7400 From: Sarah Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 7:47pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Testing - Erik Hi Derek, No problem at all! What I appreciate about this kind of forum is that anyone can discuss anything they like and one only need respond to what one is interested in or inclined to comment on at the time. I know you must also being getting busy preparing for your trip to Thailand. Please keep us posted on that and any topics you're interested to comment on;-)) Sarah --- Derek Cameron wrote: > Hi, Sarah, > > I appreciate your post, but I'm getting bored with this study vs > practice discussion and all its ramifications, and I would prefer to > drop it and move on to something else. > > Derek. > 7401 From: Sarah and Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 7:51pm Subject: Fwd: Re: Welcome to dhammastudygroup --- "Seylan Bank - DBD (Sumane Rathnasuriya)" wrote: > Dear Moderators, > > Thank you for the Welcome Msg. > > As desired I wish to detail my interests etc. as > hereunder. > > I received info about the Group thro' e-mail > forwarded by my collegue on > Subject: [BuddhistWellnessGroup] Digest Number 101 > of Friday, August 10, > 2001 10:24 AM > > I was interested in the concept "Finding the > Moment". > > I do not wish to intensely debate on intricate > deeprooted concepts/beliefs > but would use basics in abhidhamma occasionally to > sort out matters. I > prefer understanding situations on a "chain > analysis" not making analysis > complicated. > > I wish to understand rather than believe, that is in > respect of Dhamma. > > Sumane Rathnasuriya 7402 From: m. nease Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 8:35pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Fwd: Re: Welcome to dhammastudygroup Dear Sumane, wrote: > I > prefer understanding situations on a "chain > analysis" not making analysis > complicated. > I wish to understand rather than believe, that is > in > respect of Dhamma. Well said. Your comments reminded me of this: 'This Dhamma is for one who enjoys non-complication, who delights in non-complication, not for one who enjoys & delights in complication.' Anguttara Nikaya VIII.30 Anuruddha Sutta To Anuruddha 7403 From: Herman Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 8:39pm Subject: Re: Abhidhamma and Cognitive Science Dear Jon, > > Put another way, can the findings of cognitive science really give any > > indication either way about any crucial aspect of the teachings? > > My readings in cognitive science, and most other sciences for that matter, certainly confirm that the notion of a controlling self is without foundation. We are a mass of fermenting chemical processes, each one ultimately knowable and predicatable in its outcome, conforming as they all are to knowable laws. I take this not so much as a confirmation of the teachings, but as the honest finding of open minded enquiry. For the object of true scientific investigation is to know, not to confirm Planck, Newton or the Buddha. And how does modern science know it knows? When it is able to accurately predict and recreate. What is the basis for confidence in a Theradavin worldview? You can start with rebirth if you like. Is not all of Buddhism predicated on the notion of rebirth? Is there anything in rebirth that is knowable? Personally, I see more heuristic value in the the anatta, anicca and duhka of modern genetics. Regards Herman 7404 From: Sarah Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 9:11pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Fwd: Re: Welcome to dhammastudygroup Dear Sumane, Welcome to dsg. You make some interesting comments here and I look forward to hearing how you find the discussions we're all having. I'm sure you will have plenty to contribute and I hope to get to know you more. Perhaps you would tell us how you use 'basics of abhidhamma occasionally to sort out matters'..... I wonder if you're from Sri Lanka too and whether you know Gayan as well? Thank you so much for joining with these comments. Best wishes, Sarah (Sumane Rathnasuriya)" > wrote: > > As desired I wish to detail my interests etc. as > > hereunder. > > > > I was interested in the concept "Finding the > > Moment". > > > > I do not wish to intensely debate on intricate > > deeprooted concepts/beliefs > > but would use basics in abhidhamma occasionally to > > sort out matters. I > > prefer understanding situations on a "chain > > analysis" not making analysis > > complicated. > > > > I wish to understand rather than believe, that is in > > respect of Dhamma. > > > > Sumane Rathnasuriya 7405 From: Howard Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 6:31pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: rapidity of the processes Hi, Herman - I think you raise important and interesting questions here. I eagerly await Nina's reply. Meanwhile, I'll chat a bit about this matter. In a message dated 8/12/01 8:22:36 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Herman writes: > Nina, > > Forgive me if I have misunderstood, but to my limited understanding a > person who dwelt in a realm of colours, hardnesses and softnesses, > sounds, smells, tastes, coldness and warmness etc only, and makes no > further associations and connections between these separate events, > would be a completely dysfunctional person. The diagnosis would be > along the lines of disassociative state. > --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: What you say here makes sense to me. Certainly the Buddha had a keen conceptual ability which he constantly made use of for communication purposes. However, at the very same time, he didn't reify his concepts, but saw through them by means of wisdom. --------------------------------------------------------- > > Is it incorrect to say that the process of combining information from > separate events and so forming concepts, is the actual basis for > insight and wisdom, and that the reverse process of deconstructing > concepts into separate and non-related events would remove all > foundations for wisdom and insight? > ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: It would seem to me that in the process of *cultivating* wisdom, concepts play an important role, and they do so via both analysis and synthesis. To me, concepts are a kind of mental short hand which enables us to grasp patterns of interrelationships in a single step. They can also be useful as meditative tools as, for example, in the light-labelling technique of Mahasi Sayadaw. Concepts are indispensable for understanding the world in a conventional manner, but they also lay traps for us, the traps of substantialism and nihilism, and the trