I am delighted!!!!!! > I declare unconditional love to you! > I am your devoted slave! But don't take it too literally...;-) > You are my hero, my model, my guru! > This is truly wonderful, better than chocolate, better than sex (almost) > > Pure bliss, I have been projected into Jhana states with this assertion! > Celestial visions and peacefulness... > Eric you saved my day!!!! > I surrender to your wisdom. > > From your devoted slave > > Cybele hrmm, at the risk of ruining your good mood............ I disagree.... 6846 From: Victor Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 11:12pm Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Hi Anders, --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: [snip] > To tell you the truth, I have yet to find support in the Pali canon for the > belief that there is no self. If interested, you might want to refer to Ananda Sutta, To Ananda http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn44-010.html Metta, Victor 6847 From: Anders Honoré Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 11:20pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 3:54 PM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders > I disagreee. You deny social and cultural reality: you deny INTENTIONS. > The intentions of what a person declares can pollute the words or distort > the significance or reveal another facet of the issue. Intention is valid for the speaker of those words and his own progression. When it comes to the perception created in the mind of others of another saying, then it is a created image, not actual fact, but merely sense data which your own mind interprets, hence creating more volition. > Things are not so plain and transparent only because we would like them to > be so. Indeed, they aren't reliable at all! Yet you rely on the conditioned (and uncertain if the Buddha is to believed) information on Nietszche as a person to affect your own conditioned perception of his sayings. > Conditionings and prejudices are there and manipulate reality. Should say "and manipulate conditioned reality." > However we live inside a historycal, cultural and social context and being > buddhists doesn't change the fact that you have to understand things in the > right perspective. True. That's what I was aiming at. As long as you have a perspective, you're off the track. > As I carry past accumulations and my background and this influence my > mentality and choices in life, the very same applies to Nietszche or Ajah > Mun. > And yourself for that matters. All of this asserts that there is an 'I' being influenced. 6848 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 11:29pm Subject: Re: Bruce's question (Ken) Dear Ken, I would like to contribute to this thread a little. --- <> wrote: > Jon > I really would like to know the correct approach to the > Buddhadhamma. I want to know exactly what those disciples in the > suttas meant when they exclaimed, "I take refuge in the Dhamma > from this day until life's end!" On many occasions, when I > have > been reading messages posted by you and other members of this list, > the penny has dropped.There are lucid moment when everything seems to > fall into place. I wish I could hold on to those moments but they go > and I find myself making the same mistakes -- thinking I can control > things. I think the most important thing is obviously hearing the dhamma, contemplating (considering) the dhamma, and knowing the characteristics of the realities as they truly are. Beyond that, I heard K. Sujin say that one of the meaning of taking refuge is to adopt other Buddha's teachings in increasing one kusala to "let go" of the akusala (when one is not doing kusala, for the most part, one has akusala). When I post a mesage to DSG, sometimes I am reminded of the Sutta that teaches us when to say something about the dhamma, that has the following pattern: (will have to look it up): can't get the person out of the akusala -> don't say it. can get the person out of the akusala, even when it may make the other person uncomfortable, and even it may be an uncomfortable position for the speaker -> know the proper time and the proper way and say it. Obviously, this teaching is very subtle, just like many other Buddha's teachings. What is dhamma? How do we know what we say will condition kusala in other people? How do you know what we say is correct and in accord with the Buddha teachings? What is kusala? What is akusala? What is the proper time and the proper way to say such things? I consider saying something that refers to the dhamma, refers to Vinaya, that would increase the kusala in other people (and myself) good things indeed. kom 6849 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 11:37pm Subject: Re: Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message: To Robert Kirkpatrick Dear Robert How are you? You are very welcome, and glad to know that they make sense to you. But, there are some who found the full message to be not quite to their previous learning. So it seems I may need to do more work. By the way, I believe you had noticed the beginings of the Vithi tradtion can be found in the Pali Cannon itelf when you read the second section of the article. I have included abhidhamma.org in the Links page on the bodhiology website many weeks ago. With regards, Suan --- <> wrote: > --- Suan wrote: > > > > > > > What do you mean by the phrase " as one's own state"? If you > meant > > that nibbana is a state of one's consciousness, then the Pali texts > > do not support it. I have refuted Professor David Kalupahana on > this > > point in my research article "Three Abhidhamma Methods Under > > Bodhiology" on the bodhiology website. Please go there and check it > > out. > > > ____________ > Dear Suan, > Thanks for your help on these matters. > I also read your excellent article showing that vinnana, citta and > mano are indeed synonyms - and have made a link to your site on > abhidhamma.org > robert 6850 From: Anders Honoré Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 11:35pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 5:00 PM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west > >On the other hand, I am sure my breath could knock down a cow when I wake > >up in the morning after a night out on bars and discos :-) > > My...a bit more of romanticism. > Like this you don't inspire me! > Ah these scandinavians, no poetry, no latin sugary talk... ;-) > Do an effort please. Well, I do speak a bit Italian and French that I could indulge in if that would make any difference ;o) 6851 From: Anders Honoré Date: Wed Jul 25, 2001 11:33pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] A Path with heart it was Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 4:55 PM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] A Path with heart it was Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah > Dear Anders > > Actually you are the only one who notice my messageand caught my intention, > nobody gave a toss - this people here don't indulge to my whinings! ;-) Always happy to be of assistance :-) > >Sounds very Zen :-) But it's quite ironic that the school which is 'a > >teaching outside the scriptures' is also the school that has produced the > >most literature of any Buddhist school in China to this day. Seems the > >point > >is missed. > > Ahi,Ahi, Ahi you dare to read something else than Tipitaka? > Horror, scandle, disgraceful, you should be ashamed of yourself!!! > In another list I quotated a Zen teacher Charlotte Joko Beck and have been > warned that by my heresy I could reborn in a lower realm. > I am already resigned to be a cockroach. > Well you will keep me company. Sure. It's the condemned lot of Bodhisattvas, you know. They have to be reborn somewhere, so why not hell? ;-) > Yes please indulge me, yes, yes. > Love it! ;-) > And regarding patience, is the most important thing on the path, otherwise > we 'freak out'! WhharrgghBuLUUU Hepza!!! 6852 From: Erik Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 0:31am Subject: No-Self - Anders --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 1:25 PM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipatthana - Kom > > Yet anytime I hear "THIS IS THE ONLY WAY" regarding any aspect of the > > path I only recall the last of the Four Bonds that wrongly > > believes "This alone is truth..." > > Four Bonds? Would you mind elaborating on them for me? > > > I'm not disputing the necessity of insight, and yet, I wonder if it > > really IS the only way. Perhaps there are other ways as well. I mean, > > the Buddha NEVER went further in his own statements (to my limited > > knowledge at least) than saying other teachers' systems and teachings > > may not (MAY, not dogmatically WON'T)) to lead to the same result as > > the Buddha's way. And that leaves things somewhat open, as I see it. > > Yup, me too. I'm glad to find that I am not alone in that regard. BTW, could > you provide some sutta reference for that point? I can't recall the specific Sutta unfortunately, but I do recall clearly the intent. I guess you'll just have to trust me on this one :) Regarding the Four Bonds from the Abhidhamma: (iv) There are four (bodily) Ties (5): 1. Covetousness, 2. Ill will, 3. Adherence to rites and ceremonies, 4. Dogmatic belief that 'this alone is truth'. Reference: http://www.palikanon.com/abhidham/sangaha/chapter_7.htm > > Even in Zen, for example, you hear talk > > of one's "Original Face" (which I think fits in with some f what > > Ansders has been talking about if I read his points as he intended > > them) and even, Indra forbid, Self! Even though all Zennists > > adamantly deny self-existence and remain in perfect accord on this > > point with all other systems of Dharma (this so-called "Self" in this > > case has nothing to do with atta, not being "truly" or "inherently" > > existent). > > Does anyone else here have any thoughts on this? If so, I'd be quite > > curious to hear other interpretations. > > Well, in Zen (and Mahayana in general) the notion of self=Nirvana is > actually quite accepted. Okay, let's forget the linguistic term "self" altogether and use the far less confusing term (for some! :) "emptiness,' instead. That should clarify I think. Emptiness=anatta in definition, so when we say "no self" in the Pali system it refers specifically to "self-nature" of things--"atta," in other words. See Vis. XXI.53, "Discerning Formations as Void" for what anatta refers to. XXI.55 "...he discerns [...] the eye (etc.) as (i) void of a self, (ii) or of a property of a self, (iii) or of permanence, (iv) or of lastingness, (v) or of eternalness, (vi) or of non-subjectness to change..." Also se Vis. XX.16-- detailing "absence ;f 'core,'" another take on this. Anatta (no-self) then implies that all dhammas are void of intrinsic, true, non-produced identity. The above six meditations are ways of negating the wrong view of "self" or "atta." It is what all dhammas are void of. So if you want to use the term "self" you have to be REALLY careful, because it can be confusing. This is why I much prefer "emptiness," because there is far less confusion. There is no disagreement that all dharmas are empty in ANY system, Theravada, Zen, Tibetan. it is even quiet trivial to reason to--that no phenomena have "core" or "true existence." Where there are many points of debate, though, is what constitutes emptiness, particularly between schools. The Yogacaras, for example, suggested that "mind" exists absolutely, "by way of its own entitiness." That there is "thingness" there that is uncaused. This entails not only a logical absurdity, it implies "self existence" or rather, to be more precise, "true existence." > Those Zennists who claim that Zen teaches that > there is no self should start to read some original Zen literature, rather > than listening to modern day 'pop' Zen teachers. Hui-neng, the Sixth > patriarch, who is generally acknowledged as the 'true' founder of Zen > explicitly stated that Nirvana is the self-nature. We have to be VERY careful here in the terms used. This is why I said that I do not disagree when one mentions, as in Zen, "Original Face." Nibbana is NOT annihilation, that we can all agree on. It is NOT nothingness, though signless. Where all of this becomes a problem is when you have schools that use the term "self" to refer to one thing and other schools use self to refer to something else altogether. This is why I find emptiness less confusing as a term and way of describing anatta. Nowhere does Nagarjuna imply any notion of self, either, anders. I will be happy to quote you chapter and verse from the Mulamadhyamakakarika where Nagarjuna thoroughly rejects any notion of "essence" or "true nature"--what the anatta refers to when it refers to "self," or atta. Atta is a totally impossible condition that implies non-production. Nagarjuna, in the MMK, simply threads the Scylla and Charybdis of the two extreme views of annihilationism and eternalism by noting there is not true being, not no true being, nor both, nor neither. But this is merely a strategic way of nuking the fabrications (papanca) and clinging to views. As Nagarjuna said: emptiness is the relinquishing of all views. But the relinquishing of all views is NOT annihilation. And non-self-existence is NOT the extreme of annihilationism, which implies that a composed phenomenon is non-produced, meaning, it has always been and always will be, and is not subject to conditional arising. > Nagarjuna, whom most > Mahayanist schools trace their lineage back to (or at least they would like > to) said the same thing. I can provide tons of quotations, both from Zen and > the canon Mahayana Sutras to support this if you would like to. Please do! The > Shurangama Sutra even says: "If this [true Mind i.e.. Nirvana) is not your > true self, then what is?" As an aside, the Surangama Sutra is considered by some to be apocryphal and some challenge its accuracy on some points, though I don't recall specifically which ones. I have read some of it (particularly the various "experiences" one can have and mistake for supramundane wisdom, which I found very useful--even more helpful than the list of the "corruptions to insight" listed in the Visuddhimagga XX.105 for example). I wouldn't use the Surangama in a debate among even some Mahayana schools, though, since not all accept it. And there is riotous debate on the Yogacara school's (Mind Only) interpretation of emptiness in my lineage, for example--it's demonstrated to be a species of wrong view because it asserts that mind "truly exists" (meaning is NOT empty of intrinsic existence). But again, this is for pedagogical purposes only, to help one eradicate notions that even "mind" exists "truly" or "by way of its own entitiness." As Nagarjuna said, those who believe "emptiness is a 'thing' I declare incurable!" But again, these pedagogical strategies are merely skill-in-means to get past clinging to views and the tendency to see things as exiting "truly"--especially the "self" (in the puggala sense). For example, I don't reject either the Yogacara school when interpreted correctly, not even the Thathagatagharba doctrines, because many have misunderstood their inner meaning and makes a hash of them due to improper interpretation and right understanding of their pedagogical intent. My favorite rendering on emptiness and dependent origination, and how they fit together, is from Je Tsongkhapa's (founder of the Tibetan Gelug-pa lineage and guru to the First Dalai Lama) "Fourteen Root Verses on Lam Rim (Stages on the Path), dealing with Right View: "A person is entered the path that pleases the Buddhas when for all objects, in the cycle or beyond, he sees that cause and effect can never fail, and when for him they lose all solid appearance. "You have yet to realize the thought of the Able as long as two ideas seem to you disparate: the appearance of things-infallible interdependence; and emptiness-beyond taking any position. "At some point they have no longer alternate, come together; just seeing that interdependence never fails brings realization that destroys how you hold objects, and then your analysis with view complete. "In addition, the appearance prevents the existence extreme; emptiness that of non-existence, and if you see how emptiness shows cause and effect. You will never be stolen off by extreme views." This echoes what is found in the Visuddhimagga (XVII.21) in the chapter on dependent origination: "The first component [paticca] will deny the false view of eternity And so on, and the second [samuppada] will prevent The nihilistic type of view and others like it, While the two together show the true way is meant." Though this is not an exact match semantically, it is in meaning, since paticca directly implies anatta (indeed Nagarjuna equates the two as inseparable, so this should brook only a few semantic quibbles- -the meanings are identical though). > To tell you the truth, I have yet to find support in the Pali canon for the > belief that there is no self. It's there, if you understand what is meant by "no self" is the direct equivalent of the meaning of emptiness. It's the language thing again, and this is perhaps one reason I think understanding the exact definitions of the terms we use to communicate with each other is vital. Fret not Anders. It took me a while to get comfortable with the language of the Tipitaka. Trust me when i say it all hangs together, and if one understands the actual meaning of what's being pointed at, one will not find even a hair of contradiction between the Mahayana and the Pali presentations. 6853 From: Erik Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 0:58am Subject: Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > hrmm, at the risk of ruining your good mood............ I > disagree.... Rather than merely saying you disagree, I'd be very interested in hearing specifics on why you disagree. What point do you disagree with--that Right Concentration is an essential factor of the N8FP? That jhana meditaion is unnecessary (if you disagree on that you are in good company here, though not in such good company elsewhere, all of Mahayana Buddhism for example)? Let's haev at it, Anders! :) 6854 From: Erik Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 2:27am Subject: Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > Erik, I am delighted!!!!!! > I declare unconditional love to you! As you do to all other sentient beings. At least I hope! :) > I am your devoted slave! But don't take it too literally...;-) I don't believe in slavery; I always pay for all services rendered, one way or another. (And often, in retrospect, far too dearly.) > You are my hero, my model, my guru! I love your twisted sense of humor Cybele! :) As if I were guru material. Hell, I haven't even managed to give up smoking! > This is truly wonderful, better than chocolate, better than sex (almost) If you don't think jhanas are/can be better than sex, all I can say is keep practicing. So rarely is sex anything other than a recipe for dukkha of the very worst sort--so much distracting bullshit and nonsese. About the only honest form of sex, in my opinion, is prostitution. > Pure bliss, I have been projected into Jhana states with this assertion! > Celestial visions and peacefulness... Enjoy the bliss while it lasts Cybele--just don't do what I've done far too many times and get upset when it too, like all impermanent things, inevitably passes. > I surrender to your wisdom. The only wisdom to surrender to is to your own innate wisdom, the expression of your true, uncontrived nature. And I know you're only kidding with me in all this here as is your wont, but it still reminds me of one of the most important points in studying the Dharma, which is to always focus on the teachings, NOT the teacher. And I'm not implying from this I consider myself anyone's teacher. I still consider myself very much a student. 6855 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 2:51am Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Derek Jon, You're correct that "steps" is a misleading word to describe the parts of the Noble Eightfold Path. That was sloppy translation on my part. I guess "limbs" would be a better word, although talking about a path having limbs does sound odd in English. ("Nobre Caminho Óctuplo" for my Brazilian friends -- I just learned that today!) As for claiming that Right View (sammaa di.t.thi) and pañña are the same thing, I think you're conflating the eight limbs to point where it becomes a "Noble 1-fold Path." It's true that there is a sutta (Mahaa Cattaariisaka Sutta, MN117) that shows how all the parts of the path are related to each other: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn117.html But even here Right View is said to be the "forerunner" of everything else, and NOT a substitute or equivalent for everything else. In fact, this sutta suggests that right concentration (sammaa samaadhi) is what's most important, and everything else plays the part of its supports and prerequisites. Derek. 6856 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 1:22am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 5:12 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Hi Anders, --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: [snip] > To tell you the truth, I have yet to find support in the Pali canon for the > belief that there is no self. >If interested, you might want to refer to >Ananda Sutta, To Ananda http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn44-010.html Thanks. I am writing a small paper on it myself for my website, which I'll probably post here, so the hardcore Pali translators can tear the wrong usage of words apart. :-) 6857 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 4:43am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 6:58 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > hrmm, at the risk of ruining your good mood............ I > disagree.... >Rather than merely saying you disagree, I'd be very interested in hearing specifics on why you disagree. What point do you disagree with--that Right Concentration is an essential factor of the N8FP? That jhana meditaion is unnecessary (if you disagree on that you are in good company here, The Theravada perspective, I'd 'cover' with this link: http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/jhanas/jhanas06.htm > though not in such good company elsewhere, all of Mahayana Buddhism for example)? Let's haev at it, Anders! :) All of Mahayana? Well, there's a generic statement I don't subscribe to :-) As many times before, I'd direct you to the Platform Sutra of Hui-neng, the Sixth Patriarch of Zen (available at my website). There's one who doesn't emphasise seated meditation. I'm sure there are others as well, but I haven't got the quotes on hand. Get back to you later, while you read the Platform Sutra? 6858 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 4:47am Subject: No-Self - Anders Part 2 Note: This little paper of mine is not directed at Theravada Buddists as such, but rather spiritualists in general, hence some of the remarks which may seem irrelevant to most people here. Anyway, I'll look forward to seeing you guys tearing my arguments to shreads with you extensive quotations and refutations of the translations I've used :-) Self & Buddhism What is self? In my own, opinion the one who made it most clearly what is not the self was Gautama Buddha when he taught about the five skandhas (heaps) which are categorically not the self, but because of the ignorance of mankind, they mistake it to be their selves: "Form, monks, is not self. If form were the self, this form would not lend itself to disease. It would be possible [to say] with regard to form, 'Let this form be thus. Let this form not be thus.' But precisely because form is not self, form lends itself to disease. And it is not possible [to say] with regard to form, 'Let this form be thus. Let this form not be thus.' Feeling is not self... Perception is not self... [Mental] fabrications are not self... Consciousness1 is not self." (SN XXII.592) Elsewhere he teaches that all things are ultimately impermanent, unsatisfactory and not the self. From this, it would follow that what is the Self is that which is not impermanent and unsatisfactory, meaning Nirvana (Nibbana in Pali), which is generally accepted in Mahayana Buddhism (and most other spiritual traditions) but not much in the Theravada tradition, which is the oldest school of Buddhism still alive. There it is generally acknowledged that Nibbana is not the self on account of the following teaching of the Buddha (in Pali): Sabbe dhammá anattá (AN III.134), meaning "All things things are not-self." Dhammá is a word that often refers to both conditioned and unconditioned things (of which there is only Nirvana), such as in the following passage (AN IV.34): Yávatá bhikkhave dhammá sankhatá vá asankhatá vá (meaning: "Whatever things [dhammá], monks, there are, formed or unformed...) But the word dhammá is also used in a different context: Dhammá aniccá (SN 4), which means: "Things are impermanent." Since Nibbana obviously isn't impermanent, this means that the word doesn't always imply the inclusion of unconditioned phenomena meaning Nibbana, so this cannot be used to argue that Nibbana is not self. Furtermore, there is not a single passage in the Pali Canon3 which specifically states: "Nibbana is not the self (Anattá) or that there exists no self at all. On the other hand, the Buddha goes to great lengths to explain how conditioned phenomena are not the self. For instance, in one scripture (SN XXXV.85), the Buddha analyses the world into 42 components and finds that it is void of self. No mention of Nibbana there though. In the Buddha's second sermon (SN XXII.59) that he held after his awakening to the Unconditioned, it is even implied that Nibbana is the self. The Buddha explains how the five skandhas are impermanent, and asks twice: "And is it fitting to regard what is inconstant, stressful, subject to change as: 'This is mine. This is my self. This is what I am'?" Thus it is implied that what is fitting to regard as the self is that which is not inconstant, stressful and subject to change, i.e. Nibbana. The Buddha did refute just about every possible view on self imaginably though: "To what extent, Ananda, does one delineate when delineating a self? Either delineating a self possessed of form and finite, one delineates that 'My self is possessed of form and finite.' Or, delineating a self possessed of form and infinite, one delineates that 'My self is possessed of form and infinite.' Or, delineating a self formless and finite, one delineates that 'My self is formless and finite.' Or, delineating a self formless and infinite, one delineates that 'My self is formless and infinite.' Now, the one who, when delineating a self, delineates it as possessed of form and finite, either delineates it as possessed of form and finite in the present, or of such a nature that it will [naturally] become possessed of form and finite [in the future/after death], or he believes that 'Although it is not yet that way, I will convert it into being that way.' This being the case, it is proper to say that a fixed view of a self possessed of form and finite lies latent [within that person]. The one who, when delineating a self, delineates it as possessed of form and infinite, either delineates it as possessed of form and infinite in the present, or of such a nature that it will [naturally] become possessed of form and infinite [in the future/after death], or he believes that 'Although it is not yet that way, I will convert it into being that way.' This being the case, it is proper to say that a fixed view of a self possessed of form and infinite lies latent [within that person]. The one who, when delineating a self, delineates it as formless and finite, either delineates it as formless and finite in the present, or of such a nature that it will [naturally] become formless and finite [in the future/after death], or he believes that 'Although it is not yet that way, I will convert it into being that way.' This being the case, it is proper to say that a fixed view of a self formless and finite lies latent [within that person]. "The one who, when delineating a self, delineates it as formless and infinite, either delineates it as formless and infinite in the present, or of such a nature that it will [naturally] become formless and infinite [in the future/after death], or he believes that 'Although it is not yet that way, I will convert it into being that way.' This being the case, it is proper to say that a fixed view of a self formless and infinite lies latent [within that person]." (DN 15) Obviously, it would be much easier for him to simply deny the existence of a self, period, rather than go to such lengths to deny such different views of self, if it really was the case that there was no self, yet there is no such statement to be found in the Pali Canon. A curious note is the inclusion of a 'formless and infinite self' in this case, but it should be noted that the Buddha refers to a fixed view of such a self and the delineations that a person with such a view holds are all, as with the rest of the delineations, to be regarded as erroneous. I will elaborate below. Another passage which is interesting in this regard is the following (MN 2): "As he attends inappropriately in this way, one of six kinds of view arises in him: The view I have a self arises in him as true & established, or the view I have no self ...or the view It is precisely by means of self that I perceive self ...or the view It is precisely by means of self that I perceive not-self ...or the view It is precisely by means of not-self that I perceive self arises in him as true & established, or else he has a view like this: This very self of mine -- the knower that is sensitive here & there to the ripening of good & bad actions -- is the self of mine that is constant, everlasting, eternal, not subject to change, and will endure as long as eternity. This is called a thicket of views, a wilderness of views, a contortion of views, a writhing of views, a fetter of views. Bound by a fetter of views, the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person is not freed from birth, aging, & death, from sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair. He is not freed, I tell you, from suffering & stress." Of interest is the last self mentioned, "the self of mine that is constant, everlasting, eternal, not subject to change, and will endure as long as eternity", an obvious pointer to Nibbana, yet this is not actually refuted. It is merely stated that this is not the same as the [false] self "that is sensitive here & there to the ripening of good & bad actions." Notice the views of self and no self are both stated as inappropriate. The reason for that, as made clear in the above passage about the delineations of self, is that all views of self carry some inherent inconsistencies simply because they are views, and as such grounded in ignorance and thus not in accord with true reality. As the Buddha himself said when asked what view or position he held on the nature of reality (MN 72): "A 'position,' Vaccha, is something that a Tathagata [Buddha] has done away with." See, is self really is Nibbana, how could it possibly be defined? Since any perception of self is categorically not the self (the skandha of perception having been refuted by the Buddha as not-self), it would be futile to even talk of self. The moment we affirm a self, we are off the track, because that cannot possibly be the self! To envision Nibbana in any way (as being the self, not-self or anything else for that matter) is erroneous, since that would require you to form an image of Nibbana, something that it is inherently free of itself. As long as you harbour any perception or view of self or Nibbana, then you are not free from the conditioned cycle of existence, you are still bound by ignorance. One of the most heavily debated discourses in the Pali Canon which has been interpreted in a variety of ways, is the one where the Buddha is asked if there is a self or not (SN XLIV.10) and simply remains silent. What I propose, something that undoubtly was not the Buddha's original intention of this silence, is that this silence is taken not as a mode of communication, but as an actual way of understanding self. Since any view of self is inherently wrong and an obstruction on the path, simply maintain no position whatsoever on such matters, and practise for the uprooting of the inherent and habituated views that "you" still harbour. When the awakening which unquestionably follows upon the uprooting of self-identity comes, you will know the truth of the matter for yourself, without having to resort to views, which ultimately, are not the self and cannot lead you to realise the true nature of self. I only discuss this matter from the point of view of the Pali Canon and Theravada Buddhism, because in Mahayana Buddhism (and most other spiritual traditions aimed at the ending of the conditioned cycle of existence), it is generally acknowledged that Nirvana is to be equated with the true self-nature (or at least it should be acknowledged by those Mahayanists who bothers to read the Canon Mahayana scriptures, such as the Mahaparinirvana Sutra and the Shurangama Sutra, which makes it quite clear that self-nature is Nirvana). Nonetheless, as the Buddha pointed out, any view of self, existent or non-existent, is still an obstruction towards true awakening, and this holds true regardless of whether you are a Theravada or Mahayana Buddhist or belong to any other spiritual tradition for that matter. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1: When The Buddha speaks of consciousness here, he refers to the grasping consciousness which dwells on objects, as opposed to the Unconditioned Awareness (Nirvana) which doesn't dwell anywhere. 2: These abbreviations found throughout this text, are references to specific suttas (Pali: discourses) of the Buddha. To read these suttas and more in their entirety, please visit: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ 3: The scriptural body of Theravada Buddhism, the Pali Canon is the oldest collection of sermons spoken by the Buddha or his students 6859 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 5:56am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] No-Self - Anders ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 6:31 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] No-Self - Anders A very interesting post here. --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: >> Well, in Zen (and Mahayana in general) the notion of self=Nirvana is >> actually quite accepted. >Okay, let's forget the linguistic term "self" altogether and use the far less confusing term (for some! :) "emptiness,' instead. That should clarify I think. Yup. >Anatta (no-self) then implies that all dhammas are void of intrinsic, true, non-produced identity. The above six meditations are ways of negating the wrong view of "self" or "atta." It is what all dhammas are void of. So if you want to use the term "self" you have to be REALLY careful, because it can be confusing. This is why I much prefer "emptiness," because there is far less confusion. There is no disagreement that all dharmas are empty in ANY system, Theravada, Zen, Tibetan. it is even quiet trivial to reason to--that no phenomena have "core" or "true existence." Well, please see part 2 of this thread for my view on this (I agree with Nagarjuna's quotations by you, btw). >Where there are many points of debate, though, is what constitutes emptiness, particularly between schools. The Yogacaras, for example, suggested that "mind" exists absolutely, "by way of its own entitiness." That there is "thingness" there that is uncaused. This entails not only a logical absurdity, it implies "self existence" or rather, to be more precise, "true existence." Or Nirvana? >We have to be VERY careful here in the terms used. This is why I said that I do not disagree when one mentions, as in Zen, "Original Face." Nibbana is NOT annihilation, that we can all agree on. It is NOT nothingness, though signless. Where all of this becomes a problem is when you have schools that use the term "self" to refer to one thing and other schools use self to refer to something else altogether. This is why I find emptiness less confusing as a term and way of describing anatta. Yup, I'll buy that one. >Nowhere does Nagarjuna imply any notion of self, either, anders. I will be happy to quote you chapter and verse from the Mulamadhyamakakarika where Nagarjuna thoroughly rejects any notion of "essence" or "true nature"--what the anatta refers to when it refers to "self," or atta. Damn second hand quotations. Hold on for a few days while I get a hold of the source... >Please do! And here we go..... (this will be a damn long post) 1. The Awakening of Faith Shastra (very much canon in most schools): "The Mind, though pure in its self-nature from the beginning, is accompanied by ignorance." ..."From the beginning, Suchness in its nature is fully provided with all excellent qualities; namely, it is endowed with the light of great wisdom, the qualities of illuminating the entire universe, of true cognition and mind pure in its self-nature; of eternity, bliss, Self, and purity; of refreshing coolness, immutability, and freedom." 2. The Mahayana Realm Without Distinction Shastra, by Bodhisattva: "What is its self-nature? The self-nature is to be untainted by clingings, Like the fire jewel, space, and water. The light Dharma that is consummated Is just like the king of mountains" .... "Arriving at the seat of Buddhahood Is not called bodhicitta But rather is called the worthy (aarhan), The liberation of purity, self, joy, and constancy" 3. THE LION'S ROAR OF QUEEN SRIMALA SUTRA: "When sentient beings have faith in the Tathagata and those sentient beings conceive [him] with permanence, pleasure, self, and purity, they do not go astray. Those sentient beings have the right view." 4. Maha Parinirvana Sutra: "The world renouncer [enlightened one] also has permanence, pleasure, self, and purity.".... "The self is the Tathagata."..... "If one wishes to depart from the four inversions, he should know thus the permanent, pleasant, self, and pure."...... "Bhiksus, you should know that the heretics have said that the self is like the insect who eats wood, mates, and makes offspring merely. This is why the Tathagata proclaims that in the Buddha-dharma there is no self. It is for the sake of taming sentient beings, knowing the time, and that such selflessness has been the cause and condition that he also says that there is a self. He is like that physician who well knew the elixirs that were medicinal and not medicinal. It is not like that self the ordinary man reckons to be his own or the ordinary man who meets someone and reckons that they have a self. Some have said that it is as large as the thumb and finger, some that it is like the mustard seed, some that it is like a grain a dust. The Tathagata says that the self is not like any of these. This is why he says that things (dharmas) are selfless. Really it is not that there is no self. What is the self? If something is the true, the real, the constant, the master, the foundation with a nature that is unchanging, this is called the self. Just as that great doctor well understand the medicinal elixir, the Tathagata is also so. For the sake of sentient beings, in the Dharmas that he speaks there really is a self. You and the four assembles must thus cultivate the Dharma."...... "The worldly person surely says that there is a self. And those in the Buddha Dharma also say that there is a self. Although worldly person says there is a self, there is no the Buddha-nature [in that]. This then is called being in the selfless and giving rise to the idea of a self. This is called an inverted view. Those of the Buddha Dharma have a self that is the Buddha-nature." 5. Vimalakirti Nirdesha Sutra: "'Self' and 'selflessness' are dualistic. Since the existence of self cannot be perceived, what is there to be made ' selfless'? Thus, the nondualism of the vision of their nature is the entrance into nonduality." (basically an argument for both sides. Or neither!) 6. Shurangama Sutra: "Ananda, you now want to cause your seeing, hearing, sensation, and cognition to return to and tally with the eternity, bliss, true self, and purity of the Tathagata." 7. Platform Sutra: "Learned Audience, our Essence of Mind (literally, self-nature) which is the seed or kernel of enlightenment (Bodhi) is pure by nature, and by making use of this mind alone we can reach Buddhahood directly." 8. Zen Teachings of Bodhidharma (founder of Zen): "All others, trapped by the impure mind and entangled by their own karma, are mortals. They drift through the three realms and suffer countless afflictions and all because their impure mind obscures their real self."..... "That which is truly so, the indestructible, passionless Dharma-self, remains forever free of the world's afflictions." 9. Zen Teachings of Hui Hai: "The noumenon is profoundly mysterious and not easily revealed, whereas names and forms are easy to grasp. Those who do not perceive their self-nature refuse to believe in it; those who do perceive their self-nature are called Buddhas." 10. Zen Teachings of Linji (Rinzai): "If you want to be free, get to know your real self. It has no form, no appearance, no root, no basis, no abode..." 11. Genjo Koan (by Dogen): "When you first seek dharma, you imagine you are far away from its environs. But dharma is already correctly transmitted; you are immediately your original self." 12. Zen Teachings of Huangpo: "Mind and self-nature are not different. One's self-nature is Mind. One's Mind is self-nature. It is frequently said that the recognition and realization of this identification of mind and self-nature is beyond comprehension."....."Since there is, in reality, neither self nor non-self, how then can there be a Buddha to save or sentient beings to be saved?" ----------------- Well, I hope that's enough for now. Let me know if you need any more :-) >As an aside, the Surangama Sutra is considered by some to be apocryphal and some challenge its accuracy on some points, though I don't recall specifically which ones. I have read some of it (particularly the various "experiences" one can have and mistake for supramundane wisdom, which I found very useful--even more helpful than the list of the "corruptions to insight" listed in the Visuddhimagga XX.105 for example). Yup, it's great in that regard. >I wouldn't use the Surangama in a debate among even some Mahayana schools, though, since not all accept it. And there is riotous debate on the Yogacara school's (Mind Only) interpretation of emptiness in my lineage, for example--it's demonstrated to be a species of wrong view because it asserts that mind "truly exists" (meaning is NOT empty of intrinsic existence). But again, this is for pedagogical purposes only, to help one eradicate notions that even "mind" exists "truly" or "by way of its own entitiness." As Nagarjuna said, those who believe "emptiness is a 'thing' I declare incurable!" Haha, he was a great guy, that Nagarjuna. > But again, these pedagogical strategies are merely skill-in-means to get past clinging to views and the tendency to see things as exiting "truly"--especially the "self" (in the puggala sense). >For example, I don't reject either the Yogacara school when interpreted correctly, not even the Thathagatagharba doctrines, because many have misunderstood their inner meaning and makes a hash of them due to improper interpretation and right understanding of their pedagogical intent. > My favorite rendering on emptiness and dependent origination, and how they fit together, is from Je Tsongkhapa's (founder of the Tibetan Gelug-pa lineage and guru to the First Dalai Lama) "Fourteen Root Verses on Lam Rim (Stages on the Path), dealing with Right View: >"A person is entered the path that pleases the Buddhas when for all objects, in the cycle or beyond, he sees that cause and effect can never fail, and when for him they lose all solid appearance. >"You have yet to realize the thought of the Able as long as two ideas seem to you disparate: the appearance of things-infallible interdependence; and emptiness-beyond taking any position. >"At some point they have no longer alternate, come together; just seeing that interdependence never fails brings realization that destroys how you hold objects, and then your analysis with view complete. >"In addition, the appearance prevents the existence extreme; emptiness that of non-existence, and if you see how emptiness shows cause and effect. You will never be stolen off by extreme views." Great quotes. Thanks. > To tell you the truth, I have yet to find support in the Pali canon for the > belief that there is no self. >It's there, if you understand what is meant by "no self" is the direct equivalent of the meaning of emptiness. It's the language thing again, and this is perhaps one reason I think understanding the exact definitions of the terms we use to communicate with each other is vital. Fret not Anders. It took me a while to get comfortable with the language of the Tipitaka. Trust me when i say it all hangs together, and if one understands the actual meaning of what's being pointed at, one will not find even a hair of contradiction between the Mahayana and the Pali presentations. Well, I am looking forward to your comments (in both part 1 and 2). Anders Honore ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* 6860 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 7:46am Subject: Pali Tadao (and others), Did you see someone has set up a group specifically for Pali? It's: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Pali Regards, Derek. 6861 From: ppp Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 1:23am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life HI, Ken: Thank you for your reply with respect to "dead matters". I knew clearly what your point was. Somehow I've twisted your point (just to exemply that any thing can be a condition for experiencing kusal cittas). tadao 6862 From: ppp Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 1:30am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life Hi, Derek: Every thing is conditioned. With respect to snakes, I developed "dislikes" towards them since neibhour-hood kids used to harass me by using them. That bad feelings with my childhood experiences must be the main reason why I do like snakes. (However, when I stair at their eyes, I can see how beautiful they are.) Again, a non-Dhamm talk! Please forgive me. tadao 6863 From: ppp Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 1:37am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Derek Hi, Derek: Thank you for your description of how to judge whether some texts are older than the others. To add to your descriptions, I would like to say, it is safe to say that the original words of the Buddham had been memoried as verse forms. So we can be very certain that these verses compiled, for instance, as "Dhamma-pada" and "Sutta-nipaata" are very much the exact words the Buddham may have uttered. Many of these verses contain archaic word formation. (And Giger's book must the best tool to understand these forms, which are not mentioned in introductory grammar books, such as Warder's.) tadao 6864 From: ppp Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 1:50am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Pali Hi, Derek: Thank you for the information on the Pali Weg site. Somebody once told me that there is CD's or Web site which list all the Pali Tiplitaka texts. Are you aware of such a material? (I am asking the question becuase here I do not have many Pali texts) tadao 6865 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 8:57am Subject: Re: Pali --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Derek: > Thank you for the information on the Pali Weg site. > Somebody once told me that there is CD's or Web site > which list all the Pali Tiplitaka texts. Are you > aware of such a material? (I am asking the question > becuase here I do not have many Pali texts) tadao Hi, Tadao, The one I use is http://www.tipitaka.org/ where the VRI people have made available the entire Tipitaka, including commentaries and subcommentaries. It's free! (That other link was just a discussion group like this one, but concentrating on Pali.) Derek. 6866 From: ppp Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 2:38am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Pali Hi, Derek: Fantastic!!! I will check the site. Can you do "word-search" easily? (There is one sntactic construction I am interested in, which is called 'cognate object' construction: e.g., kamma.m karoti, where the object noun and the verb share the same root with rather vacous semantic significance attached to the object noun.) If word-search is possible, I can collect all the instances of the construction.) Sorry, Again, not a Dhamma talk. You can see why I disrobed. I have strong attachment to "learning" rather than to the development of "detachment". tadao 6867 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 10:23am Subject: Re: Pali Hi, Tadao, --- ppp wrote: > Can you do "word-search" easily? No. For Pali word search CD-ROMs, I think Sean is very knowledgeable. You can contact him on the list for Pali translators: http://www.smartgroups.com/message/listbydate.cfm?GID=269858 > (There is one sntactic construction I am > interested in, which is called 'cognate > object' construction: e.g., kamma.m karoti, > where the object noun and the verb share the > same root with rather vacous semantic > significance attached to the object noun.) That's a great way of putting it -- "vacuous semantic significance"! On the new Yahoo! group I mentioned ( http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Pali ) we are discussing MN 18 and there's a good one in there: phassapaññatti.m paññaapessati. > Sorry, Again, not a Dhamma talk. No problem for me ... I love this stuff. But maybe the others here are getting tired of Pali talk on the list? > You can see > why I disrobed. I didn't know you were a monk. Have you already told your story on this list? I'd like to know more. Derek. 6868 From: ppp Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 4:34am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Pali Hi, Derek: Yes, I think that most of the DSG subsribers already know that (when I was much much younger) I spent 8 years as a monk in Indonesia, Thailand, and Sri Lanka. (Jonothan, Sarah, Kun Nina, and Kun Sujin are all my old friends/teachers.) tadao 6869 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 1:26pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! --- Victor wrote: > A description of 'self' is a speculative view.*** I think I understand your answer, which in a sense is a caution not to speculate about the nature of the self. My point, however, is that there is an underlying concept or speculation or assumption about self inherent in the mind when we talk about it, whether conventionally or not, and that this ought to be discerned with mindfulness. Robert ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6870 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 4:03pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] No-Self - Anders ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 6:31 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] No-Self - Anders --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 1:25 PM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipatthana - Kom > Nagarjuna, in the MMK, simply threads the Scylla and Charybdis of the two extreme views of annihilationism and eternalism by noting there is not true being, not no true being, nor both, nor neither. But this is merely a strategic way of nuking the fabrications (papanca) and clinging to views. As Nagarjuna said: emptiness is the relinquishing of all views. But the relinquishing of all views is NOT annihilation. And non-self-existence is NOT the extreme of annihilationism, which implies that a composed phenomenon is non-produced, meaning, it has always been and always will be, and is not subject to conditional arising. And to totally destroy the views of the opposition, mighty Anders strikes a telling blow, by convincing Nagarjuna to join forces with him! Sorry, I just read a post on another newsgroup from a guy named Dharmatroll, who likes to write stuff like that :-) Anyway, I found the exact quote from Junie: "To him who understands the meaning in the teaching of the Buddha and grasps the truth of derived name, he has taught that there is "I"; but to one who does not understand the meaning in the teachings of the Buddha and does not grasp the truth of the derived name, He has taught, there is no "I." - Nagarjuna - I am still trying to find out where the quote comes from. 6871 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 4:53pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Conditions and Insight - Sarah IN BKK!!!!!;-) Dear Erik, Bruce, Rob & Sukin, --- Erik wrote: > --- Sarah Procter Abbott > wrote: > > Whew! What a fun (and challenging) this exchange is for me! :) Such fun and so challenging that.... > And Sarah, you and Jon need to go with your impulses and hop on that > plane (what is it, a three-hour ride?), ......following yr advice, for once Erik (and thanks a lot to Cathay for an unbelievavle 2nts promotion), we'll see you after that 3hr hop TOMORROW (Fri) arriving midday, departing Sun afternoon. So We'll have live exchanges as well and please keep everyone here updated with them as I'm sure they'll all want to hear your version of your exchanges with everyone! I'm very glad you and Sukin have already got together. Staying at the Peninsula hotel. Any of you are very welcome to come over in the afternoon if you're free (say after 3pm) or on Sat morning/breakfast/early lunch before the afternoon discussion as we're on the way.....let us know OFF-list w/yr ph no. etc Rob, I just noted that you won't be arriving til Sat pm- look f/w to seeing you on Sunday morning. You're welcome to join us for b/fast on Sun morning. (and besides I want to give a huge hug > to everyone). Lots of hugs (or wais coming)..;-)) and really looking f/w to meeting you and Bruce and catching up with Rob and Sukin. Sarah p.s DEREK, I was told you'd be there but I think that was a mistake as you said here at the end of August....if it's changed, of course you're included in this! 6872 From: Binh Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 5:00pm Subject: Nagarjuna ... Re: No-Self - Anders --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > Nagarjuna - > > I am still trying to find out where the quote comes from. -------------- BA: G'day. If you're interested in Nagarjuna's work, you might like to visit this website: Kalavinka Dharma World http://www.teleport.com/~dh-mitra/jewels/jewlhome.htm There is a treatise on the role of Jhana (Dhyana) meditation as well. Metta, Binh 6873 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 5:21pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! Dear Victor, Just a quickie to say that i'm enjoying your contributions to the list (like the one below) with your neat and helpful references (maybe I'll print some out to read on the flight. Subtle but useful and important points. Thank you. Sarah --- Victor wrote: > > Yes we can use conventional designation skillfully and helpfully. > For example, the Buddha taught: "Form is not self." The word "self" > can be seen as a pronoun for conventional designation, which is > further specified in "Form is to be regarded as it actually is with > right discernment thus: 'This is not mine, this is not I, this is > not my self.'"* > > The word "self" can also be used in the expressions of speculative > views such as "there is a self" and "there is no self". In these > statements, the word "self" is not used for conventional designation > as a pronoun. > > Language is used for communication. Skillful use of language can > lead to truth and understanding. Unskillful use of language can be > deceiving and confusing. > > Metta, > Victor > > *Anatta-lakkhana Sutta, The Discourse on the Not-self Characteristic > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn22-059.html > 6874 From: Robert Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 6:16pm Subject: Re: Conditions and Insight - Sarah IN BKK!!!!!;-) Dear Sarah, great news! I'll skip the breakfast- too early. You know we are meeting at 10am on sunday and also Khun Sujin has arranged a meeting at 2pm on monday....--- see you sunday. robert Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > Dear Erik, Bruce, Rob & Sukin, > > --- Erik wrote: > --- Sarah Procter > Abbott > > wrote: > > > > Whew! What a fun (and challenging) this exchange is for me! :) > > Such fun and so challenging that.... > > > And Sarah, you and Jon need to go with your impulses and hop on that > > plane (what is it, a three-hour ride?), > > ......following yr advice, for once Erik (and thanks a lot to Cathay for an > unbelievavle 2nts promotion), we'll see you after that 3hr hop TOMORROW (Fri) > arriving midday, departing Sun afternoon. So We'll have live exchanges as well > and please keep everyone here updated with them as I'm sure they'll all want to > hear your version of your exchanges with everyone! I'm very glad you and Sukin > have already got together. > > Staying at the Peninsula hotel. Any of you are very welcome to come over in the > afternoon if you're free (say after 3pm) or on Sat morning/breakfast/early > lunch before the afternoon discussion as we're on the way.....let us know > OFF-list w/yr ph no. etc > > Rob, I just noted that you won't be arriving til Sat pm- look f/w to seeing you > on Sunday morning. You're welcome to join us for b/fast on Sun morning. > > (and besides I want to give a huge hug > > to everyone). > > Lots of hugs (or wais coming)..;-)) and really looking f/w to meeting you and > Bruce and catching up with Rob and Sukin. > > Sarah > > p.s DEREK, I was told you'd be there but I think that was a mistake as you said > here at the end of August....if it's changed, of course you're included in > this! > 6875 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 6:45pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Derek Hi Derek >("Nobre Caminho Óctuplo" for my Brazilian friends -- I just learned >that today!) Do you have Brazilian friends, BB brazilian buddhists and you don't share this with me? Shame on you! > >As for claiming that Right View (sammaa di.t.thi) and pañña are the >same thing, I think you're conflating the eight limbs to point where >it becomes a "Noble 1-fold Path." Good point. I agree. > >But even here Right View is said to be the "forerunner" of everything >else, and NOT a substitute or equivalent for everything else. In >fact, this sutta suggests that right concentration (sammaa samaadhi) >is what's most important, and everything else plays the part of its >supports and prerequisites. > I am delighted with all this interesting and fruitful discussion. Eventually the 'meditators wing' came out of an apparent obliviousness in this list. So glad indeed. Love Cybele I was feeling so lonely and marginalized. 6876 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 7:08pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nagarjuna ... Re: No-Self - Anders ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 11:00 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nagarjuna ... Re: No-Self - Anders --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > Nagarjuna - > > I am still trying to find out where the quote comes from. -------------- >BA: G'day. If you're interested in Nagarjuna's work, you might like to visit this website: Kalavinka Dharma World http://www.teleport.com/~dh-mitra/jewels/jewlhome.htm >There is a treatise on the role of Jhana (Dhyana) meditation as well. Wow, thanks a million. I don't think I have ever come across a website with so many writings by Nagarjuna. It looks great. Anders Honore ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* 6877 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 7:11pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Pali ----- Original Message ----- From: Derek Cameron Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 4:23 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Pali >No problem for me ... I love this stuff. But maybe the others here are getting tired of Pali talk on the list? Well, I can't speak for others, but I find it kinda interesting too, even though I don't know anything about Pali. Anders Honore ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* 6878 From: Erik Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 8:00pm Subject: Meeting in BKK Saturday--- Amara, Robert, Sarah, Jon, Bruce, Sukin, Betty, and any other of the BKK contingent, please accept my heartfelt invitation to my place Saturday night for a "housewarming." Must get this place prioperly prepped with kusala cittas and real Dhamma discussion, and, good food and drinks (NON-ALCOHOLIC, of course!). Seven PM onward, to however late anyone wishes to stay (I normally stay up til at least 2AM to keep in sync with my NY colleagues' schedules). Sat. eve seemed the best (really the onkly possible time) given everyone's time constraints. I live on Sukhumvit Soi 10, so it's easy-acces via BTS Nana station. Sukin also has full details as well and my phone # in case anyone misses me for any reason. This is TRULY exciting! :) :) :) 6879 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 8:12pm Subject: Re: Pali --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Derek: > Yes, I think that most of the DSG subsribers already > know that (when I was much much younger) I spent 8 years > as a monk in Indonesia, Thailand, and Sri Lanka. > (Jonothan, Sarah, Kun Nina, and Kun Sujin are > all my old friends/teachers.) tadao Eight years?! That's a lot of merit! Derek. 6880 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 8:18pm Subject: Re: Conditions and Insight - Sarah IN BKK!!!!!;-) --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > p.s DEREK, I was told you'd be there but I think that was a mistake as you said > here at the end of August....if it's changed, of course you're included in > this! Thank you, but multiple changes of plan ... it's now the end of August/start of September. I'm going to my local wat in Vancouver this weekend to talk with a monk who has some friends at Wat Dhammamongkhol. Derek. 6881 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 8:21pm Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Derek --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > Do you have Brazilian friends Whoops! Did I give the game away? > BB brazilian buddhists and you don't share > this with me? But honey, you know that of all my lovers, you are my favorite! :-) Derek. 6882 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 8:57pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Der?k Ahhh, Derek You know how to flatter a woman; it's all delusion but it feels so goood, pleasant sensation, hhmmm! ;-) Hugs Cybele > >--- "cybele chiodi" >wrote: > > Do you have Brazilian friends > >Whoops! Did I give the game away? > > > BB brazilian buddhists and you don't share > > this with me? > >But honey, you know that of all my lovers, you are my favorite! :-) > >Derek. > > 6883 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 9:06pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] No-Self - Anders Part 2 Dear anders, You wrote-> "There it is generally acknowledged that Nibbana is not the self on account of the following teaching of the Buddha (in Pali): Sabbe dhammá anattá (AN III.134), meaning "All things things are not-self." Dhammá is a word that often refers to both conditioned and unconditioned things (of which there is only Nirvana), such as in the following passage (AN IV.34): Yávatá bhikkhave dhammá sankhatá vá asankhatá vá (meaning: "Whatever things [dhammá], monks, there are, formed or unformed...) But the word dhammá is also used in a different context: Dhammá aniccá (SN 4), which means: "Things are impermanent." Since Nibbana obviously isn't impermanent, this means that the word doesn't always imply the inclusion of unconditioned phenomena meaning Nibbana, so this cannot be used to argue that Nibbana is not self. Furtermore, there is not a single passage in the Pali Canon3 which specifically states: "Nibbana is not the self (Anattá) or that there exists no self at all. On the other hand, the Buddha goes to great lengths to explain how conditioned phenomena are not the self. For instance, in one scripture (SN XXXV.85), the Buddha analyses the world into 42 components and finds that it is void of self. No mention of Nibbana there though." But whenever buddha used to describe this 'sabbe..' triplet he always said, sabbe 'samkhaaraa' dukkha sabbe 'samkhaaraa' aniccha sabbe 'dhamma' anatta sabbe dhamma means all phenomena (conditioned and unconditioned) sabbe samkhara means all conditioned phenomena. rgds 6884 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 9:26pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) Dear Erik > > You are my hero, my model, my guru! > >I love your twisted sense of humor Cybele! :) As if I were guru >material. Hell, I haven't even managed to give up smoking! Ahi, Ahi, Ahi and I thought I have given you enough incentive! :-) > > > This is truly wonderful, better than chocolate, better than sex >(almost) > >If you don't think jhanas are/can be better than sex, all I can say >is keep practicing. So rarely is sex anything other than a recipe for >dukkha of the very worst sort--so much distracting bullshit and >nonsense. About the only honest form of sex, in my opinion, is >prostitution. Regarding the jhanas they are not the aim of my practice; I had more than enough of 'blissful states' while practicing Sri Aurobindo Yoga in India. And about sex, I reckon it seems that all practitioners are sex-phobics in all religions apart Tantric Paths. But I wonder how it comes that you despise so much this 'gross carnal' involvement but most of you if not all and feel free to disclaim if is not true, continue being engaged in such activities - how it comes? I never got married, I never attached myself to anybody in particular as I believe that most of such relationships are delusional. You talk about non attachment, delusion, self restraint but most are married, with children, and a normal sexual activity. All this 'sublimation concern' seems unrealistic to me anyway, Suppression doesn't change deeply rooted biological and emotional patterns. Unless one is nihilist in his approach to life. I am talking in generic sense not aiming at you in particular Erik. Just the remark led me to ponder about it. :-) Well I enjoy sex, so what - this makes me not suitable to walk this path? Love Cybele 6885 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 9:52pm Subject: Re: No-Self - Anders Part 2 --- Anders Honoré wrote: > In the Buddha's second sermon (SN XXII.59) that he held after his > awakening to the Unconditioned, it is even implied that Nibbana is > the self Hi, Anders, My two cents' worth: I still think that talking about nibbaana as though it were an object is what linguistic philosophers call a "category error." You can construct sentences that make grammatical sense, but semantically they're meaningless. From the way the word is used, it's clear that it's a state, or the event that begins that state. It often comes at the end of one of those lists of near-synonyms: "the stilling of all formations, the relinquishing of all attachments, the destruction of craving, dispassion, cessation, nibbaana." (That one's from MN 26.) Derek. Derek. 6886 From: Howard Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 6:18pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] No-Self - Anders Hi, Anders - In a message dated 7/26/01 3:58:14 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Anders Honore writes: > And to totally destroy the views of the opposition, mighty Anders strikes a > telling blow, by convincing Nagarjuna to join forces with him! > Sorry, I just read a post on another newsgroup from a guy named Dharmatroll, > who likes to write stuff like that :-) > ======================== He has another pseudonym as well - "Tom Bombadil". I believe 'Tom' is his true given name. Tom used to be on several Buddhist groups that I and others here were also on. He is a brilliant "troublemaker" with whom I became rather much of a cyber-friend despite his tendency to walk (and often cross over) the thin line between right and wrong speech. Please tell him Howard says "hello" in case you correspond with him. 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) 6887 From: Sarah and Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 10:23pm Subject: Record numbers Dear Group, Recently the volume of posts to the list has been very high (1000 for this month). We are of course pleased that members are making such good use of the forum and we're delighted to read so many excellent messages. Without wishing to spoil anyone's fun, we would ask members to refrain as far as possible from posts on dsg that are pure banter, simple 'me too' messages or too off-topic (not relating to the Buddha's Teachings in the Theravada tradition -- which of course doesn't exclude comparisons with other teachings). If you have any comments or questions about this issue or the guidelines, pls send them to us OFF-LIST. Thanks for your cooperation. (Note:This is not directed at any particular person or any particular recent posts.) Jon & Sarah 6888 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 10:32pm Subject: Re: No-Self - Anders --- Howard wrote: > He has another pseudonym as well - "Tom Bombadil". I believe 'Tom' is > his true given name. I thought his real name was Gary McCullough? Derek. 6889 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 10:34pm Subject: Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > Regarding the jhanas they are not the aim of my practice; I had more than > enough of 'blissful states' while practicing Sri Aurobindo Yoga in India. Cybele, Blissful states are only the low-level jhaana-s. In the 4th jhaana they have disappeared. Derek. 6890 From: Howard Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 6:59pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] No-Self - Anders Part 2 Hi, Gayan (and Anders) - In a message dated 7/26/01 9:01:39 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Gayan Karunaratne writes: > Dear anders, > > You wrote-> > > > "There it is generally acknowledged that Nibbana is not the self on account > of the following teaching of the Buddha (in Pali): Sabbe dhammá anattá (AN > III.134), meaning "All things things are not-self." Dhammá is a word that > often refers to both conditioned and unconditioned things (of which there is > only Nirvana), such as in the following passage (AN IV.34): Yávatá bhikkhave > dhammá sankhatá vá asankhatá vá (meaning: "Whatever things [dhammá], monks, > there are, formed or unformed...) But the word dhammá is also used in a > different context: Dhammá aniccá (SN 4), which means: "Things are > impermanent." Since Nibbana obviously isn't impermanent, this means that the > word doesn't always imply the inclusion of unconditioned phenomena meaning > Nibbana, so this cannot be used to argue that Nibbana is not self. > Furtermore, there is not a single passage in the Pali Canon3 which > specifically states: "Nibbana is not the self (Anattá) or that there exists > no self at all. On the other hand, the Buddha goes to great lengths to > explain how conditioned phenomena are not the self. For instance, in one > scripture (SN XXXV.85), the Buddha analyses the world into 42 components and > finds that it is void of self. No mention of Nibbana there though." > > But whenever buddha used to describe this 'sabbe..' triplet he always said, > sabbe 'samkhaaraa' dukkha > sabbe 'samkhaaraa' aniccha > sabbe 'dhamma' anatta > > sabbe dhamma means all phenomena (conditioned and unconditioned) > sabbe samkhara means all conditioned phenomena. > > rgds > ============================== I agree with you that the change from 'sankhara' to 'dhamma' is probably significant in this triplet. Moreover, at places in the suttas nibbana is referred to as "the ultimate emptiness", which is an unlikely epithet for a self, especially considering that the primary sense of 'empty' is "empty of self and what is related to self". 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) 6891 From: Erik Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 11:06pm Subject: Re: No-Self - Anders --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Anders - > > In a message dated 7/26/01 3:58:14 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > <> writes: > > > > And to totally destroy the views of the opposition, mighty Anders strikes a > > telling blow, by convincing Nagarjuna to join forces with him! > > Sorry, I just read a post on another newsgroup from a guy named Dharmatroll, > > who likes to write stuff like that :-) > > > ======================== > He has another pseudonym as well - "Tom Bombadil". I believe 'Tom' is > his true given name. Tom used to be on several Buddhist groups that I and > others here were also on. Do you include in this talk.religion.buddhism on Usenet? If so, ever read the writings of Professor Richard Hayes of Montreal's McGill University (aka Mubul aka Dayamati Dharmachari)? I consider him among Buddhism's greatest living scholar/practitioners (though he would never accept such fawning)--the rarest of the rare, a truly precious treasure, and absolutely one of my greatest gurus. A true Buddhist Master in ever sense of the word. 6892 From: Howard Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 7:03pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: No-Self - Anders Hi, Derek - In a message dated 7/26/01 10:35:08 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Derek writes: > --- Howard wrote: > > He has another pseudonym as well - "Tom Bombadil". I > believe 'Tom' is > > his true given name. > > I thought his real name was Gary McCullough? > > ======================== As Tom would say: "Heh, heh, heh!! ;-)) No, as a matter of fact, they didn't get on so well (to understate!). 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) 6893 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 1:53am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) >> >--- "cybele chiodi" >wrote: > > Regarding the jhanas they are not the aim of my practice; I had >more than > > enough of 'blissful states' while practicing Sri Aurobindo Yoga in >India. > >Cybele, > >Blissful states are only the low-level jhaana-s. In the 4th jhaana >they have disappeared. > >Derek. I meant to be only ironic alluding to my past experiences and anyway my present practice doesn't include jhanas. Don't take me too literally! ;-) Cybele 6894 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 2:16am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Record numbers By the way Sarah and Jon could you remind people to TRIM their posts. The replies comes with all the previous mails and my account memory is always overloaded. Not to mention who reads in digest form that struggle a lot. Metta Cybele >From: Sarah and Jonothan Abbott >Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Record numbers >Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 22:23:31 +0800 (CST) > >Dear Group, > >Recently the volume of posts to the list has been very >high (1000 for this month). We are of course pleased >that members are making such good use of the forum and >we're delighted to read so many excellent messages. > >Without wishing to spoil anyone's fun, we would ask >members to refrain as far as possible from posts on >dsg that are pure banter, simple 'me too' messages or >too off-topic (not relating to the Buddha's Teachings >in the Theravada tradition -- which of course doesn't >exclude comparisons with other teachings). > >If you have any comments or questions about this issue >or the guidelines, pls send them to us OFF-LIST. > >Thanks for your cooperation. > >(Note:This is not directed at any particular person or >any particular recent posts.) > >Jon & Sarah > 6895 From: ppp Date: Thu Jul 26, 2001 8:15pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Pali Hi, Derek: At least I've become less spoiled person than I had been (as an only-child). tadao 6896 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 4:51am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in BKK Saturday--- Wow, what a gathering. I already feel left out , ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 8:00 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in BKK Saturday--- > > Amara, Robert, Sarah, Jon, Bruce, Sukin, Betty, and any other of the > BKK contingent, please accept my heartfelt invitation to my place > Saturday night for a "housewarming." Must get this place prioperly > prepped with kusala cittas and real Dhamma discussion, and, good food > and drinks (NON-ALCOHOLIC, of course!). Seven PM onward, to however > late anyone wishes to stay (I normally stay up til at least 2AM to > keep in sync with my NY colleagues' schedules). Sat. eve seemed the > best (really the onkly possible time) given everyone's time > constraints. > > I live on Sukhumvit Soi 10, so it's easy-acces via BTS Nana station. > Sukin also has full details as well and my phone # in case anyone > misses me for any reason. > > This is TRULY exciting! :) :) :) > > 6897 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 5:29am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Record numbers Thanks Cybele, Yes, pls just keep relevant parts of the post you're replying to and delete the rest, inc. the yahoo blurb at the end etc. We all forget sometimes in our haste, I know. S. --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > By the way Sarah and Jon could you remind people to TRIM their posts. > The replies comes with all the previous mails and my account memory is > always overloaded. > Not to mention who reads in digest form that struggle a lot. 6898 From: Howard Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 2:19am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: No-Self - Anders Hi, Erik - In a message dated 7/26/01 11:11:09 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Erik writes: > --- Howard wrote: > > Hi, Anders - > > > > In a message dated 7/26/01 3:58:14 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > > <> writes: > > > > > > > And to totally destroy the views of the opposition, mighty Anders > strikes a > > > telling blow, by convincing Nagarjuna to join forces with him! > > > Sorry, I just read a post on another newsgroup from a guy named > Dharmatroll, > > > who likes to write stuff like that :-) > > > > > ======================== > > He has another pseudonym as well - "Tom Bombadil". I > believe 'Tom' is > > his true given name. Tom used to be on several Buddhist groups that > I and > > others here were also on. > > Do you include in this talk.religion.buddhism on Usenet? If so, ever > read the writings of Professor Richard Hayes of Montreal's McGill > University (aka Mubul aka Dayamati Dharmachari)? I consider him among > Buddhism's greatest living scholar/practitioners (though he would > never accept such fawning)--the rarest of the rare, a truly precious > treasure, and absolutely one of my greatest gurus. A true Buddhist > Master in ever sense of the word. > > ============================= I've had many pleasant and rewarding cyber-conversations with Richard in the past. We disagree on a couple points, but I have enormous respect for him as a scholar and a Buddhist. 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) 6899 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 7:19am Subject: Fwd: Meditation, passivity and khamma: a new translation of Samyutta Nikaya Hi group On the thread about meditation I decided to forward this interesting mail that illustrates my quest: how a so-called genuine buddhist who extrenuously defend a position of faithfulness to the original teachings can dismiss meditation in his practice. Sorry but I am still wondering... And for obvious reasons I erased the name of one of the interlocutors. >Layperson very much commited on Abhidhamma studies but who doesn't has > >ever practiced meditation: > > > This should read: But while they might be called passive, > > the experience and memory of the nana citta by panna is cause for > > firm right understanding and right memory as well as a host of > > kusala cetasika to arise and accumulate more cause for further > > development of panna in the future as well. > >Bhikkhu (or so he claims to be) replying: > >The point about whether one is practicing passively or not can be >taken in the context of samadhi or Jhàna development. If one is >diligently practicing vipassana in the sense of 'choice less >awareness' or not having much sitting/walking practice at all, say >under 3 or 4 hours a day, or if ones 'practice' is dhamma book study >and reflection on these truths, then one can be said to be practicing >passively. > >If one is dedicated to development of jhana, actively determined to >bring cessation of body (by sitting still at first then later still >the breath), to bring cessation of verbal (at the level of second >jhana) and cessation of mental (at the supreme jhana level call the >void, deathless, emptiness, cessation of feeling and perception) then one >can say the practice is active. > >Naturally there will be friends who are into 'choice less awareness' >vipassana and will say things like: We are taught to practice >passively this way. We should not try to control anything. The answer lies >in the question of how does one eradicate the hindrances without active >mental development. Then they may ask Oh yah!, what is a >hindrance? To that we can look at MN108. (stay logged in for a >rundown on the hindrances and how they prevent vipassana.) > >Then these friends may say, We are taught that one can get stuck in >jhana, liking it too much. The Blessed Ones answer to that can be >found in the Anapannasati Sutta Mn118 where Vipassana is incorporated into >the Jhana development in the fourth tetrad where/when the jhana state >becomes unstable, starts to fade away, and ceases, the jhana is >relinquished and be 'let go' with clear comprehension. > >If one is also dedicated to watching the breath moment by moment, >developing unremitting (thats unremitting) mindfulness of the breath, >determined to not allow anything at all into the mind that will >disturb the breath watching, all day, every hour, every minute, every >breath, then one can say that this is the active mindfulness that >becomes the first of seven factors of awaking (Pali sambojana.) > >It can also be said that practicing this way one may have cessation >of khamma. > >Presented here is a new translation of Samyutta Nikaya 35.146 > V New and OLd Khamma >Bhikkhus, I will teach new and old khamma, the cessation of khamma >and the way leading to the cessation of khamma. Listen to this >closely, attend well. > >What is old khamma? The eye, ear, nose, tongue, tactile body, and >mental formations, all to be understood as concocted by willful >action and can be felt. This is old khamma. > >What is new khamma? All action done by body, vocal (internal and >external), and mind. This is new khamma. > >What, bhikkhus, is the cessation of khamma (nirodha)? When one is >free of them through virtue/jhana/vipassana, this is called >the cessation of khamma. > >What Bhikkhus is the method (way) leading to the cessation of khamma? >It is the eight fold Noble path: right view right willful intention, >right verbal action, right body action, right living, right effort, >right mindfulness, right concentration. > >Now, bhikkhus I have taught old khamma, new khamma, cessation of >khamma and the method leading to the cessation of khamma. Whatever >should be done by a compassionate teacher out of compassion for >students, hoping for their welfare has been done for you. Now it is >up to you to practice diligently. There are empty kutis (huts) and >the foot of trees here. Go practice jhana, bhikkhus, do not be >negligent, maybe you will regret it later. This is our instruction to >you, practice jhana diligently. >..........end Samyutta >=================== > >Here as in many hundreds of places the Blessed one encouraged jhana >meditation practice. > > >And now for folks who may have misunderstood the above part about old >and new khamma another new translation is offered. Samyutta Nikaya >36. 21 > > The 108 kinds of feeling: part 1 > >"Gotama, master, there are some samana and brahmin who hold the >following: 'Whatever someone experiences be it pleasant, unpleasant >or in between, all that is caused by old khamma.' What do you say >about old past khamma? > >"Some feelings arise here coming from stomach and lower tract >disorders, chest and breathing disorders, coming for imbalances, or a >change of weather, produced from careless behavior, produced from >being attacked by emenies, one can know for oneself, these feelings >with these sources are to be considered true in general society. When those >samana and brahmin hold this kind of view and belief, teaching it as >doctrine: 'Whatever someone experiences be it pleasant, >unpleasant or in between, all that is caused by old (past) khamma' >they go overboard. They go beyond what is considered true in general >society. Therefore I say it is wrong on the part of those samana and >brahmin. >=================== >Dear ........ > >You have a beautiful gift to regurgitating the modern commentators of >the Abhidhamma. Did you think about the fact that the original >writers of the Abhidhamma were jhana mediators? They were speaking >from their own experiences. They were writing what they found inside >of their own mind. This kind of investigation can happen when the >jhana starts to fade and the mind starts to deteriorate from its one >pointed peak into diversity. It is good that you have a grasps of >your favorite commentators. What may not be so good about this >intellectual knowledge; it by being third hand on your part, is >missing the key ingredient, your own jhana practice. You say that you are >interested in vipassana, are you also interested in seeing in >your own mind as what you write about so tediously? It is called >tedious because it is so full of Pali mixed with modern language that it is >a lot of work to sift through the words to arrive at any >meaning. It would be helpful for everyone if you could state your >case in words that we are willing to spend time on. > >Sorry to see you taking a break. Perhaps you think this list is a bit over >your head, Dhamma wise. But that is not the case. You have >proven that you can retain complex ideas. Surly you can also grasps >the teachings of the Blessed One, all you need to do is spend a few >hours each day in samadhi/jhana/vipassana, and sutta study. That is >the way to understand the teachings of the Blessed One. > >May you be well, may you be happy. May we hear from you real soon now. >Dhamarati Metta Cybele 6900 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 7:22am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in BKK Saturday--- Dear Gayan >>Wow, what a gathering. > >I already feel left out , Don't dear friend, remember our 'heretic club' meeting in Ella! ;-) Love Cybele > >----- Original Message ----- >From: >>Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 8:00 AM >Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in BKK Saturday--- > > > > > > Amara, Robert, Sarah, Jon, Bruce, Sukin, Betty, and any other of the > > BKK contingent, please accept my heartfelt invitation to my place > > Saturday night for a "housewarming." Must get this place prioperly > > prepped with kusala cittas and real Dhamma discussion, and, good food > > and drinks (NON-ALCOHOLIC, of course!). Seven PM onward, to however > > late anyone wishes to stay (I normally stay up til at least 2AM to > > keep in sync with my NY colleagues' schedules). Sat. eve seemed the > > best (really the onkly possible time) given everyone's time > > constraints. > > > > I live on Sukhumvit Soi 10, so it's easy-acces via BTS Nana station. > > Sukin also has full details as well and my phone # in case anyone > > misses me for any reason. > > > > This is TRULY exciting! :) :) :) > > > 6901 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 7:56am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in BKK Saturday--- Of course!! the Heretix Club! This shameful mind.. always fantasizing and chasing , thinking that grass is greener on the other side.. unsatisfactoriness, unsatisfactoriness.... dear cybele , thanks for the trigger for contemplation. :7) rgds ----- Original Message ----- From: "cybele chiodi" Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 7:22 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in BKK Saturday--- > > Dear Gayan > > >>Wow, what a gathering. > > > >I already feel left out , > > Don't dear friend, remember our 'heretic club' meeting in Ella! ;-) > > Love > > Cybele > > > 6902 From: Ken Howard Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 8:15am Subject: Re: Bruce's question (Ken) Dear Kom In a message to Jon, I wrote; "I really would like to know the correct approach to the Buddhadhamma. I want to know exactly what those disciples in the suttas meant when they exclaimed, "I take refuge in the Dhamma from this day until life's end!"" You kindly responded with a very helpful explanation. Your post was a striking example of its content. It certainly created some kusala moments for me (or should I say, I think they were kusala). Thank you. Kind regards Ken > > I think the most important thing is obviously hearing the dhamma, > contemplating (considering) the dhamma, and knowing the characteristics > of the realities as they truly are. Beyond that, I heard K. Sujin say that > one of the meaning of taking refuge is to adopt other Buddha's teachings > in increasing one kusala to "let go" of the akusala (when one is not doing > kusala, for the most part, one has akusala). > > When I post a mesage to DSG, sometimes I am reminded of the Sutta that > teaches us when to say something about the dhamma, that has the > following pattern: (will have to look it up): > > can't get the person out of the akusala -> don't say it. > can get the person out of the akusala, even when it may make the other > person uncomfortable, and even it may be an uncomfortable position for > the speaker -> know the proper time and the proper way and say it. > > Obviously, this teaching is very subtle, just like many other Buddha's > teachings. What is dhamma? How do we know what we say will > condition kusala in other people? How do you know what we say is > correct and in accord with the Buddha teachings? What is kusala? What > is akusala? What is the proper time and the proper way to say such > things? > > I consider saying something that refers to the dhamma, refers to Vinaya, > that would increase the kusala in other people (and myself) good things > indeed. > > kom 6903 From: Herman Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 8:19am Subject: Question re Nibbana Hi all, I'm sorry if this has already been answered in recent discussions regarding this topic. What prompts the arising of cittas that take nibbana as their object, as in , is bhavanga interrupted, so to speak, by a sense door or mind door adverting process? Does nibbana consciousness arise through a door? Which one? If not, how does it become the object of consciousness? Thank you in advance Herman 6904 From: Derek Cameron Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 8:21am Subject: Brahmacariya: raaga-sati or raaga-dosa? What is brahmacariya (celibacy)? Is it raaga-sati (mindfulness of lust) or raaga-dosa (hatred of lust)? I would like to invite your insights on this topic. Derek. 6905 From: ppp Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 0:42am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Satipatthana, the only way? (was Theravada and Satipathana - Kom) Hi, ripka21 (Sorry, I cannot identify your name): I am sorry for my slow responce to your comment on Jainism. You kindly pointed out that there are some similarities beween Jainism and Buddhism. It is my understanding that many Indic religious notions, such as kamma-vipaaka (deed-result), sansaara (round of births and deaths), and nibbaana (enlightment), are nothing unique to Buddhism. Throughout the development of (earlier) Vedism, Indians had developed the notions that experiencing the endless series of births and deaths is nothing but suffering, and that the only way to 'escape' from this miserable state is to attain nibbaana. Then, to attain nibbaana, one has to first forsake household and sensual desires associated with it. Either joining a religous order or developing one's own practice, one purifies oneself to the extent that one can attain so-called nibbaana. The attainment of nibbaana is regarded as the end of all the sufferings. All these religous notions were already there even before Gotama Buddha's era. What is unique about Buddhism is, as you have pointed out, the way to attain nibbaana. Being different from your view of Buddhism, however, I, first, think that the Buddha uses different terminology to define this way to nibbaana. Secondly, regardless of the difference in his use of terminogly, when we read the Tipitaka carefully, all his dicourses point at the single direction: i.e., knowing/understanding what one experiences through one's doo-ways as they are. This teaching is uniquely Buddhism. tadao 6906 From: ppp Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 1:34am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Brahmacariya: raaga-sati or raaga-dosa? Hi, Derek: With respect to Brahama-cariya, I think, it can be defined by many many ways. It can be defined, in its vaguest sense, as (any types of) religious practices. Or in a less vague sense, it can mean any religous practices which induce kusala (but not akusala). The term, in its ultimate sense, must mean, as far as the Buddha's teaching is concerned, the development of wisdom whose strength is adequate/strong enough to experience nibbaana. So, if a house hold wife attains nibbaana, she should be regarded as Brahamacaarinii (a lady who practices Brahamacariya) despite the fact that she has never officially joined a order). tadao 6907 From: Herman Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 9:51am Subject: Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) Dear Cybele, --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > Well I enjoy sex, so what - this makes me not suitable to walk this path? I enjoy sex too, but I find it very difficult to walk while in the throes :-) I'd say when you are enjoying sex you are enjoying sex. It's when you are not enjoying sex, one tends to think and talk a lot about it. People don't tend to think about food when they are not hungry. Love Herman 6908 From: Robert Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 9:59am Subject: Re: Question re Nibbana --- Dear herman, Just very briefly. In the extremely short process known as magga- vitthi (path process) the following cittas arise in order: parikamma (preparatory)-takes one of the thre characteristics of a paramattha dhamma as object upacara -(access) -3 characteristics as object anuloma -(conformity) -characteristics Gotrabhu - (change of lineage) -nibbana as object Magga citta - nibbana as object Phala-citta - nibbana as object phala-citta -nibbana as object this process arises as the culmination of the correct development of insight. robert Herman wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm sorry if this has already been answered in recent discussions > regarding this topic. > > What prompts the arising of cittas that take nibbana as their object, > as in , is bhavanga interrupted, so to speak, by a sense door or mind > door adverting process? Does nibbana consciousness arise through a > door? Which one? If not, how does it become the object of > consciousness? > > Thank you in advance > > > Herman 6909 From: Derek Cameron Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 10:01am Subject: Re: Brahmacariya: raaga-sati or raaga-dosa? Hi, Tadao, What about the specific meaning of brahmacariya as celibacy? Is it a powerful spiritual practice? Or is it just repression? If it is an effective practice, then is there a right attitude and a wrong attitude to bring to it? Derek. 6910 From: Herman Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 10:25am Subject: Re: Question re Nibbana Robert, thank you for this. At the risk of pressing a point, is there a door-adverting process involved, or do I assume there isn't? Thanks again Herman --- <> wrote: > --- > > > Dear herman, > Just very briefly. In the extremely short process known as magga- > vitthi (path process) the following cittas arise in order: > parikamma (preparatory)-takes one of the thre characteristics of a > paramattha dhamma as object > upacara -(access) -3 characteristics as object > anuloma -(conformity) -characteristics > Gotrabhu - (change of lineage) -nibbana as object > Magga citta - nibbana as object > Phala-citta - nibbana as object > phala-citta -nibbana as object > > this process arises as the culmination of the correct development of > insight. > robert > > Herman wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I'm sorry if this has already been answered in recent discussions > > regarding this topic. > > > > What prompts the arising of cittas that take nibbana as their > object, > > as in , is bhavanga interrupted, so to speak, by a sense door or > mind > > door adverting process? Does nibbana consciousness arise through a > > door? Which one? If not, how does it become the object of > > consciousness? > > > > Thank you in advance > > > > > > Herman 6911 From: ppp Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 3:18am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Brahmacariya: raaga-sati or raaga-dosa? Hi, Derek: There must be tons of definitions on Brahama-cariya in the Tipitakas and commentaries. Celibacy must be an (underlying) assumption because those who would like to detach themselves from all the sential pleasures are quite unlikely to have parters to pusure their religous goals. (Celibacy is not as difficult as you may think. Once you are ordained and live in rather isolated places and spend most of your time reading suttas, etc., you won't think much about it.) I do not think Brahamacariya must necessarily be a powerful religous practice. Is taking one mean a day a powerful religous practice? I do not think so. Is living in a totally secluded place (hardly talking with anybody for weeks) a poweful religous practice? I do not think so. If you would like, you can have such types of experiences very easily, without having notion of "powerful". One thing you have to remember is that the Buddha's teaching is of the Middle Path, which very much negates any notion of "powerful". With respect to your last question, let us assume that you are going to become a monk (regardless of the duration). Then it is your wisdom (not necessarily pa~~nnaa but sampaja~~nna (wise/skilful/consideration) which will guide you and tell you what is a wrong and right attitude. tadao 6912 From: Robert Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 11:30am Subject: Re: Question re Nibbana --- Good question Herman. Yes I only gave the javanna section. Someone should check this I am doing it from memory (of the texts , not the experience:)To fill in: the full process: 1. Vibrational bhavanga 2. arrest bhavanga 3. mind-door adverting consciousness the rest follows as below in my first post. The phala citta repeats either once or twice. Then bhanvanga cittas arise, then minddoor adverting, then a series of seven javana cittas arise which review the magga citta just attained (they know what has happened). Then more bhavanga , then minddoor adverting, then a series of javanna cittas which review the fruition (phala) citta (they know what has happened. robert Herman wrote: > Robert, thank you for this. > > At the risk of pressing a point, is there a door-adverting process > involved, or do I assume there isn't? > > Thanks again > > Herman > > > --- <> wrote: > > --- > > > > > > Dear herman, > > Just very briefly. In the extremely short process known as magga- > > vitthi (path process) the following cittas arise in order: > > parikamma (preparatory)-takes one of the thre characteristics of a > > paramattha dhamma as object > > upacara -(access) -3 characteristics as object > > anuloma -(conformity) -characteristics > > Gotrabhu - (change of lineage) -nibbana as object > > Magga citta - nibbana as object > > Phala-citta - nibbana as object > > phala-citta -nibbana as object > > > > this process arises as the culmination of the correct development > of > > insight. > > robert > > > > Herman wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > I'm sorry if this has already been answered in recent discussions > > > regarding this topic. > > > > > > What prompts the arising of cittas that take nibbana as their > > object, > > > as in , is bhavanga interrupted, so to speak, by a sense door or > > mind > > > door adverting process? Does nibbana consciousness arise through > a > > > door? Which one? If not, how does it become the object of > > > consciousness? > > > > > > Thank you in advance > > > > > > > > > Herman 6913 From: ppp Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 4:54am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west Hi, Ripka21: This is a responce to your old message about living in a wrong place/country. I feel the same way as you do in the sense that although I've been in Canada for the last 20 years, I haven't met many "stimulting" people here. Fortunately, we've been linked by the Net, so it may be a time for us to stop feeling sorry for ourselves. In essence, Realities defy Concepts (of Canada, Canadians, USA, Americans, etc.) tadao 6914 From: DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 0:37pm Subject: Lumbini In Danger! India built barrage could submerge Lumbini Post Report KATHMANDU, July 25 - Lumbini, the birthplace of Lord Buddha, also listed as the UNESCO World Heritage site, could be submerged once the Russiyal-Khurda Lautan barrage being constructed by India over the Danav River on the Nepal-India border, just about 6 km south-east of the 2,500 years old Buddhist shrine, is completed, experts here said. "Buddha's birthplace is in crisis. The 6-metre high Russiyal-Khurd Lautan barrage will directly affect Lumbini's archaeological site and its adjacent area, which is just 2-meter higher than the water level at the barrage site," said Netra Prasad Dhital, a geographer of Tribhuwan University. He said the barrage being constructed is just 6-km southeast of Lumbini. The Indian side unilaterally started construction of the main barrage and two other supportive structures about five months ago. Nepali officials monitoring the construction of the barrages said that all the barrages are almost complete. The construction of the 10-km long earthen embankment east of Russiyal-Khurd Lautan barrage and south of Bhairahawa, the district headquarters of Rupandehi, will block the natural water flow of waters in the Danav River and its tributaries like Dandakhola. Experts fear that the barrage and its supportive embankment will inundate over 200 villages of the 18 Village Development Committees in Marchawar. Majority of the densely-populated and fertile area of the district will come under the water after the construction of the barrage. Bavani, Bhagwanpur, Sipuwa, Majhagawa, Bogadi, Betkuia, Roinihawa, Pharena, Asuraini, Pipra, Silauriya, Raypur, Simra, Karautiya and other Village Development Committees are feared of being inundated too. Presenting field-study report in an interaction programme in the Capital today, Dhital stated that the barrage is being constructed only 200 metres south of the Nepal-India border. "It is against the Helsinki Convention and other international laws, which require consultations between the two countries before any construction is made within the range of 8 kilometre from the international border," said Dhital. Lawmaker and chairman of the CPN-UML aligned Democratic National Youth Federation Nepal (DNYFN), Gokarna Bista, said the Nepali people will protest, to any extent, if the Indian government does not stop the construction of the controversial barrage. "The federation demands the construction be suspended and urged the governments of both the countries to seek solution on the issue," he said. Karki was one of the 16 lawmakers who visited the site on July 20 and analysed the geographic situation of the area. Including Karki, the 16 lawmakers of Nepal Communist Party (United Marxist-Leninist) issued a release Wednesday asking all the political parties, organisations and civic societies to show solidarity to safeguard Nepal's sovereignty and the ancient site of Lumbini from the inundation. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- NSP for constitutional amendment KATHMANDU, July 25 (PR)- The Nepal Sadbhawana Party today demanded amendment of the Constitution saying that it is the only way for solving the existing Nepali citizenship problem. Demand for the amendment of the Constitution by the Nepal Sadbhawana Party (NSP) comes after the Supreme Court on Monday declared void over 30,000 citizenship certificates issued four years ago. The court even issued mandamus to the Home Ministry ordering "to distribute citizenship only as per the Constitution and the existing laws" and that "there is no legal provision to distribute citizenship certificates by issuing a directive" as the certificates then was issued through a directive. "There is no way but amend the Constitution to solve the citizenship problem as it is impossible to solve the citizenship issue confining to the present Constitution," says Rajendra Mahato, NSP General Secretary. Mahato lays stress that the Constitution should be amended in the current session of the parliament itself. "The verdict of the court has raised several questions which would be solved in due course," says Mahato. Mahato further said that the government should take quick initiatives for the "legality" of the "void declared" over 30,000 citizenship certificates. According to Mahato Terai people are the most affected from the court's decision. Mahato blames the government for not being sincere in solving the citizenship issue. "Even various government reports show that there are more than four million people affected from citizenship problem and as the present Constitution stands as a hurdle, there is no option but to amend it," says Mahato pointing out the need for the government and other political parties to agree to it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- 6915 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 0:44pm Subject: Re: Question re Nibbana Dear Roberts and Herman, This link has the detail: http://www.dhammastudy.com/paramat8.html My observations: 1) The phala citta repeats 3 times if there is no parikamma. 2) With the descriptions of the processes, there are no doubts that the person attaining knows that they have attained. kom --- <> wrote: > --- > Good question Herman. > Yes I only gave the javanna section. > Someone should check this I am doing it from memory (of the texts , > not the experience:)To fill in: > the full process: > 1. Vibrational bhavanga > 2. arrest bhavanga > 3. mind-door adverting consciousness > the rest follows as below in my first post. > > The phala citta repeats either once or twice. > Then bhanvanga cittas arise, then minddoor adverting, then a series > of seven javana cittas arise which review the magga citta just > attained (they know what has happened). > Then more bhavanga , then minddoor adverting, then a series of > javanna cittas which review the fruition (phala) citta (they know > what has happened. > robert 6916 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 1:17pm Subject: Re: Brahmacariya: raaga-sati or raaga-dosa? Dear Derek, This is from: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn148.html "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 arises what is felt either as pleasure, pain, or neither pleasure nor pain. If, when touched by a feeling of pleasure, one relishes it, welcomes it, or remains fastened to it, then the underlying tendency to passion lies latent within one. If, when touched by a feeling of pain, one sorrows, grieves, & laments, beats one's breast, becomes distraught, then the underlying tendency to resistance lies latent within one. If, when touched by a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain, one does not discern, as it actually is present, the origination, passing away, allure, drawback, or escape from that feeling, then the underlying tendency to ignorance lies latent within one. That a person -- without abandoning the underlying tendency to passion with regard to a feeling of pleasure, without abolishing the underlying tendency to resistance with regard to a feeling of pain, without uprooting the underlying tendency to ignorance with regard to a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain, without abandoning ignorance and giving rise to clear knowing -- would put an end to suffering & stress in the here & now: such a thing isn't possible. It looks like to me that delighting (lobha), grieving (dosa), and not knowing the realities as they truly are (moha), all adds to the latent tendencies, which, having enough, one cannot attain the arahatship. Thus, one should see faults in all sort of lobha (including sex) from the standpoint of adding to the latent lobha, which contradicts the goal of eradicating all akusala latent tendencies. Of course, only an anagami has eradicated all clinging and aversion to the 5 sensualities. There is a commentary story about a householder who reached the stage of sotapanna, sakatagami, and anagami succesively (not all at the same time). Only at the point of becoming an anagami that he stopped having sex with his wife. Since we are not (or I am not) an anagami, then we can totally expect that the delights in the 5 sensualities are arising, and will arise. At the same time, we should know that adding to the latent tendencies is in everyway "adding trouble for oneself." One will seek to reduce them if one sees their faults. Repression without panna, I suspect, doesn't last for long (even in this life time) and obviously doesn't bring the highest fruit as abstaining with panna would. One does need to eat to live, but one certainly doesn't need to have sex to live... kom --- "Derek Cameron" wrote: > Hi, Tadao, > > What about the specific meaning of brahmacariya as celibacy? Is it a > powerful spiritual practice? Or is it just repression? > > If it is an effective practice, then is there a right attitude and a > wrong attitude to bring to it? > > Derek. 6917 From: Erik Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 1:58pm Subject: Re: thailand/west --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Ripka21: Tadao--just FYI "rikpa21" is really Erik, so you don't forget now (kindof a mnemonic for my name--actually "rikpa" means "panna" in Tibetan, and with unspeakable arrogance I appopriated that email adderss) :) :) :) > This is a responce to your old message about living in a > wrong place/country. I feel the same way as you do in the > sense that although I've been in Canada for the last > 20 years, I haven't met many "stimulting" people here. > Fortunately, we've been linked by the Net, so it may be > a time for us to stop feeling sorry for ourselves. > In essence, Realities defy Concepts (of Canada, > Canadians, USA, Americans, etc.) tadao I have met the most astounding acharyas where I've lived in NYC, so for me it isn't an issue of place per se. You can find the Dhamma anyplace. Tha Dhamma lives in our hearts anyway, and has nothing to do with geograpic location. My lama, for example, lives in New Jersey! And there there are none superior to him in my eyes, as I consider him a living Buddha. My response was merely to indicate I find it wonderful to live in a place where I'm surrounded by all the symbols of the Dhamma, and that they serve as reminders all the time. From the scads of monks wandering around Panthip plaza (and what are monks doing eyeing pirated software is what I'd like to know?), to the wats, chedis, and so on. In other words I agree entirely with your sentiment, but it still is wonderful nonethelss to be living in a land where the Dhamma is a central aspect of the culture and all the symbols that truly matter to me fill my field of vision wherever I go. 6918 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 2:05pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom --- Victor wrote: > Hi Anders, > > --- "Anders Honoré" > wrote: > [snip] > > To tell you the truth, I have yet to find support in the Pali canon > for the > > belief that there is no self. > > If interested, you might want to refer to > Ananda Sutta, To Ananda > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn44-010.html > > Metta, > Victor I went and read the excerpt you referred to in the Sutta, and I cannot see it as refuting the existence of a self, only refuting wrong views of self. According to Sutta, Buddha is confirming that: 1/ there is no permanent, unchanging soul [that does not mean there is no self] 2/ that consciousness is not annihilated with the death of the body [certainly doesn't mean that there is no self] 3/ that all phenomena are not-self [this would mean that a self would have to be outside of phenomena] 4/ that it is wrong to assert that there is no self [since it would lead to the idea that one's previous self no longer existed] Based on the above, the only possible self that could be accepted by the Buddha would be a self that was ouside of conditioned phenomena. The only existent beyond phenomena is Nirvana, and so the true self would have to be Nirvana and nothing else. This is, I believe, Anders' contention, that the true self is neither a soul nor an existent phenomena, and that it is not personal, but is Nirvana itself, and that Nirvana is the true identity of all beings. Anders, I may have overspoken. If you're around, please correct. I would also be happy to see if others feel this assertion should be refuted. Robert ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6919 From: Herman Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 3:30pm Subject: Re: Lumbini In Danger! Lumbini is a conditioned phenomenon. As such, it is always in danger. And certainly impermanent. Herman --- "DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo" <081176234213158209227038213248130208071048> wrote: > India built barrage could submerge Lumbini > > Post Report > > KATHMANDU, July 25 - Lumbini, the birthplace of Lord Buddha, also listed as > the UNESCO World Heritage site, could be submerged once the Russiyal-Khurda > Lautan barrage being constructed by India over the Danav River on the > Nepal-India border, just about 6 km south-east of the 2,500 years old > Buddhist shrine, is completed, experts here said. > > "Buddha's birthplace is in crisis. etc 6920 From: Erik Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 5:02pm Subject: Re: No-Self - Anders --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Erik - Howard, how ya doin'? ever > > read the writings of Professor Richard Hayes of Montreal's McGill > > University (aka Mubul aka Dayamati Dharmachari)? I consider him among > > Buddhism's greatest living scholar/practitioners (though he would > > never accept such fawning)--the rarest of the rare, a truly precious > > treasure, and absolutely one of my greatest gurus. A true Buddhist > > Master in ever sense of the word. > ============================= > I've had many pleasant and rewarding cyber-conversations with Richard > in the past. We disagree on a couple points, but I have enormous respect for > him as a scholar and a Buddhist. Believe me, I've had a number of heated disagreements with Mubul in the past (and got my ass justifiably kicked when I tried atking him on in more than one debate), and it was those very debates and disagreements that did more to clarify my understanding of the Dharma (and terminate some very serious ditthi) than just about anything else I can think of! He is an acharya to be taken VERY seriously indeed, as a Master of Sanskrit, Pali, Tibetan, the Suttas, AND meditation. And he's a true "One Vehiclist" and proponent of Right View if there ever was one. He plays the "bad cop" role on so many occasions, and that role, for these accumulations, did more to loosen fixed and wrong conceptions of what is and is not the path than nearly anything else. Many many many deep bows to the great Master Dayamati Dharmachari! 6921 From: Howard Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 4:22pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: No-Self - Anders Hi, Erik - In a message dated 7/27/01 5:06:04 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Erik writes: > --- Howard wrote: > > Hi, Erik - > > Howard, how ya doin'? > -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I'm fine! Anumodana on your Thai venture. ------------------------------------------------------- > ever > > > read the writings of Professor Richard Hayes of Montreal's McGill > > > University (aka Mubul aka Dayamati Dharmachari)? I consider him > among > > > Buddhism's greatest living scholar/practitioners (though he would > > > never accept such fawning)--the rarest of the rare, a truly > precious > > > treasure, and absolutely one of my greatest gurus. A true > Buddhist > > > Master in ever sense of the word. > > ============================= > > I've had many pleasant and rewarding cyber-conversations > with Richard > > in the past. We disagree on a couple points, but I have enormous > respect for > > him as a scholar and a Buddhist. > > Believe me, I've had a number of heated disagreements with Mubul in > the past (and got my ass justifiably kicked when I tried atking him > on in more than one debate), and it was those very debates and > disagreements that did more to clarify my understanding of the Dharma > (and terminate some very serious ditthi) than just about anything > else I can think of! > > He is an acharya to be taken VERY seriously indeed, as a Master of > Sanskrit, Pali, Tibetan, the Suttas, AND meditation. And he's a > true "One Vehiclist" and proponent of Right View if there ever was > one. He plays the "bad cop" role on so many occasions, and that role, > for these accumulations, did more to loosen fixed and wrong > conceptions of what is and is not the path than nearly anything else. ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: He's a very down-to-earth, no-nonsense guy who acts a bit roughly at times with some folks, but has always treated me wonderfully. (Maybe he thinks I'm on the fragile side! ;-) I've learned a great deal from him. ---------------------------------------------------------- > > Many many many deep bows to the great Master Dayamati Dharmachari! > > ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well .. I'd put it a bit more like "Much friendship and respect to Richard!". ;-) ============================= 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) 6922 From: Derek Cameron Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 8:31pm Subject: Re: Brahmacariya: raaga-sati or raaga-dosa? Tadao, I'm grateful for your encouragement. What you say about "detach from all sensual pleasures" fits in my my reading of the sutta-s, namely, that nothing in the world of the five senses is to be grasped at. That seems to me to be the way the Buddha taught it. But often (at least here in the West) that original teaching seems to get lost. It's not put across as clearly as that. Thank you. Derek. 6923 From: Derek Cameron Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 8:39pm Subject: Re: Brahmacariya: raaga-sati or raaga-dosa? --- "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > Since we are not (or I am not) an anagami, then we can totally expect > that the delights in the 5 sensualities are arising, and will arise. At the > same time, we should know that adding to the latent tendencies is in > everyway "adding trouble for oneself." One will seek to reduce them if > one sees their faults. Repression without panna, I suspect, doesn't last > for long (even in this life time) and obviously doesn't bring the highest fruit > as abstaining with panna would. One does need to eat to live, but one > certainly doesn't need to have sex to live... Thank you, Kom. I was talking to a Thai monk about what it's like to be a monk, and he said: "You have to understand it properly." I think that's what you're saying too. BTW, I asked him what he meant by understanding it properly, and all he said was: "You know, all the stuff we learned when we were very young." And that was it. Well, of course, I'm not Thai, so I didn't learn to understand it when I was very young! Derek. 6924 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 9:47pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) Dear Herman >>Dear Cybele, > >--- "cybele chiodi" >wrote: > > > Well I enjoy sex, so what - this makes me not suitable to walk this >path? > > >I enjoy sex too, but I find it very difficult to walk while in the >throes :-) > >I'd say when you are enjoying sex you are enjoying sex. It's when you >are not enjoying sex, one tends to think and talk a lot about it. > >People don't tend to think about food when they are not hungry. > >Love > >Herman > In my experience people is talking always about food! And indeed that's a good point, accordingly with you then people would not talk about sex unless they were 'hungry' for it - therefore why should we deny this fact and believe that is a frivolous issue? LOve CYbele 6925 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 10:00pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Brahmacariya: raaga-sati or raaga-dosa? Dear Derek > >What is brahmacariya (celibacy)? > >Is it raaga-sati (mindfulness of lust) or raaga-dosa (hatred of lust)? > >I would like to invite your insights on this topic. > >Derek. I think that theoretically should be indeed raaga-sati, minfulness of lust but most of the time because of wrong undersatnding it becomes raaga-dosa, aversion, suppression, hatred of lust and 'of WOMEN' quite often. We become evil beings existing just to tempt and lead astray the wise men. Cybele 6926 From: Derek Cameron Date: Fri Jul 27, 2001 10:08pm Subject: Re: Brahmacariya: raaga-sati or raaga-dosa? --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > I think that theoretically should be indeed raaga-sati, minfulness of lust > but most of the time because of wrong undersatnding it becomes raaga-dosa, > aversion, suppression, hatred of lust and 'of WOMEN' quite often. Hi, Cybele, You've met many monks. Can you tell just by looking at the way they behave whether they're practicing correctly or not? > We become evil beings existing just to tempt and lead astray the wise men. Ah ha! Just as I thought! Derek. 6927 From: Derek Cameron Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 0:02am Subject: Re: Buddha's innovations (was Satipatthana etc.) Hi, Tadao, Do you think it is accurate to say that the Buddha's very first teaching -- the middle way between the indulgent householder and the self-mortifying ascetic -- was an innovation? In other words, up to this point, everyone in India was either self-indulgent and self- mortifying, but the Buddha introduced a new way of life? Derek. 6928 From: Erik Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 0:39am Subject: Re: Brahmacariya: raaga-sati or raaga-dosa? --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > I think that theoretically should be indeed raaga-sati, minfulness of lust > but most of the time because of wrong undersatnding it becomes raaga-dosa, > aversion, suppression, hatred of lust and 'of WOMEN' quite often. > We become evil beings existing just to tempt and lead astray the wise men. Fortunately not tantric practitioners, who all share the ROOT VOW of NEVER disparaging women, and to see all women as the Dakini. 6930 From: DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 3:07am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lumbini In Danger! Tell that to the people living there. Have you visited there? I find your post just a bit too dismissive using a convenient way to bow out. Pay it forward --- or do you know what that means? Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Friday, July 27, 2001 3:30 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lumbini In Danger! > Lumbini is a conditioned phenomenon. As such, it is always in danger. > And certainly impermanent. > > Herman > > --- "DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo" > <081176234213158209227038213248130208071048> wrote: > > India built barrage could submerge Lumbini > > > > Post Report > > > > KATHMANDU, July 25 - Lumbini, the birthplace of Lord Buddha, also > listed as > > the UNESCO World Heritage site, could be submerged once the > Russiyal-Khurda > > Lautan barrage being constructed by India over the Danav River on > the > > Nepal-India border, just about 6 km south-east of the 2,500 years > old > > Buddhist shrine, is completed, experts here said. > > > > "Buddha's birthplace is in crisis. > > etc > > 6931 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 7:37am Subject: Dakini it was Re: Brahmacariya: raaga-sati or raaga-dosa? Sweetheart >>--- "cybele chiodi" >wrote: > > > I think that theoretically should be indeed raaga-sati, minfulness >of lust > > but most of the time because of wrong undersatnding it becomes >raaga-dosa, > > aversion, suppression, hatred of lust and 'of WOMEN' quite often. > > We become evil beings existing just to tempt and lead astray the >wise men. Erik: >Fortunately not tantric practitioners, who all share the ROOT VOW of >NEVER disparaging women, and to see all women as the Dakini. > Indeed honey that's what I observed in that post to you: that apart in Tantra practices all religions are very much sex-phobic and lust-fearing and as a consequence misogenous and depreciating of women. So glad to know that I am a Dakini. ;-))))) For those who doesn't know what about are we blattering and correct me if I am not accurate enough Erik: A Dakini in Vajrayana Buddhism is the inspiring power of consciousness, usually depicted in iconography as a wrathful naked female figure (form of manifestation). As semiwrathful or wrathful - yidam, the dakini has the task of integrating the powers liberated by the practitioner in the process of visualization (sadhana). In Tibetan, Dakini is translated as khadroma. Kha means 'celestial space', emptiness (shunyata) become an image; dro has the meaning of walking and moving about; ma indicates the feminine gender in substantive form. Thus the khadroma is a female figure that moves on the highest level of reality; her nakedness symbolizes knowledge of truth unveiled. The homeland of the dakinis is said to be the mystic realm of Urgyen. In Tantra Yoga the personification of the female energy is the Shakti - in sanskrit literally 'force, power, energy': the consort of Shiva and personification of primal energy, the force of - brahman, the dynamic aspect of God. Indeed Tantrism is also called Shaktism. Hindus believe that Shakti's grace is needed in order to grasp the transcendent aspect of God and worship her as the creative force that makes all life possible and maintains the universe. The goddess Cybele is a shakti. ;-) Beware of pissing me off. :-)))) Metta Cybele 6932 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 8:32am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Brahmacariya: raaga-sati or raaga-dosa? Dear Derek > >--- "cybele chiodi" >wrote: > > I think that theoretically should be indeed raaga-sati, minfulness >of lust > > but most of the time because of wrong undersatnding it becomes >raaga-dosa, > > aversion, suppression, hatred of lust and 'of WOMEN' quite often. > >Hi, Cybele, > >You've met many monks. Can you tell just by looking at the way they >behave whether they're practicing correctly or not? Well Derek, I don't wear rose-tinted glasses as you know and in my experience most of monks because of the strict rules plus social pressure and their ignorance on sexual matters if they have been ordained too young as is common in the East are quite clumsy and ankward while relating with females. I find there is a lot of sexual tension and incapacity of dealing with their own sexual energy and suppression is largely diffused. In many countries they have radical positions - or extreme control, eyes on the floor and avoiding carefully contact with women or they become far too indulgent and touch you even unnecessarily and are flirtatious, yes they are. The young monks are very much curious about the female gender and always you are surrounded by young bhikkhus in the temples what is most tender and amusing sometimes because some are very candid, shy while others are quite smart and daring. They want to get also the chance to practice English and if they manage to grab you it's a fight to set free. In Sri Lanka the monks tend to be quite open and they shake hands and accept invitations for a meal in public places without particular fuss. In Thailand they are apparently a bit more conservative but many times I had physical contact and have been interviewed alone without chaperon with only the door open to prevent gossips and blame. In the temples I have been offered tea or juice and sat down chatting with them most with a translator. Sometimes they even forget that they are not supposed to touch you and hand out things directly. In Burma they are pretty conservative specially Mahasi type but even so they are prone to be much more indulgent with westerners but they never interview a woman without a male present in the room. Outside the context of retreats they are much more relaxed. In Malaysia I met very nice monks but they are a bit constricted in a traditionalist chinese buddhist-taoist society. Visuddhacara who was my teacher would prepare me coffee himself, never allowed me to wash his dishes and always received me privately in his room and would shake hands as pass me objects. BUT in front of the sangha he was much more careful in order to don't provoke consternation. He was personally very concerned that I had to rent a place for myself while in the meditation center there was a spare room free that I could not occupy only because of my gender. However in my perception there is a lot of sexual tension due to suppression and most of the unfairness in the dhamma trasmission happens exactly because of aversion adding heaviness to the rules already very strict. I find the ones that have ordained late after leading a life as householders married men less self conscious, more relaxed sexually. However as you may know MOST of the monks DISROBE because they cannot deal with the sexual and affective issue. They disrobe to marry or because they acknowledge they spend much more time fantasizing than meditating or whatever else. You know Derek is so strange, sometimes you meet monks like Sumeddho that gives you the impression they are extremely happy being monksa nd they treat women as equal, are most fair and caring with them and you don't feel any sexual tension; while others are so stiff and tensed up, displaying a firm attitude and tough manners that are soon revealed for what they are - hatred and FEAR of women and hatred and fear of their own desires they believe we evil creatures instigate on them, and doing so they justify themselves and deny their sexual urges. > > > We become evil beings existing just to tempt and lead astray the >wise men. > >Ah ha! Just as I thought! > >Derek. > Please if you become a monk and start ill treating me or any woman I will personally provide to kick you on your behind Derek to awake you from self deceit! ;-) Now I will reveal you something amusing - do you know I wanted to be a buddhist nun? And don't dare to laugh!!!! And you know what all the western monks have discouraged me while the eastern ones thought that I was quite meant to be a nun, isn't funny? Well being a nun in Theravada is trapping yourself very much in a male world. But this is already another issue. Love Cybele 6933 From: Erik Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 8:50am Subject: Dakini it was Re: Brahmacariya: raaga-sati or raaga-dosa? --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > Indeed honey that's what I observed in that post to you: that apart in > Tantra practices all religions are very much sex-phobic and lust- fearing and > as a consequence misogenous and depreciating of women. > So glad to know that I am a Dakini. ;-))))) Yes, but of whioch sort I'm still trying to figure out (wrathful, semi-wrathful, or peaceful) :) If I take my cue from your name (and I take appellations with regard to dakinis VERY seriously indeed), the historical cult of Cybele always involved castration of the priests who served her. Eek! Perhaps I may be forgiven for having just a bit of The Fear regarding you, Cybele! :) :) :) > For those who doesn't know what about are we blattering and correct me if I > am not accurate enough Erik: You are absolutely correct in what you've said here. In fact, what a "convenient coincidence" you posted this just now, given the wonderful conversation Bruce and I had last night discussing Dhamma here at my place, where this very issue came up and I attempted to describe to him the role and symbolism of the dakini (khadro-ma), which as you note, means "sky-dancer" literally in the Tibetan, representing, as you also noted, represents the primordial wisdom of shunyata. My quick attempt to describe this to Bruce was far poorer than your excellent descriptions here of the function and symbolism of the dakini. > A Dakini in Vajrayana Buddhism is the inspiring power of consciousness, > usually depicted in iconography as a wrathful naked female figure (form of > manifestation). And as a side-note, those hooked-knives (gri-gug) they carry are NOT mere decorative accessories, but symbolize the function fo the dakini in severing all attachment, and at the very deepest levels of grasping. All tantric practitioners MUST at some point have encounters with the dakini--several actually, some wrathful, some semi-wrathful, some peaceful. These encounters are a necessary aspect of the tantric path leading to supreme Buddhahood according to tantric Buddhism. The dakini is one of the "Three Roots" (Guru, Yidam, Dakini), which are the inner and "secret" manifestations of Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha. The tales of the great tantric sages, the Mahasiddhas, are replete with stories of their encounters with the dakini, who are the supreme teacher manifested in feminine form--many times as ugly old hags, or those suffering great sickness. Sometimes as beautiful temptresses, who demonstrate the destructiveness of clinging to sensuality. > As semiwrathful or wrathful - yidam, the dakini has the task of integrating > the powers liberated by the practitioner in the process of visualization > (sadhana). And in their wrathful manifestation destroying ALL fixed conceptions of reality, using those vicious hooked knives to sever grasping and attachment at its very root. Mercilessly. > In Tibetan, Dakini is translated as khadroma. > Kha means 'celestial space', emptiness (shunyata) become an image; dro has > the meaning of walking and moving about; ma indicates the feminine gender in > substantive form. > Thus the khadroma is a female figure that moves on the highest level of > reality; her nakedness symbolizes knowledge of truth unveiled. > The homeland of the dakinis is said to be the mystic realm of Urgyen. > In Tantra Yoga the personification of the female energy is the Shakti - in > sanskrit literally 'force, power, energy': the consort of Shiva and > personification of primal energy, the force of - brahman, the dynamic aspect > of God. > The goddess Cybele is a shakti. ;-) There has never been a single moment of doubt in my mind about this, Cybele. > Beware of pissing me off. :-)))) I guess from this I can guess you're "only" semi-wrathful. That would be a nice change from the wrathful "destroyer" (or as my lama said to me in Sanskrit, "sudana") variety, for sure. Bruce should get a REAL kick out of this little thread, given our conversation last night!!! Love and HEALTHY respect, Erik 6934 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 9:28am Subject: The Philosophy of Emptiness I found this short article on line quite interesting. It's a good subject for careful pondering. Love Cybele The Philosophy of Emptiness (adapted from Zen and Western Thought, by Prof. Masao Abe, edited by Prof. William R. LaFleur, 1985, Honolulu 1989) In early Buddhism the theory of dependent origination and the philosophy of emptiness were still naively undifferentiated. It was Abhidharma Buddhism which awakened to a kind of philosophy of emptiness and set it up in the heart of Buddhism. But the method of its process of realization was to get rid of concepts of substantiality by analysing phenomenal things into diverse elements and thus advocating that everything is empty. Accordingly, Abhidharma Buddhism's philosophy of emptiness was based solely on analytic observation - hence it was later called the 'analytic view of emptiness'. It did not have a total realization of emptiness of the phenomenal things. Thus the overcoming of the concept of substantial nature or 'being' was still not thoroughly carried through. Abhidharma fails to overcome the substantiality of the analysed elements. Beginning with the Prajñaparamita-sutra, Mahayana Buddhist thinkers transcended Abhidharma Buddhism's analytic view of emptiness, erecting the standpoint which was later called the 'view of substantial emptiness'. This was a position which did not clarify the emptiness of phenomena by analysing them into elements. Rather, it insisted that all phenomena were themselves empty in principle, and insisted on the nature of the emptiness of existence itself. The Prajñaparamita-sutra emphasizes 'not being, and not not being'. It clarified not only the negation of being, but also the position of the double negation - the negation of non-being as the denial of being - or the negation of the negation. It thereby disclosed 'Emptiness' as free from both being and non-being, i.e. it revealed prajña-wisdom. But it was Nagarjuna who gave this standpoint of Emptiness found in the Prajñaparamita-sutra a thorough philosophical foundation by drawing out the implications of the mystical intuition seen therein and developing them into a complete philosophical realization. Nagarjuna criticized the proponents of substantial essence of his day who held that things really exist corresponding to concepts. He said that they had lapsed into an illusory view which misconceived the real state of the phenomenal world. He insisted that with the transcendence of the illusory view of concepts, true Reality appears as animitta (no-form, or non-determinate entity). But Nagarjuna rejected as illusory, not only the 'eternalist' view, which took phenomena to be real just as they are, but also the opposite 'nihilistic' view that emptiness and non-being are true reality. He took as the standpoint of Mahayana Emptiness an independent stand liberated from every illusory point of view connected with either affirmation or negation, being or non-being, and called that standpoint the 'Middle Way'. 6935 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 10:34am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Dakini it was Re: Brahmacariya: raaga-sati or raaga-dosa? Dear Erik > >--- "cybele chiodi" >wrote: > > Indeed honey that's what I observed in that post to you: that apart >in Tantra practices all religions are very much sex-phobic and lust- >fearing and as a consequence misogenous and depreciating of women. > > So glad to know that I am a Dakini. ;-))))) > >Yes, but of which sort I'm still trying to figure out (wrathful, >semi-wrathful, or peaceful) :) You are too smart, difficult try techniques of mind control with you Erik; the cult leaders would have a hard time with you and me. ;-) You continue trying to figure out and let me know when you draw some conclusion. If you need any clue, feel free to investigate. :0) > >If I take my cue from your name (and I take appellations with regard >to dakinis VERY seriously indeed), the historical cult of Cybele >always involved castration of the priests who served her. Eek! >Perhaps I may be forgiven for having just a bit of The Fear regarding >you, Cybele! :) :) :) Don't worry I reassure you that I would never waste such powerful energy demanding sacrifice of castration. You can express your devotion in other modalities much more appropriate. I would change the ritual in something much more celebrative, joyful and less truculent. ;-) > > > For those who doesn't know what about are we blattering and correct >me if I > > am not accurate enough Erik: > >You are absolutely correct in what you've said here. In fact, what a >"convenient coincidence" you posted this just now, given the >wonderful conversation Bruce and I had last night discussing Dhamma >here at my place, where this very issue came up and I attempted to >describe to him the role and symbolism of the dakini (khadro-ma), >which as you note, means "sky-dancer" literally in the Tibetan, >representing, as you also noted, represents the primordial wisdom of >shunyata. My quick attempt to describe this to Bruce was far poorer >than your excellent descriptions here of the function and symbolism >of the dakini. Being a representative of the kind I must live up expectations! Great, print it for him to read and give my warm regards plus a 'pull of ears' because he abbandoned me totally on d-l while I was suppporting him on a discussion he proposed, the coward male! ;-) I am joking, I could deal quite well. But I am envious, I wish I were there with you... :-( not fair, you have all the fun! By the way when you go to my room check on the books: apart the erotic ones ;-), I have some on Tantra, the left hand kind if might interest you. And off list I will give you the directions to visit a tantric temple in Chinatown area. Wow I would love drag you both around in all magic places I know there. But I will in future, I am sure. > > > A Dakini in Vajrayana Buddhism is the inspiring power of >consciousness, > > usually depicted in iconography as a wrathful naked female figure >(form of > > manifestation). > >And as a side-note, those hooked-knives (gri-gug) they carry are NOT >mere decorative accessories, but symbolize the function fo the dakini >in severing all attachment, and at the very deepest levels of >grasping. All tantric practitioners MUST at some point have >encounters with the dakini--several actually, some wrathful, some >semi-wrathful, some peaceful. These encounters are a necessary aspect >of the tantric path leading to supreme Buddhahood according to >tantric Buddhism. The dakini is one of the "Three Roots" (Guru, >Yidam, Dakini), which are the inner and "secret" manifestations of >Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha. > >The tales of the great tantric sages, the Mahasiddhas, are replete >with stories of their encounters with the dakini, who are the supreme >teacher manifested in feminine form--many times as ugly old hags, or >those suffering great sickness. Sometimes as beautiful temptresses, >who demonstrate the destructiveness of clinging to sensuality. I am not an ugly old hag I warn you! ;-))) > > > As semiwrathful or wrathful - yidam, the dakini has the task of >integrating > > the powers liberated by the practitioner in the process of >visualization > > (sadhana). > >And in their wrathful manifestation destroying ALL fixed conceptions >of reality, using those vicious hooked knives to sever grasping and >attachment at its very root. Mercilessly. > > > In Tibetan, Dakini is translated as khadroma. > > Kha means 'celestial space', emptiness (shunyata) become an image; >dro has > > the meaning of walking and moving about; ma indicates the feminine >gender in > > substantive form. > > Thus the khadroma is a female figure that moves on the highest >level of > > reality; her nakedness symbolizes knowledge of truth unveiled. > > The homeland of the dakinis is said to be the mystic realm of >Urgyen. > > In Tantra Yoga the personification of the female energy is the >Shakti - in > > sanskrit literally 'force, power, energy': the consort of Shiva and > > personification of primal energy, the force of - brahman, the >dynamic aspect > > of God. > > > The goddess Cybele is a shakti. ;-) > >There has never been a single moment of doubt in my mind about this, >Cybele. Good to know that your mind is so clear, Erik! :) Some males are a bit slow to understand it. > > > Beware of pissing me off. :-)))) > >I guess from this I can guess you're "only" semi-wrathful. That would >be a nice change from the wrathful "destroyer" (or as my lama said to >me in Sanskrit, "sudana") variety, for sure. Well that I know the Male Yidam are peaceful: bhagavat - active semiwrathful: daka - sympathy wrathful: heruka - compassion Female Yidam peaceful: bhagavati - knowledge of semiwrathful: dakini - supreme wrathful: dakini - reality Yidam is Tibetan and means lit. 'firm mind'. Which one could I be related to? The most widely invoked are Chenresi, Green - Tara or Diamond Sow Dorje Phagmo. :-) To give you a clue - in Thailand all monks give me an amulet with a female deity - Kuan Yin, the Goddess of Mercy. I have a beautiful statue in porcelain in my room that I bought in China, in Shanghai where there is an important temple. In India they would identify me as shakti with the characteristics of 'divine mother' but not Kali, which one would you guess? >Bruce should get a REAL kick out of this little thread, given our >conversation last night!!! > >Love and HEALTHY respect, >Erik > Sweetheart I accept your devotion and grant my blessings over you, all over! :) Love and divine cuddles Cybele 6936 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 0:56pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] No-Self - Anders Part 2 --- Gayan Karunaratne wrote: > Dear anders, > > You wrote-> > > > "There it is generally acknowledged that Nibbana is not the self on account > of the following teaching of the Buddha (in Pali): Sabbe dhammá anattá (AN > III.134), meaning "All things things are not-self." Dhammá is a word that > often refers to both conditioned and unconditioned things (of which there is > only Nirvana), such as in the following passage (AN IV.34): Yávatá bhikkhave > dhammá sankhatá vá asankhatá vá (meaning: "Whatever things [dhammá], monks, > there are, formed or unformed...) But the word dhammá is also used in a > different context: Dhammá aniccá (SN 4), which means: "Things are > impermanent." Since Nibbana obviously isn't impermanent, this means that the > word doesn't always imply the inclusion of unconditioned phenomena meaning > Nibbana, so this cannot be used to argue that Nibbana is not self. > Furtermore, there is not a single passage in the Pali Canon3 which > specifically states: "Nibbana is not the self (Anattá) or that there exists > no self at all. On the other hand, the Buddha goes to great lengths to > explain how conditioned phenomena are not the self. For instance, in one > scripture (SN XXXV.85), the Buddha analyses the world into 42 components and > finds that it is void of self. No mention of Nibbana there though." > > But whenever buddha used to describe this 'sabbe..' triplet he always said, > sabbe 'samkhaaraa' dukkha > sabbe 'samkhaaraa' aniccha > sabbe 'dhamma' anatta > > sabbe dhamma means all phenomena (conditioned and unconditioned) > sabbe samkhara means all conditioned phenomena. is nibbana an unconditioned phenomenon? is it a phenomenon at all, or a pre-existing condition? would a condition be a 'dhamma' of any kind? a 'thing' of any kind? I wouldn't think so, unless, in my acknowledged ignorance, I am misunderstanding the scope of the word 'dhamma'. Robert E. ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6937 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 0:58pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) --- cybele chiodi wrote: > Well I enjoy sex, so what - this makes me not suitable to walk this path? Just to get personal, are you attached to your enjoyment, or can you take it or leave it? That would seem to me to be the important issue, not the 'enjoyment'. Robert E. ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6938 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 1:03pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: No-Self - Anders Part 2 --- Derek Cameron wrote: > --- Anders Honoré > wrote: > > In the Buddha's second sermon (SN XXII.59) that he held after his > > awakening to the Unconditioned, it is even implied that Nibbana is > > the self > > Hi, Anders, > > My two cents' worth: > > I still think that talking about nibbaana as though it were an object > is what linguistic philosophers call a "category error." You can > construct sentences that make grammatical sense, but semantically > they're meaningless. > > From the way the word is used, it's clear that it's a state, or the > event that begins that state. It often comes at the end of one of > those lists of near-synonyms: "the stilling of all formations, the > relinquishing of all attachments, the destruction of craving, > dispassion, cessation, nibbaana." (That one's from MN 26.) what if true selfhood is also a state, rather than an object, a state with nothing added or subtracted, and the Buddha was reluctant to assert or deny anything about a 'self' because it would implicitly turn 'self' into an object by attributing properties or negative properties to 'it'? Robert E. ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6939 From: Christine Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 4:37pm Subject: Animals - Nivarana/Jhananga Dear All, Way back in response to my post no. 6275, gayan, Robert and Suan were most helpful with their responses. I have been browsing through a book 'The Abhidharma' by Peter Della Santina http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebidx.htm (under Books) which also seems to hint at a potential in animals to be able to be helped to a better rebirth. In Chapter 4 he says, "Five factors of absorption (Jhananga) are crucial to developing the states of meditation that result in the type of consciousness belonging to the form and formless spheres: (i) initial application (vitakka), (ii) sustained application (vichara) (iii)interest, enthusiasm, or rapture (piti) (iv) happiness or bliss (sukha) and (v) one-pointedness (ekaggata). These five factors are also evident in most types of consciousness, including the sense-sphere consciousness and even the consciousness of some of the more developed animals. In Chapter 11 he says The five hindrances (nivarana) are typical of very low levels of conscious development, such as the consciousness of animals, which is saturated with these factors. The presence of these hindrances means that ones' mind is totally conditioned and manipulated by various stimuli. In opposition to these five hindrances are the five factors of absorption, which are also present even in the consciousness of animals. The five absorptions counter and eventually eliminate the five hindrances. Thus we can reduce the controlling power of the hindrances to whatever extent we can cultivate the absorptions. In a sense we are standing at the cross-roads. All ten factors, hindrances and absorptions, are present in our minds, and it is a question of whether we allow the hindrances to dominate or develop the factors of intensification so that they begin to dominate our minds. This is a very important battle because as long as the hindrances predominate we are very likely to see the results in this life and in the next life, in the form of rebirth in unfavourable or miserable states. But if our minds are raised by cultivating the five factors of absorption, we reach a higher level of development in both this life and the next." So, with regard to the Hindrances - perhaps one can help by having a well-trained and disciplined animal,who is prevented(?) from doing too much wrong in order to assist it in having a better likelihood of a more favourable rebirth? But - what to do with regard to factors of absorption - I wonder how they are evident in animal consciousness and how they can be intensified? metta, Christine 6940 From: Derek Cameron Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 5:21pm Subject: Re: Brahmacariya: raaga-sati or raaga-dosa? Hi, Cybele, > Well Derek, I don't wear rose-tinted glasses as you know I know you don't -- that's why I asked you about it! It's interesting what you say about the monks' curiosity. I think you're absolutely right about them getting ordained too young. For *most* people, I think they really should have some experience of life before they ordain. But, of course, that's not the way it is. There's a travel book I really, really enjoyed by Italian journalist Tiziano Terzani called "A fortune teller told me." In it he writes that young women flirt with the temporary monks (you know, that 3- month ordination they do in Thailand) because they figure that handsome, well-behaved monk = handsome, well-behaved husband. But that's temporary monks, and that's different, I think. And I'm shocked (but only slightly!) to hear about monks shaking hands with you. Quite apart from the vinaya, it seems like a loss of the old-fashioned way of doing things to me. I was even surprised one day when a monk shook hands with *me*. I'd have been much more comfortable with the wai and smile routine. > Please if you become a monk and start ill treating me or > any woman I will > personally provide to kick you on your behind Derek to > awake you from self > deceit! ;-) I believe you, I believe you! :-) > Now I will reveal you something amusing - do you know I > wanted to be a > buddhist nun? And don't dare to laugh!!!! I wouldn't dare! > And you know what all the western monks have discouraged > me while the > eastern ones thought that I was quite meant to be a nun, > isn't funny? You would be a very good nun. You would bring a great freshness of perspective to it. But I'm assuming you don't want to do it any more? Anyway, I thank you for sharing your experiences. You're an astute observer of life, and you've been so many places. Thank you. Derek. 6941 From: Derek Cameron Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 6:04pm Subject: Re: No-Self - Anders Part 2 --- Robert Epstein wrote: > what if true selfhood is also a state, rather than an object, a state with nothing > added or subtracted, and the Buddha was reluctant to assert or deny anything about > a 'self' because it would implicitly turn 'self' into an object by attributing > properties or negative properties to 'it'? Yes. I think there's an approach to Christian theology called the "via negativa" where they come to understand God by removing false attributes rather than by adding positive ones. I also see parallels between early Buddhism and the "neti, neti" method of the Upanisads. One of my observations from reading the texts is that early Buddhism was essentialy a practice. But somehow it transitioned (at least in the literature) into a philosophical endeavor. Derek. 6942 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 8:32pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) Dear Robert > > > Well I enjoy sex, so what - this makes me not suitable to walk this >path? > >Just to get personal, are you attached to your enjoyment, or can you take >it or leave it? I am attached to many things Robert not only sex, why are you free of attachments? There are people who are not able to quit smoking or drinking coffee and aim to practice celibacy. I am prone to be realistic. And about attachments, you have to consider many other factors as past accumulations and present kamma; it's never a mere question of sheer will dealing with attachments. > >That would seem to me to be the important issue, not the 'enjoyment'. > >Robert E. > Well if you take a single sentence of what I declare from the original context, you are distorting the meaning I implied and using it to demonstrate your view. Affirming that enjoying without being attached is the important issue is worn out buddhist rethorical dear Robert. Why don't you expand the subject in a much more articulate way? Looking forward to it. Love Cybele 6943 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 8:55pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Howard (with PS to all) --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Robert (and Erik) - > For sure volition is conditioned. All dhammas other than nibbana > are > conditioned. If something were to arise without conditions, then its > arising > would be random. > However, how is the path to be followed except by exercise of > volition? Progress on the path requires that volition be consistently > exercised, a very strong volition, and a very great effort made as a > result > of that strong volition. Quite so. But let's not forget that the volition that is the conditioned dhamma (it is a cetasika, in fact) is not the same as the volition that conventionally speaking we exercise almost continually in our lives, the latter being a concept which represents a number of different conditioned dhammas/realities. I think this may also be the source of some of the different ideas about effort. The effort that we exert (conventionally speaking) is not the same as the cetasika/conditioned dhamma of the same name and that is also a factor of the Eightfold Path). When trying to understand about the dhammas referrd to in the teachings, it is always helpful to remember that they differ from the convnetional concept of the same name. Jon PS to all: We have just finished an interesting day of dhamma discussion here in Bangkok. Erik and Bruce joined regulars Sukin, Betty, Amara, Ivan and Ell in a fairly lively session with Khun Sujin. Robert joins the discussion when it continues tomorrow morning. Sarah and I have enjoyed meeting Erik and Bruce. Both have very keen interest and will undoubtedly both benefit from and contribute to the regular weekly discussions while they are here. 6944 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 8:55pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! Robert E --- Robert Epstein wrote: > --- Suan Lu Zaw wrote: > > >>So the answer to Erik's question is that memory performs the function > of noting the fact of nibbana having no signs.<< > > Dear Suan, > Please correct me if I'm wrong [and I mean that literally, not as an > expression], > but it seems to me that what you are saying is that Nibbana 'itself' > [which also > makes it sound like an object rather than an awakened state] is not > actually the > object of consciousness, but the concept of it is the object of > consciousness both > before and after it has been experienced. > > Nibbana itself being signless, would have no way itself of being > apprehended, even > while being 'experienced' as one's own state. But memory forming a > concept in > order to mark and communicate the presence of Nibbana, would refer to > the concept > as a pointer towards Nibbana itself. You may not have seen my earlier post in which i summarised a number of propositions found in the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha on these points (i have posted these again below). It is clear from the first 3 of those propositions, as I read them, that nibbana has an individual essence capable of being experienced by consciousness (and marked by sanna), and that nibbana is itself the object of consciousness for the person attaining each of the stages of enlightenment. Propositions 4 and 4.1 explain what exactly 'signlessness' means as an attribute of nibbana. It clearly does not refer to the lack of a characteristic or mark capable of being experienced by consciousness. Difficult to grasp, I know. I dont' pretend to understand, but simply quote this as the accepted orthodox teaching on this point. Jon 1. Nibbana is classified as one of the ultimate realities (paramattha dhammas). Ultimate realities are distinguished from concepts in that they exist by reason of their own intrinsic nature (sabhava). 2. Nibbana is the object of each of the 8 supramundane cittas (ie. the path and fruition cittas of the 4 stages of enlightenment) 3. Nibbana has one intrinsic nature (sabhava), which is that of being the unconditioned deathless element totally transcendent to the conditioned world. 4. Nibbana has 3 different aspects-- 4.1 It is called the void (sunnata) because it is devoid of greed, hatred, and delusion, and because it is devoid of all that is conditioned. 4.2 It is called signless (animitta) because it is free from the signs of greed, etc., and free from the signs of all conditioned things. 4.3 It is called desireless (appanihita) because it is free from the hankering of greed, etc., and because it is not desired by craving. 5. Nibbana is excluded from the category of the 5 aggregates because it lacks differentiation (such as past, present , future). [References: CMA Ch I, #2, #26-28; Ch VI, #31; Ch VII, #40] > It also seems to me that every experience is exactly like this in truth, > because > no experience actually is apprehended as an object while being > experienced, and > ultimately all experiences are likewise 'signless'. Only objects have > something > to apprehend, and even this is only done by maintaining the concept of > the object > for a duration of more than a moment and turning it into a remembered or > known > object beyond the immediate experience. > > Thus, if I am not missing something which I hope you'll point out to me, > this > would be a proof that all experiences actually partake of the same > signlessness > and primordial reality of Nibbana, and that Nibbana is not only our very > and only > actual nature, outside of concepts of one kind or another including > memories, but > it is also the very and only signless reality of all existence. > > Robert E. 6945 From: Derek Cameron Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 9:22pm Subject: What is vipassanaa? Nowadays there are many books, teachers and centers teaching vipassanaa. Of course, they use the word to designate a certain way of practicing. But how is the word vipassanaa used in the original sutta-s? It's actually a relatively rare word in the sutta-s. The most often- mentioned meditation practices there are sammaa-sati and sammaa- samaadhi. And when the word vipassanaa does appear, it's generally in the pair samatho ca vipassanaa ca (e.g. DN 33). The DN commentary glosses these as samatho = samaadhi, and vipassanaa = pañña. But in SN 43.12, samatha, vipassanaa, samaadhi and sati are all treated separately -- as though they were distinct. And in SN 35.245 samatha and vipassanaa are compared to a "swift pair of messengers." So, in the sutta-s themselves, what exactly does vipassanaa mean? And why the samatha-vipassanaa pairing as well as samaadhi-sati? Derek. 6946 From: Howard Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 8:35pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Hi, Jon - In a message dated 7/28/01 8:56:00 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Jonothan Abbott writes: > Howard (with PS to all) > > --- Howard wrote: > > Hi, Robert (and Erik) - > > > For sure volition is conditioned. All dhammas other than nibbana > > are > > conditioned. If something were to arise without conditions, then its > > arising > > would be random. > > However, how is the path to be followed except by exercise of > > volition? Progress on the path requires that volition be consistently > > exercised, a very strong volition, and a very great effort made as a > > result > > of that strong volition. > > Quite so. But let's not forget that the volition that is the conditioned > dhamma (it is a cetasika, in fact) is not the same as the volition that > conventionally speaking we exercise almost continually in our lives, the > latter being a concept which represents a number of different conditioned > dhammas/realities. > > I think this may also be the source of some of the different ideas about > effort. The effort that we exert (conventionally speaking) is not the > same as the cetasika/conditioned dhamma of the same name and that is also > a factor of the Eightfold Path). > > When trying to understand about the dhammas referrd to in the teachings, > it is always helpful to remember that they differ from the convnetional > concept of the same name. > > Jon > =============================== Well, I don't know. The following, which deals with the path factor of right Effort, is copied from the Access to Insight site. It all sounds quite conventional to me. It seems to discuss something which is *do-able*, whereas a "right effort" dealing with abhidhammic citta factors and "ultimate realities" seems to me to be something rather beyond practicing. The material follows. 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) ********************************************************** Right Effort samma vayamo Right Effort is the sixth of the eight path factors in the Noble Eightfold Path, and belongs to the concentration division of the path. The definition (the four Right Exertions): > "And what, monks, is right effort? [i] "There is the case where a monk > generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his > intent for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that > have not yet arisen. [ii] "He generates desire, endeavors, activates > persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the abandonment of > evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen. [iii] "He generates desire, > endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake > of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen. [iv] "He > generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his > intent for the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, > development, & culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen: This, > monks, is called right effort." > >> -- SN XLV.8 > Abandon the unskillful, develop the skillful > "Abandon what is unskillful, monks. It is possible to abandon what is > unskillful. If it were not possible to abandon what is unskillful, I would > not say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' But because it is possible to > abandon what is unskillful, I say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' If > this abandoning of what is unskillful were conducive to harm and pain, I > would not say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' But because this > abandoning of what is unskillful is conducive to benefit and pleasure, I > say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' "Develop what is skillful, monks. > It is possible to develop what is skillful. If it were not possible to > develop what is skillful, I would not say to you, 'Develop what is > skillful.' But because it is possible to develop what is skillful, I say to > you, 'Develop what is skillful.' If this development of what is skillful > were conducive to harm and pain, I would not say to you, 'Develop what is > skillful.' But because this development of what is skillful is conducive to > benefit and pleasure, I say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.'" > >> -- AN II.19 > Abandoning the wrong factors of the path > "One tries to abandon wrong view & to enter into right view: This is one's > right effort... "One tries to abandon wrong resolve & to enter into right > resolve: This is one's right effort... "One tries to abandon wrong speech & > to enter into right speech: This is one's right effort... "One tries to > abandon wrong action & to enter into right action: This is one's right > effort... "One tries to abandon wrong livelihood & to enter into right > livelihood: This is one's right effort." > >> -- MN 117 > 6947 From: Howard Date: Sat Jul 28, 2001 9:03pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Hi again, Jon - In a message dated 7/28/01 12:37:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Howard writes: > > Well, I don't know. The following, which deals with the path factor > of > right Effort, is copied from the Access to Insight site. It all sounds > quite > conventional to me. It seems to discuss something which is *do-able*, > whereas > a "right effort" dealing with abhidhammic citta factors and "ultimate > realities" seems to me to be something rather beyond practicing. The > material > follows. > > With metta, > Howard > ================================= Also relevant to the notion of the importance of volition on the path is, I think, the path factor of Right Intention, which, again, seems (to me) to be quite conventional. With regard to this, I give the link to Bhikkhu Bodhi's comments on the Noble 8-Fold Path from the Access to Insight site. Chapter 3 deals with Right Intention. The link is http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/waytoend.html An important disclaimer, Jon: Obviously, the material covered at this link, and the material quoted in my last post, is material I think is relevant, but it is *not* anything I think you don't already know all about! I just thought these references might be of general interest with regard to this specific topic, and I put them forward only to help express my thinking on this matter. (I'm well aware that your knowledge of the Dhamma goes way beyond mine!) 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) 6948 From: gayan Date: Sun Jul 29, 2001 8:18am Subject: Re: No-Self - Anders Part 2 dear robert e., 'dhamma' is the word with the greatest scope , found in pali. rgds. > > > > But whenever buddha used to describe this 'sabbe..' triplet he always said, > > sabbe 'samkhaaraa' dukkha > > sabbe 'samkhaaraa' aniccha > > sabbe 'dhamma' anatta > > > > sabbe dhamma means all phenomena (conditioned and unconditioned) > > sabbe samkhara means all conditioned phenomena. > > is nibbana an unconditioned phenomenon? is it a phenomenon at all, or a > pre-existing condition? would a condition be a 'dhamma' of any kind? a 'thing' > of any kind? I wouldn't think so, unless, in my acknowledged ignorance, I am > misunderstanding the scope of the word 'dhamma'. > > Robert E. > > > 6949 From: Erik Date: Sun Jul 29, 2001 8:49am Subject: Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... As usual, Howard, (and Sarah was commenting on how appreciated your insights are here and I could only agree vehemently), you go STRAIGHT to the heart of the matter, bypassing any the irrelevant junk, and somehow always seem to find the exact passages where Lord Buddha speaks clearly, succinctly, on the matters under discussion. If the definition of wisdom is "knowing what to put down and what to take up," I can only offer many deep bows to the wisdom you CONSISTENTLY demonstrate here in DSG. And anyone who didn't take the time to read the passages quoted or the links given may wish to do so and read and meditate on them very carefully. And, on a different note, I offer MANY MANY thanks to Khun Sujim who I finally met yesterday for some of the most amazing Dhamma discussion I've ever had the privilege to participate in, and the kindness demonstrated and amazing gifts offered by ALL the DSG'ers I've somehow had the amazing kamma to come in contact with so far: Amara, Betty, Sukin, Bruce, Jonothan & Sarah, Robert, Ivan, and "Rin- chen" (meaning "great jewel" in Tibetan, who has offered to help teach me Thai!) :) It's obvious there is so much to learn from these wonderful, wonderful friends in the Dhamma! 6950 From: Howard Date: Sun Jul 29, 2001 5:54am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was ... Hi, Erik - Thanks for your very kind words, and for reporting on Sarah's. 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) 6951 From: ppp Date: Sun Jul 29, 2001 6:09am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: thailand/west Hi, Erik: Sorry for not knowing your real name. So, do you know Tibetan? tadao 6952 From: ppp Date: Sun Jul 29, 2001 6:18am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Buddha's innovations (was Satipatthana etc.) Hi, Derek: As for the Majjhima Patipataa, I do think that it is uniquely Buddhism. It is generally equated to the Eight Noble Eightfold Path. If you ask what the Middle Path to such people as Kun Sujin and Kun Nina, they would say that whenever there is sammaa sati, you are right on the Middle Path at that moment. I think this kind of answer desribes the Middle Path in its ultimate sense. Its more conventional sense is what you have already refered to: i.e, avoiding the both extremes. I think the notion of the Middle Path can be very vague and "wide", which can fit to desribe any practices of any individuals who understand the Dhamma to a certain extent. I think that this vaguenss is not the shortcoming but the beautiy of the Buddhism. And I think that this vagueness applies to the most of the Buddhist concepts. (I am slightly deviating from the main issue here.) In my interpretation, the Buddha was like some GP having his clinic in downtown Vancouver, he refused to be a medical professor at UBC. All the records he left for us were the medical files of his patients. His successors tried to establish the Medical Philosophy based on his medical files. But given that the Buddha's main goal was the treatment of his patients, there are tentions between the Medical philosophy created by his sucessors and the medical descriptions found in his files. So, there are many many Buddhist concepts which may appear to be very vague if you treat him as a medical professor or medical encycopedia. (Further deviating from the main topic) When I teach, I always tell my undergradutes that they should not treat me like a walking encyclopedia or even as an instructor, but should treat me as a facilitator, who is providing them with teachig materials. It is students' duty to do their best to understand the materials. I also tell them that I am providing just one wheel, and they have to come up with another wheel so that they can assemble a bycycle to travel. I think the Buddha's teaching is very much like that. You cannot exptec the Buddha to define everything. He is providing just a wheel, you have to come up with your own wheel so that you can travel to, say, Halifax (=nibbaana). The quality of your bycyle is totally depends on your own effort. Those who are interested mostly in Buddhist philosophy are those who are travelling to Halifax by a unicyle. And those who try to travel there by crawling on the ground are those who are on one extreme. And those who rather stay in the beautiful British Columbia or try to go to Las Vegas with their SUV are on the other exreme. The point I wanted to make is that the actual definition of the Middle Path is highly idiosycratic. As long as one is willing to assemble a bycycle, he should be regarded as one who is on the Middle Path (despite the fact that its ultimate sense refer to the Nobel Eightfold Path.) tadao (Sorry, my brain is not working today) 6953 From: Erik Date: Sun Jul 29, 2001 4:06pm Subject: Abhidharma, Translation, Etc. --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Erik: > Sorry for not knowing your real name. > So, do you know Tibetan? Ha! I've been tutored personally by one of Jeffrey Hopkins' top Tibetan (and Sanskrit) Ph.D students, and due to the rpsence of too many mental obscurations (inappropriate conditions at present--in the same way there were too many obscurations in the mind before recently to begin Abhidharma studies in depth), the words just don't seem to stick. And anyway, I have far bigger fish to fry at the moment with Abhidharma studies, and I wish to remain as uundistracted as possible to assimilate as clearly as possible this profound and subtle system of teaching. I can read Tibetan characters and recite from Tibetan (or could, at least, when I was in better practice), but as far as comprehending the thorny syntactical structure of scriptural Tibetan, or even recalling all but the most basic terms, forget about it--too much ma- rik-pa (avijja). Also, there's a huge difference between scriptural Tibetan and colloquial Tibetan, and new students (even native Tibetans) of the Tibetan Dharma have a big vocabulary to get rolling, so it's not a "gimme" by any means. My intention, however, is to become a lotsawa (translator), but given I'm in Thailand at present I have to first cover Thai just to get by here, then Pali, to ensure I am able to complete the foundational studies of the Abhidhamma I feel is a requirement to become an effective translator. So the in-depth study of the Tibetan language is quite a few years off yet as I see it (but then who knows what vipaka will arise in the next moment?) And of course, to be REALLY serious, at some point I will have to learn Sanskrit as well--following the example of my teachers and senior studens of my lama, who have translated the Abhidharmakosa from both Tibetan AND Sanskrit, as a part of their Abhidharma study and learning exercise. At present, my strategy for learning the Abhidharma--other than paying careful attention to Khun Sujin per Amara's kind reminder to this voluble debate fanatic to shut the hell up and listen! :)--is working on the computerized input of the primary categories (khanda, cittas, cetasikas, paramattha dhamma, bodhipakkiya dhammas, paticca samuppada) and at least the basic relations (paccaya) among them to hyperconnect the exact wording of the Pali (and later Sanskrit & Tibetan) texts, into an "AI" Knowledge-Based System (KBS) (which I have worked with career-wise at Xerox's AI labs many years ago) which conveniently happens to have a hypertext web front-end! Incidentally, this KBS is structured EXACTLY the same way as the Patthana. Funny how AI researchers (through trial-ane-error) and Abhidhammists wound up arriving at the same way of representing knowledge, eh? Basically, this means modeling "entities" (for us, non-self-existent entities, of course!) and the relations (paccaya) between these entities, for example the way avijja paccaya sankhara, which opccaya, using the rpecise wording gfrom the Pali texts describing these relations. I expect this to take quite some time, however, and have only begun and input the barest outline so far. Perhaps at some point it will be something that can be made available for peoklpe freely on the Web. Perhaps not. Regardless, it's a wonderful exercise for working with the actual Abhidharma texts, which is my primary motivation for doing this at present. Once the next three years of Abhidharma studies are complete, I will return full-bore to Tibetan language and Dharma studies and probably spend some significant time at my home monastery, Sera Mey, for study of both the FULL classical Tibetan Gelug-pa presentation of the Dharma to learn the equivalent knowledge of a Geshe (though I can't become a real Geshe since I'm not a monk) and the Tibetan scriptural (and colloquial) Tibetan, to prepare for a career as a lotsawa (translator), which is reallty the focus of the group I've wound up in (http://www.world-view.org/directors/index.html). Actually, our group in New Jersey is where the Gelug-pa lineage "landed" in North America (believe it or not, there are three, em THREE!, Gelug-pa temples in this little backwater Jersey town), with Geshe Wangyal, who was Robert Thurman's (whose daughter actress Uma may be better know to those outside of the Tibetan scholarship realm) teacher and the first Geshe to come to North America. Based solely on what is happening there and the function being performed, our group is the American equivalent of the Tibetan "Kadampa" lineage (NOT the "New Kadampa" group based in the UK, which is altogether a different question). The Kadampas were the students of the Dharma (and later gurus, inclding the famed Marpa Lotsawa, guru of the great Tibetan yogi Milarepa who some on this list, from last evening, may recall hearing a little story about thanks to Mr. Khun Sukin's extraordinary gift to me) who transmitted the Indian Buddhist Dharma to Tibet (many dying of illness going to and from the Land of Snows to India--TRULY dedicated to the point of even gicving up their lives for the Dharma), who served as the translators (and transmitters and lineage gurus for the present system of Tibetan Buddhism) of the Sanskrit texts into Tibetan. Given the Buddha said the Dharma should be taught to us in our native tongue, this is a critical exercise in terms of transmitting this living (and extremely high-voltage) lineage to North America. It simply cannot be lost! I feel compelled beyond logical reason to be a "preserver of the Dharma" in whatever very limited capacity I am able to assist in this process. At present, the top overall priority is the inputting of the precious (and unspeakably rare) Tibetan texts into ASCII, a project which was begun by Geshe Michael Roach--the first American Geshe and senior student of my lama. He began the "Asian Classics Input Project" (http://www.asianclassics.org,/ and for a neat story--the author Erik Davis is NOT THIS Erik!!!, see this link: http://www.levity.com/figment/dharma.html). The other and concurrent priority is the translation of the most essential Tibetan texts into English, which has also begun. The original transmission of the Dharma from India to Tibet took around 400 years, and I'm hoping with the Internet now, and the speed of communications, and the possibility of on-line collaboration, this process can be speeded greatly. This is another reason I'm interested in seeing the Abhidharma (both the Pali version AND the Abhidharmakosa) input into a form that can be used as reference using full hyperlinking between terms and relations, because of how I suspect this may assist the translation process in terms of clarifying certain subleties in terms & definitions--which are ovbvioously critical whenever embarking on any major and systematic translation effort. Already this has begun (at least in concept and design, if not in execution) with portions of the ACIP texts, though not using the entities & relations method of "sankhara paccaya sankhara" as in the Abhidharma--rather, more straightforward indexing and cross- referencing via text-search facilities, which is still a major coup-- quite probably "good enough" as is (but what the heck, perhaps a hyperlinked structure of the Abhidharma would be of assistance as well). To be honest, it was Geshe Michael Roach who inspired this nascent effort (and as transmitter of the CORRECT Dharma inspired me to pursue the equivalent understanding of geshe as well). And I hope this seriously flawed collection of khandas will be able to do some tiny justice, in whatever feeble and imperfect way it will surely be, to this enormously important undertaking--for the sake of all sentient beings. Anyway, that's a bit more than I imagine you'd expected for such a simple question! :) :) :) *** May all beings have happiness and the causes of happiness; May all be free from suffering and the causes of suffering; May all never be separated from the sorrowless joy; And may all live in equanimity, free from the afflictions of greed, hatred, and delusion. 6954 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jul 29, 2001 9:55pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] What is vipassanaa? op 28-07-2001 15:22 schreef Derek Cameron op Derek: > Nowadays there are many books, teachers and centers teaching > vipassanaa. Of course, they use the word to designate a certain way > of practicing. But how is the word vipassanaa used in the original > sutta-s? > > It's actually a relatively rare word in the sutta-s. The most often- > mentioned meditation practices there are sammaa-sati and sammaa- > samaadhi. > > And when the word vipassanaa does appear, it's generally in the pair > samatho ca vipassanaa ca (e.g. DN 33). > > The DN commentary glosses these as samatho = samaadhi, and vipassanaa > = pañña. > > But in SN 43.12, samatha, vipassanaa, samaadhi and sati are all > treated separately -- as though they were distinct. > > And in SN 35.245 samatha and vipassanaa are compared to a "swift pair > of messengers." > > So, in the sutta-s themselves, what exactly does vipassanaa mean? And > why the samatha-vipassanaa pairing as well as samaadhi-sati? Dear Derrek, the development of vipassana, of satipatthana or of the eightfold Path, it all amounts to the same. It is the development of pa~n~naa that clearly knows the characteristics of dhammas. This has been taught in all parts of the scriptures, even though the word vipassana may not often occur. For example, in the Kindred Sayings (IV, Fourth Fifty Ch 3, § 204, Judas tree) the word dassana.m, seeing is used: translated by the PTS as insight. Dassati and passati (in vipassanaa) are both seeing. We should consider what should be seen? How is this seeing pure? We read, "friend, when a monk understands as they really are the arising and the destruction of the sixfold sense-sphere, to that extent is his insight fully developed." Thus, seeing all realities that appear through the six doors as they are, as impermanent. Is that not the goal? As Jon recently explained so clearly, we should not see the factors of the eightfold Path as a series of steps or a number of qualities each to be developed separately. Even if they are treated separately, they have to developed together. Without pa~n~naa the other factors are not factors of the eightfold Path. Jim explained the word vipassanaa: < the Patisambhidhamagga com. gives the following interpretation of vipassanaa: "Aniccataadivasena vividhehi aakaarehi dhamma passatii ti vipassanaa." It sees realities in various aspects by way of impermanence and so on.> In the "Path of Discrimination" you will find many passages on insight and the stages of insight, Treatise on Knowledge, Ch XVII, Behaviour. Buddhaghosa in his commentaries uses the word vipassana very frequently: it should know the khandhas, the dhatus, the ayatanas, thus whatever appears through the six doors, again and again. Jim mentioned that the Buddha Vipassii was given this name, I am delighted with this viceyya, viceyya passati, he sees constantly investigating. I need this reminder, I forget "good old seeing and good old visible object" as Jon so aptly remarked. It reminds me that just investigating once or twice is not enough. It is really difficult to know what is hearing and what is sound, how we mix up the two. But we find this not interesting enough, we rather think of "stories" about people and things. We may find situations very important. But, as Sarah recently wrote to Cybele, Robert wrote to Sukin:< When we are listening to dhamma or discussing or reading the texts, what cittas are present? Isn't there seeing and visible object, sound and hearing, bhavangacittas... It all points to understand the anattaness of dhammas that are arising now. These dhammas are arising right while listening or considering- now is the time to understand.> I believe that in this way we shall understand what vipassana is, we shall not worry how often this word is used in early texts, or whether it has been used more often in later texts. It is the message we find in the whole Tipitaka that counts: investigation of realities appearing now, so that we gradually can understand their true nature of anatta. "Constantly investigating he sees. " Best wishes, Nina. 6955 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Sun Jul 29, 2001 10:14pm Subject: Meeting DSG friends in Bkk Dear Friends, Just back to Hong Kong after a really wonderful weekend in Bangkok..... Such a treat to listen to Khun Sujin (who didn't even know we were coming and thought I was calling her from Hong Kong), to see old friends and especially to meet and spend time with Bruce and Erik for the first time. Erik is just as intense in real life as here - like he's just come off the NY trading floor - and very excited to have so many new friends who are so happy to debate with him. He talks at ten times the pace (and quantity) of most Thais but everyone appreciates his sincere interest in dhamma and many topics were brought up by him which have been discussed here....Bruce, on the other hand, as here, is very happy lurking in a corner and could have come out of a zen temple.....As on dsg, he's happy to bring up the right questions and make appropriate witty comments as occasion arises. This morning Rob joined us too and as we hadn't seen him in 18mths or so. Time with him would have made the trip worthwhile in itself for me. Lots and lots of lobha (so natural as Cybele reminds us), buts lots of opportunities for helpful reminders and reflections which I'm sure will be so useful when I start back teaching tomorrow after quite a long break! Some of the topics that come to mind quickly before I get ready for bed and tomorrow: intention, rt effort, dukkha, consideration of the Teachings, hindrances, samatha, realities and concepts, nibbana, meditation, anatta, characteristic vs intrinsic nature, nothingness vs emptiness, suitable conditions for awareness!!! I also enjoyed getting to know Bruce and Erik socially over breakfasts and lunches and spending time with the others inc. Sukin and Betty from dsg. Tadao, K.Sujin is so little changed from the old days in both appearance, manner and word.... whatever the story, she always so gently and kindly reminds us of realities now in just the same way as before....she was very happy to hear that you've joined dsg and are interested to discuss dhamma again. Gayan and others, don't worry, we're going to keep working hard so we can make the rounds and visit you all in time (unless you have a chance to meet us in Bkk)!! Best wishes for now, Sarah p.s Howard, yes, I was interested to hear that Erik had met you and we excanged positve comments....of course, that doesn't mean we always agree!! More later! Cybele, Bruce sent his regards and says he's often 'too busy and too lazy to write...' 6956 From: m. nease Date: Sun Jul 29, 2001 11:14pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Derek Hello, Derek, Have you ever compiled a list of what you take to be early vs. later material? Would make interesting reading I think. mike --- Derek Cameron wrote: > Hi, Jon, > > --- Jonothan Abbott > wrote: > > Why don't you give it a try! > > Okay, here goes. > > There's various clues you can use to differentiate > between earlier > and later material. Tadao mentioned one a few days > ago -- namely, the > use of archaic word-forms in early material. I won't > list all > possible tools used to stratify the nikaaya-s. > Instead I'll just > refer to those that are relevant to our discussion > of the > Mahasatipa.t.thaana Sutta (DN 22). > > (1) Over time, ordinary words become used in > specialized, technical > meanings. Look at the word dhamma. In the early > materials, it just > means teaching. But later on it comes to have the > specifically > Buddhist meaning of mind-object. And in DN 22 we can > already see the > word used in this later sense. The fourth section of > DN 22, the > section on dhammaanupassanaa uses the word dhamma > not only for > teachings, but also for mind-objects such as the > five hindrances. So, > this is an indication of the lateness of the > material. > > (2) Literary form. The early material consists of > simple statements > and propositions. Later materials take the form of > explanations, > analysis and commentary. Now, look at the > presentation of the Four > Noble Truths toward the end of DN 22. We have the > usual statement > that birth is suffering, old age is suffering, etc. > But THEN in DN 22 > we have analysis of each of these terms -- what is > birth? what is old > age? Each of these terms is commented upon within > the sutta itself. > The use of the commentarial formal is again an > indication of relative > lateness. > > (3) Elaboration of simple ideas comes after the > simple ideas > themselves. The early material presents sati > (mindfulness) without > much in the way of elaboration. But here we have a > whole discourse on > what just this one point means. Again, this suggests > it is later than > the simple proposition of the Noble Eightfold Path. > > (4) Absence of concentration meditation as part of > the path. The > Noble Eightfold Path is a core, early teaching -- it > occurs almost > everywhere. But in DN 22 we have sati without > samaadhi. Since the > early teachings and the Buddha's own practice > included samaadhi, and > this one doesn't, we can infer that DN 22 is late > rather than early. > > Derek. > > > > ===== nothing personal... 6957 From: Derek Cameron Date: Sun Jul 29, 2001 11:52pm Subject: Re: Early vs Late (was Theravada and Satipathana - Derek) --- "m. nease" wrote: > Have you ever compiled a list of what you take to be > early vs. later material? Would make interesting > reading I think. Mike, This is a subject that fascinates me. One thing I've quickly learned is that, even after a century and a quarter of scholarship, there are very few unanimously-agreed conclusions. Still, I continue to read the sutta-s with an historical, text-critical awareness. When I was at university I took some courses on the Old Testament and the New Testament, and this is where I learned to approach texts from this perspective. One angle that interests me right now is to notice who the audience is in the sutta-s. I distinguish three phases: (1) The Buddha's earliest audiences were people who were already ascetics. There was no need for them to leave their homes and "go forth" because they had already gone forth. Moreover, they lived alone, as solitary recluses, rather than in organized communities of monks. (2) In a second stage of development, people (men first, women later) would leave their homes and go forth specifically to follow the Buddha. They began to live in monastic communities, with buildings specifically donated to them, as opposed to living alone. (3) In a third stage, householders would remain householders -- i.e., NOT go forth -- and yet still follow the Buddha. For example, the Sigaalaka Sutta, Advice to Householders (DN 31) is clearly late by these criteria. The most extensive analysis I know of is G. C. Pande's "Studies in the Origins of Buddhism," 4th edition published 1995 by Motilal Banarsidass. I bought my copy mail order from Vedams Books in India http://www.vedamsbooks.com/relbuddh.htm but in the U.S. you may also be able to get it from South Asia Books http://www.southasiabooks.com/ Derek. 6958 From: m. nease Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 0:05am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Early vs Late (was Theravada and Satipathana - Derek) Hello, Derek, This IS an interesting approach, nice to see something good come out of biblical study. I now recall asking nearly the same question a long time ago, of whom I forget (Jinavamsa, maybe?)--he recommended the same book. Thanks again. mike p.s. Actually, your points about the progression (-expansion) of the teaching over the Buddha's lifetime are fairly self-evident in the Suttas (in the Vinaya too)--I was more curious about the construction angle, verses being an older form and so on. I've always taken the Dhammapada verses, for example, as being later--what about the Udana verses? --- Derek Cameron wrote: > --- "m. nease" > wrote: > > Have you ever compiled a list of what you take to > be > > early vs. later material? Would make interesting > > reading I think. > > Mike, > > This is a subject that fascinates me. One thing I've > quickly learned > is that, even after a century and a quarter of > scholarship, there are > very few unanimously-agreed conclusions. Still, I > continue to read > the sutta-s with an historical, text-critical > awareness. When I was > at university I took some courses on the Old > Testament and the New > Testament, and this is where I learned to approach > texts from this > perspective. > > One angle that interests me right now is to notice > who the audience > is in the sutta-s. I distinguish three phases: > > (1) The Buddha's earliest audiences were people who > were already > ascetics. There was no need for them to leave their > homes and "go > forth" because they had already gone forth. > Moreover, they lived > alone, as solitary recluses, rather than in > organized communities of > monks. > > (2) In a second stage of development, people (men > first, women later) > would leave their homes and go forth specifically to > follow the > Buddha. They began to live in monastic communities, > with buildings > specifically donated to them, as opposed to living > alone. > > (3) In a third stage, householders would remain > householders -- i.e., > NOT go forth -- and yet still follow the Buddha. > > For example, the Sigaalaka Sutta, Advice to > Householders (DN 31) is > clearly late by these criteria. > > The most extensive analysis I know of is G. C. > Pande's "Studies in > the Origins of Buddhism," 4th edition published 1995 > by Motilal > Banarsidass. I bought my copy mail order from Vedams > Books in India > http://www.vedamsbooks.com/relbuddh.htm but in the > U.S. you may also > be able to get it from South Asia Books > http://www.southasiabooks.com/ > > Derek. > > ===== nothing personal... 6959 From: Derek Cameron Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 0:13am Subject: Re: Buddha's innovations (was Satipatthana etc.) Hi, Tadao, > I think the notion of the Middle Path can be very vague and "wide", > which can fit to desribe any practices of any individuals who > understand the Dhamma to a certain extent. > I think that this vaguenss is not the shortcoming but the beautiy of > the Buddhism. Me too. Imagine what would have happened if the Buddha has spoken just the first few words of the first sermon -- not this extreme, not that extreme (SN 56.11) -- and then stopped there, and never said another word. Probably very few people would have understood what he was saying. But yes, I think there is a beautiful, clean aesthetic in teaching by denying negatives rather than asserting positives. Nothing to hold on to. > And I think that this vagueness applies to > the most of the Buddhist concepts. Particularly the teaching about the five aggregates not being self. This form of teaching makes no statements, either way, about whether there is or is not a self. Again, nothing to hold on to. > In my interpretation, the Buddha was like some > GP having his clinic in downtown Vancouver, he refused to be a > medical professor at UBC. Love the Canadian-content in your example! > When I teach, I always > tell my undergradutes that they should not treat me like a walking > encyclopedia or even as an instructor, but should treat me as a > facilitator, who is providing them with teachig materials. And can we go so far as to say that about the dhamma? That dhamma can be learned, but not taught? > (Sorry, my brain is not working today) For someone whose brain is not working, you make some pretty good points! Best regards, Derek. 6960 From: Erik Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 0:21am Subject: Re: Buddha's innovations (was Satipatthana etc.) --- "Derek Cameron" wrote: > I think there is a beautiful, clean aesthetic in > teaching by denying negatives rather than asserting positives. > Nothing to hold on to. Bingo. 6961 From: Howard Date: Sun Jul 29, 2001 8:25pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting DSG friends in Bkk Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 7/29/01 10:15:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Sarah Procter Abbott writes: > p.s Howard, yes, I was interested to hear that Erik had met you and we > excanged > positve comments....of course, that doesn't mean we always agree!! More > later! > > ============================ ;-)) Yes, I'm aware that we don't always agree! Likewise, there is not always agreement between Jon and me, between Robert and me, and between Amara (who I dearly wish would return to DSG) and me, and even between Erik and me, but I respect and admire all of you (and OF COURSE Nina!), and I learn a great deal from you all. 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) 6962 From: Derek Cameron Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 1:00am Subject: Re: Early vs Late (was Theravada and Satipathana - Derek) > I was more curious about the construction > angle, verses being an older form and so on. I've > always taken the Dhammapada verses, for example, as > being later--what about the Udana verses? Hi, Mike, I'm afraid my Pali isn't up to commenting on metre and archaisms. Maybe Sean or Jim can say something about this? Derek. 6963 From: Derek Cameron Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 2:07am Subject: Re: Early vs Late (was Theravada and Satipathana - Derek) --- "m. nease" wrote: > what about the Udana verses? Mike, I just realized that Peter Masefield, who has published translations of both the Udaana and its commentaries, is a contributor to the new Pali group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Pali Derek. 6964 From: ppp Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 0:09am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Buddha's innovations (was Satipatthana etc.) Hi, Derek: With respect to your question of whether the Dhamma can be learnt/ can be taught, I think, there have always been insightful people, due possibly to their previous accumulation of wisdom, who were able to figure out what the essense of the Buddha's teaching is all about. (In my own view, Khun Sujin is one of those rather rare people.) The Buddha's successors did their best to comment on the orignal teaching of the Buddha as in details as possible so that its essence (documented as integral part of the Theravada Buddhism) would retain its recovebility. (think a sailboat here) In the above sense, we can safely say that the Dhamma is learnable. But, as well illustrated in the famous sutta with a hypothetical guy with a pierced arrow, if one pursues the Dhamma with the attitude that one has to get a clear explantion on every Buddhist concept, then, that person would possibly get disappointed. (For that type of people, we may say that the Dhamma is not learnable.) The above seemingly shortcoming of the Buddhism should, however, not be treated as that the Dhamma is untautable. If it were, Gotama Buddha wouldn't have done so. The fact that he himself spent for decades to spread his teaching indictes that the Dhamma is taughtable. Even thought the Dhamma is taughtable, it is not meant for everybody. Even in suttas, we can see that there were occationally people who refused to accept hit teaching. So, Dhamma can be taught only to those who are willing to listen, willing to see the value in his teaching, willing to put one's effort, and who are not going to lose the sight of what the Buddhism is all about (ie. cessestion of all the sufferings). (The Buddha as a GP can prescribe a medicene, but it is not his position to force his patients to swallow it. It's all up to us.) tadao 6965 From: ppp Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 3:30am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Hi, Erick: It's nice to hear that you've finally met Khun Sujin, and impressed by her "qualities" (gu.na). tadao 6966 From: Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2) Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 0:03pm Subject: the moment in between Dear all, I was lurking a while because I couldn't really make head or tail what are all of you are discussing... however I have a question... in between the arising and falling of a resultant kamma, is there 1) a moment where no resultant kamma arise (be it bad or good) ex... say a resultant kamma having a cycle of 10 days, will the next resultant kamma follow immediately after the dissipation of the first resultant kammic energy ?... or 2) will there be a reprieve of a few minutes or days or event moments... where nothing happens... sort of like waiting for the next resultant kamma to happen kind of thing...??? I hope you get what I am trying to say.... May you all be well and happy... Loke 6967 From: Herman Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 1:17pm Subject: Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) Dear Cybele, Be assured that I don't consider sex to be a frivolous issue. On a psychological level I believe with Maslow that sex is one of the "higher" needs of human beings, and that a fulfilling sexual relationship is an avenue for transcending the little self. And on a biological level, neither you, I or anyone else would be here if it were not for sex. Such enormous creative power is given to each of us!!!! For myself I believe abstinence would be very difficult, I just suspect I would be forever fighting with ghosts in my head. To be succesfully celibate, I imagine one has to die to one's sexuality. On the other hand, parenting requires the death of self in an other way. I find that parenting requires 24x7x365x? dana, but it is oh, so rewarding (and you learn heaps about yourself) Love Herman --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > Dear Herman > > > >>Dear Cybele, > > > >--- "cybele chiodi" > >wrote: > > > > > Well I enjoy sex, so what - this makes me not suitable to walk this > >path? > > > > > >I enjoy sex too, but I find it very difficult to walk while in the > >throes :-) > > > >I'd say when you are enjoying sex you are enjoying sex. It's when you > >are not enjoying sex, one tends to think and talk a lot about it. > > > >People don't tend to think about food when they are not hungry. > > > >Love > > > >Herman > > > > In my experience people is talking always about food! > And indeed that's a good point, accordingly with you then people would not > talk about sex unless they were 'hungry' for it - therefore why should we > deny this fact and believe that is a frivolous issue? > > LOve > > CYbele > 6968 From: Herman Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 1:35pm Subject: Re: Lumbini In Danger! Hi there, No, I don't know what you mean by pay it forward, my guess is "forward this post to others" . Is that anywhere near correct? When I read your post re Lumbini, I thought : How would I react if your post said Nazareth or Bethlehem is going to be destroyed (I am an ex Christian, I understand more fully and immediately what these towns mean to religious Christianity) . My feeling was that neither Nazareth nor Bethlehem add one iota to anyone's liberation, and there would be a great possibility that clinging to these mere symbols would only add to the ignorance and suffering we share. I then assumed the same about Lumbini. The Buddha is not to be found there, just as Jesus is not in those other places. Still, I would be very pissed off if Westminster Abbey, the Dom at Koln, the Buddha statues in Afghanistan were mindlessly blown up. Where you writing about Lumbini as a sacred site? Regards Herman --- "DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo" wrote: > Tell that to the people living there. > > Have you visited there? > > I find your post just a bit too dismissive using a convenient way to bow > out. > > Pay it forward --- or do you know what that means? > > Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > Sent: Friday, July 27, 2001 3:30 AM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lumbini In Danger! > > > > Lumbini is a conditioned phenomenon. As such, it is always in danger. > > And certainly impermanent. > > > > Herman > > 6969 From: Sarah and Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 2:51pm Subject: News reports/Lumbini In Danger! Dear Friends, >From: "DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo" >Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 15:07:08 -0400 >Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lumbini >In Danger! This thread is off-topic for dsg. Please do not post any further messages on the subject. Thank you for your cooperation. Jon & Sarah 6970 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 3:15pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: No-Self - Anders Part 2 --- Derek Cameron wrote: > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > what if true selfhood is also a state, rather than an object, a > state with nothing > > added or subtracted, and the Buddha was reluctant to assert or deny > anything about > > a 'self' because it would implicitly turn 'self' into an object by > attributing > > properties or negative properties to 'it'? > > Yes. I think there's an approach to Christian theology called > the "via negativa" where they come to understand God by removing > false attributes rather than by adding positive ones. > > I also see parallels between early Buddhism and the "neti, neti" > method of the Upanisads. Yes, I was amazed when I discovered how simiilar the views of the Advaita Masters are to those of advanced Buddhists. It seems that the most advanced Hindu Vedantists sometimes reached a parallel development from basic Hindu beliefs to the non-dual realization of the Buddha. After all, he was an enlightened Brahmin. > One of my observations from reading the texts is that early Buddhism > was essentialy a practice. But somehow it transitioned (at least in > the literature) into a philosophical endeavor. very interesting comments, which I appreciate. I think it would make sense to say that Buddha initially wanted to share the way in which he found freedom with as many people as possible. As he ran into the mental and emotional obstacles that people confronted him with, he developed skillful ways to help them get into the correct orientation to receive the 'real' teachings. It is also possible that the Buddha himself developed a more intimate and clear relationship to his own enlightenment as he integrated it into his own life and teaching, and that he thus was more concerned with advanced issues of integration in the later part of his teaching career. I am not as familiar with the progression of all the sutras in the order in which they were created as many on this list. But I think it would be of great interest to hear from someone what they feel the pattern of development is in the progression from sutra to sutra. Robert ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6971 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 3:23pm Subject: Re: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > Dear Robert > > > > > > Well I enjoy sex, so what - this makes me not suitable to walk this > >path? > > > >Just to get personal, are you attached to your enjoyment, or can you take > >it or leave it? > > > I am attached to many things Robert not only sex, why are you free of > attachments? > There are people who are not able to quit smoking or drinking coffee and aim > to practice celibacy. > I am prone to be realistic. > And about attachments, you have to consider many other factors as past > accumulations and present kamma; it's never a mere question of sheer will > dealing with attachments. > > > > > >That would seem to me to be the important issue, not the 'enjoyment'. > > > >Robert E. > > > > Well if you take a single sentence of what I declare from the original > context, you are distorting the meaning I implied and using it to > demonstrate your view. > Affirming that enjoying without being attached is the important issue is > worn out buddhist rethorical dear Robert. > Why don't you expand the subject in a much more articulate way? > Looking forward to it. > Oh I wasn't trying to distort anything, and I wasn't criticizing you either, dear Cybele. I do think it's interesting to see if we can experience the ups and downs of life and even of desires and defuse the aspect of suffering and insecurity by letting go of attachment. To me, it's not worn out or rhetorical, but an active way to take the pressure and resistance out of living without having to resist the forces of life itself, which only sets up more counter-resistance. As for past factors controlling the possibility of letting go, this may be somewhat true, but may also be an excuse for clinging. We can either let go or not, if not, that's okay, but if so, then it is an opportunity in the moment. I warrant that I enjoy sex as much as you do [perhaps some day we'll have a contest], but I have found it beneficial to allow the enjoyment while trying to relax about it and let go of the tension around it. I see tension as usually accumulating around any desire. The self-organism decides that it 'needs' whatever it desires, and it goes into the 'survival' category instead of the 'experiencing' category. When there is tension and need around any desire, one tends to make others into objects and not 'share'. When desire is allowed to come and to go freely as possible, then one can have the patience to accord with the moment and sometimes hav sex, sometimes not. Please keep in mind that I am not addressing this to you in the sense that I do not claim to know how you feel about sex or whether you are attached or anything of that kind. I just thought it was an interesting question based on what you initially brought up, and now I think it's interesting to expand it. So is my inquiry more interesting to you now, or do you think I am still falling into empty rhetoric? Robert E. 6972 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 3:29pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Robert E > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > --- > Suan Lu Zaw wrote: > > > > >>So the answer to Erik's question is that memory performs the function > > of noting the fact of nibbana having no signs.<< > > > > Dear Suan, > > Please correct me if I'm wrong [and I mean that literally, not as an > > expression], > > but it seems to me that what you are saying is that Nibbana 'itself' > > [which also > > makes it sound like an object rather than an awakened state] is not > > actually the > > object of consciousness, but the concept of it is the object of > > consciousness both > > before and after it has been experienced. > > > > Nibbana itself being signless, would have no way itself of being > > apprehended, even > > while being 'experienced' as one's own state. But memory forming a > > concept in > > order to mark and communicate the presence of Nibbana, would refer to > > the concept > > as a pointer towards Nibbana itself. > > You may not have seen my earlier post in which i summarised a number of > propositions found in the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha on these points (i have > posted these again below). > > It is clear from the first 3 of those propositions, as I read them, that > nibbana has an individual essence capable of being experienced by > consciousness (and marked by sanna), and that nibbana is itself the object > of consciousness for the person attaining each of the stages of > enlightenment. > > Propositions 4 and 4.1 explain what exactly 'signlessness' means as an > attribute of nibbana. It clearly does not refer to the lack of a > characteristic or mark capable of being experienced by consciousness. > > Difficult to grasp, I know. I dont' pretend to understand, but simply > quote this as the accepted orthodox teaching on this point. > > Jon Thank you, Jon. I know you are not claiming to understand this difficult formulation, but I wonder what your take is on how consciousness, which is still a conditioned phenomena [?] can itself grasp Nibbana, whose 'one intrinsic nature' is being 'totally transcendent to the conditioned world'. This seems to be on the face of it wholly self-contradictory and therefore impossible. It would need an unconditioned, transcendent consciousness to grasp an object or state with a totally transcendent characteristic. If that consciousness is indeed transcendent and unconditioned, it seems to me that this is a redundant statement of the definition of Nibbana itself. Therefore the proposition is reduced to Nibbana experiencing Nibbana. But this separates Nibbana into subject and object, whereas there is no subject-object separation in Nibbana, and Nibbana is one not two. If anyone can respond to this, I will be happy to remove the clouds from my mind. Robert ------------------------------------------- > 1. Nibbana is classified as one of the ultimate realities (paramattha > dhammas). Ultimate realities are distinguished from concepts in that they > exist by reason of their own intrinsic nature (sabhava). > 2. Nibbana is the object of each of the 8 supramundane cittas (ie. the > path and fruition cittas of the 4 stages of enlightenment) > 3. Nibbana has one intrinsic nature (sabhava), which is that of being the > unconditioned deathless element totally transcendent to the conditioned > world. > 4. Nibbana has 3 different aspects-- > 4.1 It is called the void (sunnata) because it is devoid of greed, > hatred, and delusion, and because it is devoid of all that is conditioned. > 4.2 It is called signless (animitta) because it is free from the signs of > greed, etc., and free from the signs of all conditioned things. > 4.3 It is called desireless (appanihita) because it is free from the > hankering of greed, etc., and because it is not desired by craving. > 5. Nibbana is excluded from the category of the 5 aggregates because it > lacks differentiation (such as past, present , future). > > [References: CMA Ch I, #2, #26-28; Ch VI, #31; Ch VII, #40] > > > > > > It also seems to me that every experience is exactly like this in truth, > > because > > no experience actually is apprehended as an object while being > > experienced, and > > ultimately all experiences are likewise 'signless'. Only objects have > > something > > to apprehend, and even this is only done by maintaining the concept of > > the object > > for a duration of more than a moment and turning it into a remembered or > > known > > object beyond the immediate experience. > > > > Thus, if I am not missing something which I hope you'll point out to me, > > this > > would be a proof that all experiences actually partake of the same > > signlessness > > and primordial reality of Nibbana, and that Nibbana is not only our very > > and only > > actual nature, outside of concepts of one kind or another including > > memories, but > > it is also the very and only signless reality of all existence. > > > > Robert E. > > ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6973 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 3:33pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: No-Self - Anders Part 2 --- gayan wrote: > dear robert e., > > 'dhamma' is the word with the greatest scope , found in pali. so it would be correct to say that Nibbana is an unconditioned dhamma? Robert E. ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6974 From: m. nease Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 7:32pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Early vs Late (was Theravada and Satipathana - Derek) Thanks, Derek, I got the invite too but didn't realize Masefield was there. I'm already subscribed to a couple of Pali sites but may visit there with my question. Thanks again for the tip. mike --- Derek Cameron wrote: > --- "m. nease" > wrote: > > what about the Udana verses? > > Mike, I just realized that Peter Masefield, who has > published > translations of both the Udaana and its > commentaries, is a > contributor to the new Pali group: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Pali > > Derek. > > 6975 From: m. nease Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 7:58pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Pali Tadao, After considerable searching I was able to find the name of the north american distributor of the CSCD, then lost it--apparently accidentally deleted while cleaning out my old email. If memory serves his name is Richard Crutcher for what that's worth. I'll look into it again and pass it along if I can find it. mike --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Derek: > Thank you for the information on the Pali Weg site. > Somebody once told me that there is CD's or Web site > which list all the Pali Tiplitaka texts. Are you > aware of such a material? (I am asking the question > becuase here I do not have many Pali texts) tadao > 6976 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 8:42pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: No-Self - Anders Part 2 dear robert e. > so it would be correct to say that Nibbana is an unconditioned dhamma? > > Robert E. yes, that would be correct. rgds. 6977 From: cybele chiodi Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 9:11pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) Dear Herman Sadhu x 3!!!!!! Non self deceit, great. Love Cybele >Dear Cybele, > >Be assured that I don't consider sex to be a frivolous issue. On a >psychological level I believe with Maslow that sex is one of >the "higher" needs of human beings, and that a fulfilling sexual >relationship is an avenue for transcending the little self. > >And on a biological level, neither you, I or anyone else would be >here if it were not for sex. Such enormous creative power is given to >each of us!!!! > >For myself I believe abstinence would be very difficult, I just >suspect I would be forever fighting with ghosts in my head. To be >succesfully celibate, I imagine one has to die to one's sexuality. > >On the other hand, parenting requires the death of self in an other >way. I find that parenting requires 24x7x365x? dana, but it is oh, so >rewarding (and you learn heaps about yourself) > >Love > >Herman > 6978 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 9:33pm Subject: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Robert E Robert Epstein wrote: > I do think it's interesting to see if we can experience the ups and downs > of life and even of desires and defuse the aspect of suffering and insecurity by > letting go of attachment. To me, it's not worn out or rhetorical, but an active > way to take the pressure and resistance out of living without having to resist the > forces of life itself, which only sets up more counter-resistance. The so-called technique of 'letting go' is indeed a well-worn one. To my mind it connotes a rather strong idea of someone who is 'seeing' the attachment and is able to let go. In fact there is attachment and aversion arising most of the time, if only we knew it, and these accumulations are so much stronger than any intention to 'let go' of the kilesa. > I warrant that I enjoy sex as much as you do [perhaps some day we'll have a > contest], but I have found it beneficial to allow the enjoyment while trying to > relax about it and let go of the tension around it. I see tension as usually > accumulating around any desire. The self-organism decides that it 'needs' > whatever it desires, and it goes into the 'survival' category instead of the > 'experiencing' category. > > When there is tension and need around any desire, one tends to make others into > objects and not 'share'. When desire is allowed to come and to go freely as > possible, then one can have the patience to accord with the moment and sometimes > hav sex, sometimes not. I hope you don't mind me saying so, Robert, but this sounds like so much pop psychology of the kind pedalled by relationship advisers! It might be of some use in the short term to someone who has a particular problem in this area, but does it say anything in dhamma terms? > Please keep in mind that I am not addressing this to you in the sense that I do > not claim to know how you feel about sex or whether you are attached or anything > of that kind. I just thought it was an interesting question based on what you > initially brought up, and now I think it's interesting to expand it. > > So is my inquiry more interesting to you now, or do you think I am still falling > into empty rhetoric? I can't really see where this is leading, but you are welcome to relate it to the teachings if possible. Jon 6979 From: Derek Cameron Date: Mon Jul 30, 2001 10:38pm Subject: Objection! Objection, your honor! I actually found Robert's observations insightful. Derek. --- <> wrote: > > When there is tension and need around any desire, one tends > to make others into > > objects and not 'share'. When desire is allowed to come and > to go freely as > > possible, then one can have the patience to accord with the > moment and sometimes > > hav sex, sometimes not. > > I hope you don't mind me saying so, Robert, but this sounds like > so much pop psychology of the kind pedalled by relationship > advisers! It might be of some use in the short term to someone > who has a particular problem in this area, but does it say > anything in dhamma terms? 6980 From: DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 3:09am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lumbini In Danger! Reply in context below: ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Monday, July 30, 2001 1:35 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lumbini In Danger! > Hi there, > Hi, > No, I don't know what you mean by pay it forward, my guess > is "forward this post to others" . Is that anywhere near correct? > It comes from a movie of the same title. "Pay it forward" means that one returns the kindnesses and good deeds that have been done for them by doing kind things and good deeds to others. There is no "pay back" so one can "pay forward".. > When I read your post re Lumbini, I thought : How would I react if > your post said Nazareth or Bethlehem is going to be destroyed (I am > an ex Christian, I understand more fully and immediately what these > towns mean to religious Christianity) . > The problem is "react". I would respond with the same concern. These places belong to humanity. > My feeling was that neither Nazareth nor Bethlehem add one iota to > anyone's liberation, I disagree. > and there would be a great possibility that > clinging to these mere symbols would only add to the ignorance and > suffering we share. > It is not about clinging to symbols. It is about preserving the best of humanity for humanity. > I then assumed the same about Lumbini. > Perhaps that is the problem in a nutshell --- assuming. > The Buddha is not to be found there, just as Jesus is not in those > other places. > It does not take a rocket scientist to figure that out. The very statement implies they could be found somewhere else, but they are dead. (Discussion of Tathagata deferred!) > Still, I would be very pissed off if Westminster Abbey, the Dom at > Koln, the Buddha statues in Afghanistan were mindlessly blown up. > Afghanistan? Don't tell me you do not know what happened there. (And despite the religious fury about "graven images", the Taliban made a pretty penny on selling priceless art works --- again, what belonged to humanity.) > Where you writing about Lumbini as a sacred site? > Wow, some people really do not get it at all. What is "sacred"? The whole Earth is a sacred site, and if Lumbini is a place that few people care about and are willing to ignore, this speaks to what is happening with the rest of the Sasana. The Dhamma will not be obscured, but people will do a fine job obscuring it. So much for the New Age... Ha! > Regards > > Herman > Dhammapiyo Bhante > > --- "DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo" > wrote: > > Tell that to the people living there. > > > > Have you visited there? > > > > I find your post just a bit too dismissive using a convenient way > to bow > > out. > > > > Pay it forward --- or do you know what that means? > > > > Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: > > > Sent: Friday, July 27, 2001 3:30 AM > > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lumbini In Danger! > > > > > > > Lumbini is a conditioned phenomenon. As such, it is always in > danger. > > > And certainly impermanent. > > > > > > Herman > > > > > > --- "DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo" > > > wrote: > > > > India built barrage could submerge Lumbini > > > > > > > > Post Report > > > > > > > > KATHMANDU, July 25 - Lumbini, the birthplace of Lord Buddha, > also > > > listed as > > > > the UNESCO World Heritage site, could be submerged once the > > > Russiyal-Khurda > > > > Lautan barrage being constructed by India over the Danav River > on > > > the > > > > Nepal-India border, just about 6 km south-east of the 2,500 > years > > > old > > > > Buddhist shrine, is completed, experts here said. > > > > > > > > "Buddha's birthplace is in crisis. > > > > > > etc > > > 6981 From: DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 3:13am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] News reports/Lumbini In Danger! Ooops. I answered Herman's post before seeing your post below. I am sorry. And just out of curiosity, why is this thread of-topic? With Metta, Dhammapiyo Bhante ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sarah and Jonothan Abbott" Sent: Monday, July 30, 2001 2:51 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] News reports/Lumbini In Danger! > Dear Friends, > > >From: "DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo" > >Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 15:07:08 -0400 > >Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Lumbini >In > Danger! > > This thread is off-topic for dsg. Please do not post > any further messages on the subject. > > Thank you for your cooperation. > > Jon & Sarah > 6982 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 4:54am Subject: Re: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: The main point of my post was that people usually deal with desire in one of two ways: 1/ they follow desire 2/ they suppress desire Those who have decided that desire is 'bad' tend to try to get rid of it. Sometimes this involves sweeping it under the rug and making believe it isn't there, or trying to expel it by main force. My point is that by working with desire we are in a more honest relationship to it and can face it and gradually erode it. I don't think that having a forceful struggle with desire gets rid of it. I think it adds a secondary complication, that one has desire and on top of that is in a state of struggle. Treating desire with mindfulness is more effective than suppressing it. Allowing for the natural occurence of sexuality as part of life without suppressing it but without succumbing to it or being addicted to it, seems like a way to work with it. Is this pop psychology? [I've now moved from tired rhetoric to pop psychology. Oh well!] I don't know. If one wants to be celibate and work with desire as it arises, that's fine. But if one is married, as I am, or otherwise has sexual relations, then the question is: how do you work with sexuality and how do you work with desire. No conclusion, but those are my thoughts. How would you work with sexuality and desire in order to free yourself from attachment and aversion? It seems like you are saying that such a task is nearly impossible. So what is your approach that you think is most sensible for the path? Robert ---------------------------------- --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Robert E > > Robert Epstein wrote: > > > I do think it's interesting to see if we can experience the ups > and downs > > of life and even of desires and defuse the aspect of suffering > and insecurity by > > letting go of attachment. To me, it's not worn out or rhetorical, > but an active > > way to take the pressure and resistance out of living without > having to resist the > > forces of life itself, which only sets up more counter-resistance. > > The so-called technique of 'letting go' is indeed a well-worn one. > To my mind it connotes a rather strong idea of someone who is > 'seeing' the attachment and is able to let go. In fact there is > attachment and aversion arising most of the time, if only we > knew it, and these accumulations are so much stronger than any > intention to 'let go' of the kilesa. > > > I warrant that I enjoy sex as much as you do [perhaps some > day we'll have a > > contest], but I have found it beneficial to allow the enjoyment > while trying to > > relax about it and let go of the tension around it. I see tension > as usually > > accumulating around any desire. The self-organism decides > that it 'needs' > > whatever it desires, and it goes into the 'survival' category > instead of the > > 'experiencing' category. > > > > When there is tension and need around any desire, one tends > to make others into > > objects and not 'share'. When desire is allowed to come and > to go freely as > > possible, then one can have the patience to accord with the > moment and sometimes > > hav sex, sometimes not. > > I hope you don't mind me saying so, Robert, but this sounds like > so much pop psychology of the kind pedalled by relationship > advisers! It might be of some use in the short term to someone > who has a particular problem in this area, but does it say > anything in dhamma terms? > > > Please keep in mind that I am not addressing this to you in the > sense that I do > > not claim to know how you feel about sex or whether you are > attached or anything > > of that kind. I just thought it was an interesting question based > on what you > > initially brought up, and now I think it's interesting to expand it. > > > > So is my inquiry more interesting to you now, or do you think I > am still falling > > into empty rhetoric? > > I can't really see where this is leading, but you are welcome to > relate it to the teachings if possible. > > Jon > ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6983 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 4:54am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Objection! --- Derek Cameron wrote: > Objection, your honor! > > I actually found Robert's observations insightful. > > Derek. thanks. Robert E. ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6984 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 4:46am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: No-Self - Anders Part 2 --- Gayan Karunaratne wrote: > dear robert e. > > > > so it would be correct to say that Nibbana is an unconditioned dhamma? > > > > Robert E. > > yes, that would be correct. thanks. I will have to try to understand the definitional scope of 'dhamma' a bit more to try to absorb this idea, since I don't in any way understand Nibbana as a 'thing'. What an 'unconditioned 'thing'' would be I cannot cognize, since a thing's 'thingness' consists of its conditioning. I guess I'm off to an area I know nothing about: Pali and Sanskrit, where the original words are lodged. Best, Robert E. 6985 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 5:42am Subject: Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! Dear Robert E, --- Robert Epstein > Thank you, Jon. I know you are not claiming to understand this difficult > formulation, but I wonder what your take is on how consciousness, which is still a > conditioned phenomena [?] can itself grasp Nibbana, whose 'one intrinsic nature' > is being 'totally transcendent to the conditioned world'. This seems to be on the > face of it wholly self-contradictory and therefore impossible. > > It would need an unconditioned, transcendent consciousness to grasp an object or > state with a totally transcendent characteristic. If that consciousness is indeed > transcendent and unconditioned, it seems to me that this is a redundant statement > of the definition of Nibbana itself. Therefore the proposition is reduced to > Nibbana experiencing Nibbana. But this separates Nibbana into subject and object, > whereas there is no subject-object separation in Nibbana, and Nibbana is one not > two. > > If anyone can respond to this, I will be happy to remove the clouds from my mind. > There were a fair number of discussions about nibbana since Erik and Anders have joined us in the group. I hope you have had the chance to read some of it. As I have mentioned in the past, the following book: http://www.zolag.co.uk/condf.pdf explains in details how the realities condition one another. If you understand what Nina wrote in this book, you would understand some of the members' position why nibbana is cognizable (by the citta and co- arising mental factors which are conditioned realities). I personally don't understand some of the members' position that something that is cognizable by conditioned realities must necessarily be conditioned itself. Maybe you would explain this to me? By patthana explanation, there are other objects (real and not real) that condition the nama that cognize them but are not themselves conditioned by the nama. The example of this is: 1) The visible object (real) outside our bodies are not conditioned by the seeing consciousness. In this case, the visible object conditions seeing consciousness, but the seeing consciousness doesn't condition the visible object. 2) When we think of the concepts (unreal), the concept is conditioning the thinking consciousness, but the thinking consciousness is not conditioning the concepts. kom 6986 From: Jon and Sarah Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 7:37am Subject: Re: News reports Ven Dhammapiyo, --- "DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo" wrote: > Ooops. I answered Herman's post before seeing your post below. I am sorry. > > And just out of curiosity, why is this thread of-topic? It is off-topic because it does not fall within the scope set out in the guidelines, which we have referred you to before. If you have any furher queries on this, please contact us off-ist. The guidelines may be found at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files Jon and Sarah 6987 From: ppp Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 0:58am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Pali Hi, Mike: Thank you for your information on CD's. If you come up with the accurate information, please pass it to me. Thanks again, tadao 6988 From: Herman Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 8:01am Subject: Teachings Then / Now Jon, --- <> wrote: > I can't really see where this is leading, but you are welcome to > relate it to the teachings if possible. > Do you believe it is possible and necessary to fit all experience into the idiom of the teachings? For example: I think that not many people today would actively use the periodic table of the elements as expounded in the Abhidhamma, to describe physical realities (rupas). This is not ascribing a deficiency to the Abhidhamma roadmap of rupas, it was sufficient for its time, and way beyond it in insight. But these days the equipment used to investigate physical realities has a far greater resolution than the sense bases, and consequently different depths of the same realities are being observed and described. Hence the periodic table of elements containing things such as Na , Cl, H , O is in use. And it's use has significant consequences for humanity today. Anyone who has ever taken medicine has benefitted from the efforts of those who have sought to investigate realities beyond what was accepted as final in their time. The reality at this moment is that we are all using 21st century technology to communicate at a very impersonal level with each other. Apparently it is very useful to be more discriminating than to have just two types of reality, absolute and conventional. Regards Herman 6989 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 8:17am Subject: Fwd: Emptiness is a mode of perception > >Emptiness is a Mode of Perception >(adapted from Emptiness, by Thanissaro Bhikkhu (Geoffrey DeGraff), >Theravada Text Archives, Internet 1997, revised 1999) > > >Emptiness is a mode of perception, a way of looking at experience. It adds >nothing to and takes nothing away from the raw data of physical and mental >events. You look at events in the mind and the senses with no thought of >whether there is anything lying behind them. This mode is called emptiness >because it is empty of the presuppositions we usually add to experience to >make sense of it: the stories and world views we fashion to explain who we >are are and the world we live in. Although these stories and views have >their uses, the Buddha found that some of the more abstract questions they >raise - of our true identity and the reality of the world outside - pull >attention away from a direct experience of how events influence one another >in the immediate present. Thus they get in the way when we try to >understand and solve the problem of suffering.. > >To master the emptiness mode of perception requires training in firm >virtue, concentration and discernment. Without this training, the mind >tends to stay in the mode that keeps creating stories and world views. And >from the perspective of that mode, the teaching of emptiness sounds simply >like another story or world view with new ground rules.. In terms of your >views about the world, it seems to be saying either that the world does not >really exist, or else that emptiness is the great undifferentiated ground >of being from which we all came [and] to which someday we shall all return. >These interpretations not only miss the meaning of emptiness but also keep >the mind from getting into the proper mode.. > >Now, stories and world views do serve a purpose. The Buddha employed them >when teaching people, but he never used the word emptiness when speaking in >this mode. He recounted the stories of people's lives to show how suffering >comes from the unskillful perceptions behind their actions, and how freedom >from suffering can come from being more perceptive. And he described the >basic principles that underlie the round of rebirth to show how bad >intentional actions lead to pain within that round, good ones lead to >pleasure, while really skillful actions can take you beyond the round >altogether. In all these cases, the teachings were aimed at getting people >to focus on the quality of the perceptions and intentions in their minds in >the present - in other words, to get them into the emptiness mode. Once >there, they can use the teachings on emptiness for their intended purpose: >to loosen all attachments to views, stories, and assumptions, leaving the >mind empty of all greed, anger, and delusion, and thus empty of suffering >and stress. > 6990 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 8:20am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Teachings Then / Now Dear Herman I agree with you. Being too strict leads to dualism indeed. I appreciate your consideration. Metta Cybele > >Apparently it is very useful to be more discriminating than to have >just two types of reality, absolute and conventional. > > >Regards > > >Herman > > 6991 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 8:52am Subject: Re: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) Dear Robert E. > > Affirming that enjoying without being attached is the important issue is > > worn out buddhist rethorical dear Robert. > > Why don't you expand the subject in a much more articulate way? > > Looking forward to it. > > >Oh I wasn't trying to distort anything, and I wasn't criticizing you >either, dear Cybele. I do think it's interesting to see if we can >experience the ups and downs of life and even of desires and defuse the >aspect of suffering and insecurity by letting go of attachment. To me, >it's not worn out or rhetorical, but an active way to take the pressure and >resistance out of living without having to resist the forces of life >itself, which only sets up more counter-resistance. Sweetheart Rob 2 (I have a thing with the Roberts in this list ;-)), happens that I am the one who has learned to take advantage of the streams and never swim against the current. I am Brazilian you know, I am always instinctively prone to chose what is opposing less resistance and imply less effort of 'sheer will' to fit in. I need to relax; la dolce vita.... Apart in my viewpoints where I am the one who contests but Derek spared me the chance this time. No pressure, no forcefulness with me. Therefore we agree. :-) >I warrant that I enjoy sex as much as you do [perhaps some day we'll >have >a contest], but I have found it beneficial to allow the enjoyment >while >trying to relax about it and let go of the tension around it. I am not tensed up Robert; the idea of the contest is appealling! ;-) > >Please keep in mind that I am not addressing this to you in the sense that >I do >not claim to know how you feel about sex or whether you are attached or >anything >of that kind. I just thought it was an interesting question based on what >you >initially brought up, and now I think it's interesting to expand it. INDEED, it's a very interesting issue and I am willing to expand it. Let's proceed! I brought it up purposefully; I am wicked lady - I want to dissuade Derek from his monkhood intentions. I am joking Derek! ;-) Don't worry to address me, I don't exclude anything from my practice and sex and desire is a very important and dynamic part of it and only if you are in self deceit you would ignore it. > >So is my inquiry more interesting to you now, or do you think I am still >falling >into empty rhetoric? > >Robert E. YES, now is not sterile rethoric but lively subject and I am pretty interested. Please wait for me, don't give up the discussion. Tomorrow I will be quite busy but for sure will arrange the time to join the sharing. I always feel grateful when I meet practitioners that are not sex repressed!!! Love Cybele 6992 From: Erik Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 9:51am Subject: Re: Meeting DSG friends in Bkk --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > Dear Friends, > > Just back to Hong Kong after a really wonderful weekend in Bangkok..... > > Such a treat to listen to Khun Sujin (who didn't even know we were coming and > thought I was calling her from Hong Kong), to see old friends and especially to > meet and spend time with Bruce and Erik for the first time. I just wanted to say how delightful it was to meet you and Jonothan, Bruce, Sukin, Betty, Kieaw, Robert & Alex & Roxanne, Ivan, and of course the dear Amara (who WILL rejoin DSG--I have something up me sleeve on that one I think may work to get her back here actively participating heh heh heh :), who has "mothered" me since arriving here in a way that has made me feel more to feel truly welcomed here than at any other time anywhere, anyplace. Excellent Dhamma discussions with Bruce a few evenings ago, and look forward to many more during his stay here, as well as getting hooked up with his teacher at Section 5 at Wat Mahatat who teaches walking meditation. It was such an unmitigated pleasure to finally meet Khun Sujin, to even have such an incredible opportunity at all is the cause for many many moments of kusala citta. > Erik is just as intense in real life as here - like he's just come off the NY > trading floor [...] > and very excited to have so many new friends who are so happy > to debate with him. He talks at ten times the pace (and quantity) > of most Thais Well, Sarah, you may or may not know this but I literally DID work ON the trading floor at one point on Wall St. (actually, the World Financial Center--but not the "trading pits" with all the shouting and hand-waving like the NYSE--these are computerized trading desks, but still an extremely intense environment where people burn out faster than Roman candles). And, FYI, all my partners in my company are all ex-Wall-Streeters as well, and my even my boss (who worked as a head trader for a decade at a very big Swiss bank) tells me I have to slow down! :) He particularly emphasized that to me before my leaving for SE Asia, not once, twice, but thrice, and now hearing it again reminds me to S-L-O- W down, so that I actually communicate with my interlocuters, rather than barrage them with an incomprehensible stream of syllables. And of course I mentioned before I am taking Amara's well-spoken advice to shut up and pay more attention, rather then keep flapping this yap! :) :) :) > but everyone appreciates his sincere interest in dhamma and many topics were > brought up by him which have been discussed here....Bruce, on the other hand, > as here, is very happy lurking in a corner and could have come out of a zen > temple..... I have been extremely impressed by Bruce's approach to the Dhamma since meeting. There is a Buddhist saying: "asking questions is the way to wisdom." And if that is a way to wisdom (it is), then wisdom MUST ripen as a result of this sort of inquiry. This is one erason I love Batchelor's "Buddhism Without Beliefs," because he really emphasizes the questioning aspect. I have also been so impressed by (Mr.) Sukin since meeting, for so many reasons. This is not to inflate any egos (I hope all this merely encourages the pursuit of the path--beacuse I know circumsatnce will find a way to deflate ego soon enough, so I'm not too worried), but I have to say (not knowing another's cittas lacking clairvoyance) that Sukin's actions truly exemplify the dana paramita. Sarah and Jonothan, such delightful breakfasts and discussions (and thank you again for providing nutriment for these five heaps to continue the pursuit of the path)! What a wonderful way to start a day! I look forward to many more discussions here and in person. And for Betty, I feel utterly privileged to have met you, particularly the gifts and assistance given. Those have given me MUCH to meditate on. The one regret is that I haven't had nearly enough time with Robert, given his busy schedule. I hope to remedy that at some point soon, especuially if I am to be going to Tokyo on business, which looks quite possible in the near future. 6993 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 10:11am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Objection! Derek --- Derek Cameron wrote: > Objection, your honor! > > I actually found Robert's observations insightful. I'm glad to hear that. I should perhaps have been more constructive in my comments. Let the discussion continue! Jon > Derek. > > --- <> wrote: > > > When there is tension and need around any desire, one tends > > to make others into > > > objects and not 'share'. When desire is allowed to come and > > to go freely as > > > possible, then one can have the patience to accord with the > > moment and sometimes > > > hav sex, sometimes not. > > > > I hope you don't mind me saying so, Robert, but this sounds like > > so much pop psychology of the kind pedalled by relationship > > advisers! It might be of some use in the short term to someone > > who has a particular problem in this area, but does it say > > anything in dhamma terms? > 6994 From: Erik Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 10:40am Subject: Re: Fwd: Emptiness is a mode of perception --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > > >Emptiness is a Mode of Perception > >(adapted from Emptiness, by Thanissaro Bhikkhu (Geoffrey DeGraff), > >Theravada Text Archives, Internet 1997, revised 1999) > >Now, stories and world views do serve a purpose. The Buddha employed them > >when teaching people, but he never used the word emptiness when speaking in > >this mode. He recounted the stories of people's lives to show how suffering > >comes from the unskillful perceptions behind their actions, and how freedom > >from suffering can come from being more perceptive. And he described the > >basic principles that underlie the round of rebirth to show how bad > >intentional actions lead to pain within that round, good ones lead to > >pleasure, while really skillful actions can take you beyond the round > >altogether. In all these cases, the teachings were aimed at getting people > >to focus on the quality of the perceptions and intentions in their minds in > >the present - in other words, to get them into the emptiness mode. Once > >there, they can use the teachings on emptiness for their intended purpose: > >to loosen all attachments to views, stories, and assumptions, leaving the > >mind empty of all greed, anger, and delusion, and thus empty of suffering > >and stress. Just wanted to re-quote this because it is so important--and thank you for posting this Cybele! It really is about the relinquishing of all suppositions and views, and, based on the Dmama discussions with Khun Sujin Sunday, we were in full agreement that this is precisely the reason to study paramattha dhammas is solely to get rid of suppositions and views, to experience things as they are, directly (yatha-bhuta-dasa-nana), which is the basis for the arising of the path-moments which are the ONLY way to permanently eradicate the ten fetters binding us to the wheel of samsara. Whether practiced from the perspective of paramattha dhammas, or by negating views via the study and meditation on emptiness, is the highest-level wisdom-mode practice that DIRECTLY leads to the termination of the fetters. And, as Thanisarro Bikkhu also notes (and I totally agree with him on this point), "to master the emptiness mode of perception requires training in firm virtue, concentration and discernment. Without this training, the mind tends to stay in the mode that keeps creating stories and world views." And of course those stories and world-views (pannati) are NOT "realities," are NOT seeing things as they are, but mere conceptual fabrication, papanca. See Bikkhu Bodhi's essay on this: http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/bd8p/bd8p_16.htm I prefer to emphasize this part: "The Buddha calls this process of mental construction papanca, "elaboration," "embellishment," or "conceptual proliferation." The elaborations block out the presentational immediacy of phenomena; they let us know the object only "at a distance," not as it really is. But the elaborations do not only screen cognition; they also serve as a basis for projections. The deluded mind, cloaked in ignorance, projects its own internal constructs outwardly, ascribing them to the object as if they really belonged to it." In other words, taking objects for self. To add to the emptiness discussion, and as I mentioned to Mr. Sukin, Bikkhu Bodhi's understanding--if one is to go by the following essay-- of the teachigns on emptiness, are in serious error, because if he understood those teachings as intended, he'd know they PERFECTLY harmonize with what was quoted above. Anyway, here's the essay: http://www.quangduc.com/English/245Dhamma.html This representation of the so-called "non-dualism" of the emptiness teachings is a very serious distortion of actual Mahayana teachings on both emptiness and its so-called "non-dualism." It is apparent Bikkhu Bodhi has never studied under a qualified teacher of so-called "Mahayana" Buddhism nor Buddhist tantra (as if there were actually more than a single yana to begin with), or if he has, never comprehended it as intended, beacuse there could NEVER be cause for falling into the very serious error of denigrating the actual Ariyan Dharma as he has done here, which all extant lineages I am familiar with, Tibetan and Zen, most DEFINITELY are. To speak in such a way about what is the Ariyan Dharma is to disgrace the Three Jewels. That said, I give him the benefit of the doubt and hope that these views have been corrected by now. And it also doesn't mean I don't accept what he says when it IS correct Dharma, to be perfectly clear. But I can only restate that it is an expression of extreme unwisdom to such make categorical-sounding statements about a system with which one has no obvious familiarity. The sort of kamma created by denigrating what is in actuality the Ariyan Dhamma can't be good, that's for certain. And if one is not CERTAIN about another's system (and I speak to those dogmatists in my own lineage who have, for example, denigrated the Nyingma lineage's teachings of Tibetan Buddhism on Dzogchen as well on this), then one with wisdom will remain silent on such points until one knows for certain one way or another. 6995 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 10:52am Subject: Re: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Robert E Thanks for your measured response to my provocative post! There is much that is useful in your message below, and one or two points which I would like to comment on later. Just to make one point at this stage. To see our kilesa as this or that kind of problem or situation (sex, alcohol, food, etc) is perhaps to lose sight of the fact that attachment is attachment is attachment. At such moments one is caught up in an idea of 'my problem', 'my situation'. This is perhaps particularly likely to be so where the situation involves the intimate presence of another person. The purpose of developing undestanding is to see realities as they are, so that attachment and pleaseant feeling can be realised as elements that appear but are not 'us', whether it is the attachment that arises in relation to a particular 'situation' or that arises when there is no discernable 'situation'. However, if we approach our kilesa in terms of problems areas to be 'dealt with', we are in effect looking at them on a purely conventional level, as something we should be rid of or at least to be kept to a manageable level. This will not be conducive to seeing the unwholesomeness as it really is as and when it arises, or to seeing the other realities that are arising at the same time. I am not saying we should ignore conventional problems. I am just trying to distinguish the development of the path from means of 'dealing with' such problems. Jon --- Robert Epstein wrote: > The main point of my post was that people usually deal with desire in > one of two > ways: > > 1/ they follow desire > 2/ they suppress desire > > Those who have decided that desire is 'bad' tend to try to get rid of > it. > Sometimes this involves sweeping it under the rug and making believe it > isn't > there, or trying to expel it by main force. > > My point is that by working with desire we are in a more honest > relationship to it > and can face it and gradually erode it. > > I don't think that having a forceful struggle with desire gets rid of > it. I think > it adds a secondary complication, that one has desire and on top of that > is in a > state of struggle. > > Treating desire with mindfulness is more effective than suppressing it. > Allowing for the natural occurence of sexuality as part of life without > suppressing it but without succumbing to it or being addicted to it, > seems like a > way to work with it. > > Is this pop psychology? [I've now moved from tired rhetoric to pop > psychology. > Oh well!] I don't know. If one wants to be celibate and work with > desire as it > arises, that's fine. But if one is married, as I am, or otherwise has > sexual > relations, then the question is: how do you work with sexuality and how > do you > work with desire. > > No conclusion, but those are my thoughts. > How would you work with sexuality and desire in order to free yourself > from > attachment and aversion? > > It seems like you are saying that such a task is nearly impossible. So > what is > your approach that you think is most sensible for the path? > > Robert 6996 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 0:50pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > There were a fair number of discussions about nibbana since Erik and > Anders have joined us in the group. I hope you have had the chance to > read some of it. As I have mentioned in the past, the following book: > http://www.zolag.co.uk/condf.pdf > explains in details how the realities condition one another. If you > understand what Nina wrote in this book, you would understand some of > the members' position why nibbana is cognizable (by the citta and co- > arising mental factors which are conditioned realities). > > I personally don't understand some of the members' position that > something that is cognizable by conditioned realities must necessarily be > conditioned itself. Maybe you would explain this to me? Well, let's say this: even though seen objects are not conditioned by seeing consciousness, the seen objects are limited insofar as they are taken in by seeing consciousness via the form of the seeing consciousness. If I don't notice a mark on an object, the seeing consciousness doesn't condition that object by 'removing the mark', but insofar as I am taking in the rock, the seeing of the rock is conditioned by the seeing consciousness and for me is missing that mark. If a conditioned [limited and particularly structured] consciousness is able to apprehend Nibbana, it will likewise be apprehending Nibbana according to its form and limitations, ie, its conditioning. Therefore, while Nibbana may be an object for this conditioned consciousness, the view of Nibbana that the limited consciousness apprehends will be a limited [untrue] version of Nibbana, not Nibbana itself. Since Nibbana is the only unlimited, unconditioned state, only Nibbana itself can apprehend Nibbana as it truly is, but if it were to theoretically split itself in order to be able to apprehend itself, it would instantly decline into a limited, divided consciousness of subject-object, with a limited, conditioned version of Nibbana apprehending itself as a limited, objectified version of itself. This is the logic by which I feel that Nibbana cannot possibly be apprehended by consciousness without objectifying, limiting and dividing it into a conditioned object or concept, which is to say, not Nibbana itself, but an apprehendable version of itself. I don't see how this logic can be refuted, but I'm sure if it has been refuted in the suttas themselves, then there is good reason why I am not understanding the dynamic of the advanced consciousnesses and their relation to Nibbana. This is very possible, since my education in Buddhism is somewhat limited itself. Anyway, I will look at the book, and see what it says about this. > By patthana explanation, there are other objects (real and not real) that > condition the nama that cognize them but are not themselves > conditioned by the nama. The example of this is: > > 1) The visible object (real) outside our bodies are not conditioned by the > seeing consciousness. In this case, the visible object conditions seeing > consciousness, but the seeing consciousness doesn't condition the visible > object. > > 2) When we think of the concepts (unreal), the concept is conditioning > the thinking consciousness, but the thinking consciousness is not > conditioning the concepts. I understand that an object that is assumed to be 'real' and have an objective reality beyond my perceiving of it, would be assumed to not be itself conditioned by my conditioned seeing consciousness's apprehension of it. But in the case of thinking of concepts, I don't see how the form of the thinking consciousness would not condition the concepts, since thoughts, unlike outer objects, are influenced by consciousness. If my consciousness is unable to understand the color red, the concept of the color red will not show up as the color red for that consciousness. Now maybe once again I am not understanding the use of 'consciousness' here. If it is merely a passive recorder of whatever concepts/objects happen to land on it, then your formulation would make sense to me, and objects and concepts would have the same status, in conditioning the consciousness that apprehends them, while not being conditioned by it themselves. But if consciousness is a dynamic force that interacts with perceptions and concepts, then I would see it as capable of shaping and conditioning that which it apprehends. Robert E. 6997 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 1:18pm Subject: Re: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Bruce's question (Ken) --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > Dear Robert E. > > > > Affirming that enjoying without being attached is the important issue is > > > worn out buddhist rethorical dear Robert. > > > Why don't you expand the subject in a much more articulate way? > > > Looking forward to it. > > > > >Oh I wasn't trying to distort anything, and I wasn't criticizing you > >either, dear Cybele. I do think it's interesting to see if we can > >experience the ups and downs of life and even of desires and defuse the > >aspect of suffering and insecurity by letting go of attachment. To me, > >it's not worn out or rhetorical, but an active way to take the pressure and > >resistance out of living without having to resist the forces of life > >itself, which only sets up more counter-resistance. > > > Sweetheart Rob 2 (I have a thing with the Roberts in this list ;-)), happens > that I am the one who has learned to take advantage of the streams and never > swim against the current. > I am Brazilian you know, I am always instinctively prone to chose what is > opposing less resistance and imply less effort of 'sheer will' to fit in. I > need to relax; la dolce vita.... > Apart in my viewpoints where I am the one who contests but Derek spared me > the chance this time. > No pressure, no forcefulness with me. > Therefore we agree. :-) > > > >I warrant that I enjoy sex as much as you do [perhaps some day we'll >have > >a contest], but I have found it beneficial to allow the enjoyment >while > >trying to relax about it and let go of the tension around it. > > I am not tensed up Robert; the idea of the contest is appealling! ;-) > > > > > >Please keep in mind that I am not addressing this to you in the sense that > >I do > >not claim to know how you feel about sex or whether you are attached or > >anything > >of that kind. I just thought it was an interesting question based on what > >you > >initially brought up, and now I think it's interesting to expand it. > > > INDEED, it's a very interesting issue and I am willing to expand it. > Let's proceed! > I brought it up purposefully; I am wicked lady - I want to dissuade Derek > from his monkhood intentions. > I am joking Derek! ;-) > Don't worry to address me, I don't exclude anything from my practice and sex > and desire is a very important and dynamic part of it and only if you are in > self deceit you would ignore it. > > > > >So is my inquiry more interesting to you now, or do you think I am still > >falling > >into empty rhetoric? > > > >Robert E. > > YES, now is not sterile rethoric but lively subject and I am pretty > interested. > Please wait for me, don't give up the discussion. > Tomorrow I will be quite busy but for sure will arrange the time to join the > sharing. > I always feel grateful when I meet practitioners that are not sex > repressed!!! ha ha, well, we'll see what this subject brings up. I have just become very interested in the idea of discriminating the attachment and aversion to things. For instance, I quit smoking 20 years ago, but I don't think I ever stopped desiring to smoke. I just reached a point where I decided to let go of it. Now I am averse to it. I am annoyed by smokers and I can't stand to be around smoke. In terms of Buddhism is this any better? If I can't keep my equanimity around smoke, then I am just as involved with it in terms of Buddhism as when I *indulged*. I am on the other side of the coin and I have replaced attachment with aversion which is the same thing from the other angle. It is non-acceptance, separation and individual entity asserting itself in both cases. The smoker says "You can't tell me what to do - I can smoke if I want to", and the non-smoker says: "You can't smoke around me. You have to stop!" So I think in terms of Buddhism I would be better off if I could just be around smoke, accept people smoking without getting angry, and gently try to avoid the smoke when I can, and perhaps gently remind people that smoke is bad for them when it seems appropriate. So with sex, you have St. Paul in Christianity saying that if you love God enough, you don't need earthly love and lust. And then people have to prove how spiritual they are by giving up sex. But they then become the judges of sex and look down on people who still have sex as being 'animalistic' and savage, and not as spiritual as they are. It would be better to have sex, in my view, be moderate and compassionate in sexuality, try to be aware, which of course takes half the pleasure out of it [just joking] and gradually let go of attachment to sex, rather than taking sides for or against it, which just increases separation and replaces attachment with aversion. Imagine having a teenager who's thinking about having sex with her boyfriend. And you say: 'You'd better not fool around or I'll lock you in your room, goddamit! Sex is BAD for you and you're too young, blah blah.' Now imagine having a teenage girl and saying to her: 'How do you really feel when you're with this person? Have you ever really paid attention and seen what he's up to? Do you think he really likes you? How do you think you'll feel if you go through with this plan? Do you think you're ready? Why don't you try touching, holding hands, talking, and see how that feels. Are you really together, is there a mutual acknowledgment? Are you aware of who you are and how you feel when you're with him? Please pay attention and see what is real when you are with this person. Don't turn sex into something you *have* to do or *have to* not do. Where's your freedom here?' I'd rather have a child that uses mindfulness to make life decisions and really grows as an aware being, than one who is in a battle between should and shouldn't, between the false gods of attachment and aversion. I can't imagine a young person who would jump into bed with some sleezy guy if she really paid attention and cultivated her awareness of what was really there. At least, this seems to me to be a more sane way to grow into life than to either run towards things or away from them with eyes shut tight. Robert ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6998 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 1:32pm Subject: Re: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Robert E > > Thanks for your measured response to my provocative post! There is much > that is useful in your message below, and one or two points which I would > like to comment on later. > > Just to make one point at this stage. To see our kilesa as this or that > kind of problem or situation (sex, alcohol, food, etc) is perhaps to lose > sight of the fact that attachment is attachment is attachment. At such > moments one is caught up in an idea of 'my problem', 'my situation'. This > is perhaps particularly likely to be so where the situation involves the > intimate presence of another person. > > The purpose of developing undestanding is to see realities as they are, so > that attachment and pleaseant feeling can be realised as elements that > appear but are not 'us', whether it is the attachment that arises in > relation to a particular 'situation' or that arises when there is no > discernable 'situation'. However, if we approach our kilesa in terms of > problems areas to be 'dealt with', we are in effect looking at them on a > purely conventional level, as something we should be rid of or at least to > be kept to a manageable level. This will not be conducive to seeing the > unwholesomeness as it really is as and when it arises, or to seeing the > other realities that are arising at the same time. > > I am not saying we should ignore conventional problems. I am just trying > to distinguish the development of the path from means of 'dealing with' > such problems. Jon, Thanks for continuing the discussion. I have to say honestly that I 'sort of' know what you mean by the distinction you are making between thematizing areas of life as topics to be 'fixed' instead of seeing the arising of attachment as a feature of the conditioned self and to disidentify with it. If that is your main point -- to take a structural perspective towards the arising of all phenomena and reactivity, then I can understand that and I think it is a good point. I would only say two things: 1/ I really understand sex, relationship, intimacy, etc., as examples of the arising of attachment and aversion, rather than areas of living to be 'fixed up' by Buddhism in some way. We could be talking about eating, attachment to possessions, whatever you might like, just as examples in which attachment and aversion arise. 2/ My main point was that to see attachment and desire as 'not-self' is important, but if it is subtly replaced with aversion it is just as unhelpful. If one identifies with aversion as 'self' as opposed to attachment/desire as 'not-self', the essential separation of the illusory self is still bolstered, just from an opposite point of view. Robert ------------------------------- > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > The main point of my > post was that people usually deal with desire in > > one of two > > ways: > > > > 1/ they follow desire > > 2/ they suppress desire > > > > Those who have decided that desire is 'bad' tend to try to get rid of > > it. > > Sometimes this involves sweeping it under the rug and making believe it > > isn't > > there, or trying to expel it by main force. > > > > My point is that by working with desire we are in a more honest > > relationship to it > > and can face it and gradually erode it. > > > > I don't think that having a forceful struggle with desire gets rid of > > it. I think > > it adds a secondary complication, that one has desire and on top of that > > is in a > > state of struggle. > > > > Treating desire with mindfulness is more effective than suppressing it. > > Allowing for the natural occurence of sexuality as part of life without > > suppressing it but without succumbing to it or being addicted to it, > > seems like a > > way to work with it. > > > > Is this pop psychology? [I've now moved from tired rhetoric to pop > > psychology. > > Oh well!] I don't know. If one wants to be celibate and work with > > desire as it > > arises, that's fine. But if one is married, as I am, or otherwise has > > sexual > > relations, then the question is: how do you work with sexuality and how > > do you > > work with desire. > > > > No conclusion, but those are my thoughts. > > How would you work with sexuality and desire in order to free yourself > > from > > attachment and aversion? > > > > It seems like you are saying that such a task is nearly impossible. So > > what is > > your approach that you think is most sensible for the path? > > > > Robert > ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6999 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Tue Jul 31, 2001 5:10pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Meeting DSG friends in Bkk Hi Erik, It's great to see and hear what a good start you've got off to in Bkk and how hospitable everyone is to you (and would be to anyone else from here)! ..and of course you're so appreciative that it makes it a pleasure for everyone.... > > Well, Sarah, you may or may not know this but I literally DID work ON > the trading floor at one point on Wall St. (actually, the World > Financial Center--but not the "trading pits" with all the shouting > and hand-waving like the NYSE--these are computerized trading desks, > but still an extremely intense environment where people burn out > faster than Roman candles). Glad my comments about the 'intensity' were well taken .....just don't go burning out too soon with all that abhidhamma study ahead of you ;-)) Actually, what I really appreciate is seeing and reflecting on all the very different accumulations that make up this 'self' and other 'selves'. Whether male, female, fast, slow, intense, laid-back, left-brain or right-brain, the realities which the Buddha discussed, as appearing through the 6 doorways, are the same to be known. The problems and defilements(the kilesa) are the same and that's why we have these universal teachings. The stories (the panatti) maybe different, but the realities (paramattha dhammas)- the seeing, hearing, likes, dislikes etc are there to be seen as anatta for us all. It's not a matter of changing character or tempo but of developing understanding..but all this you know well! > > And, FYI, all my partners in my company are all ex-Wall-Streeters as > well, and my even my boss (who worked as a head trader for a decade > at a very big Swiss bank) tells me I have to slow down! :) He > particularly emphasized that to me before my leaving for SE Asia, not > once, twice, but thrice, and now hearing it again reminds me to S-L-O- > W down, so that I actually communicate with my interlocuters, rather > than barrage them with an incomprehensible stream of syllables. That's funny that even NY bankers give you this advice!! > > And of course I mentioned before I am taking Amara's well-spoken > advice to shut up and pay more attention, rather then keep flapping > this yap! :) :) :) I did notice her taking the microphone away from you on Sunday and how gracefully you took the reminders! > > I have been extremely impressed by Bruce's approach to the Dhamma > since meeting. There is a Buddhist saying: "asking questions is the > way to wisdom." And if that is a way to wisdom (it is), then wisdom > MUST ripen as a result of this sort of inquiry. This is one erason I > love Batchelor's "Buddhism Without Beliefs," because he really > emphasizes the questioning aspect. I haven't read the book, but yes, listening and considering can be more helpful than seeing oneself in 'combat'....;-)) On the otherhand, I can't imagine you EVER lurking in a corner!! > Erik, all your notes about everyone's help here are very touching. You're already bringing new life and interest to the discussions in Bkk as you have on dsg . It would be so boring if we all had the same approach! No need to compare;-) You'll do fine. I hope your business (software development for financial orgs. as I understand it) goes well enough for the NY company to be happy to keep you on our doorstep. Let us know when you're coming this way too. Yesterday we had lunch and a little dhamma chat with Kom's sister and Japanese brother-in-law who are on their way to Bkk (and stay in your Soi 10!!). They are interested to attend a discussion and have yr number. It's a bit of a shock getting back into office work and teaching after my trips...but even when hectic and speedy (yes, I get that way too) and over-tired, there are still those same paramatha dhammas waiting to be known! What a lovely weekend if was for us...keep us updated, Erik! Sarah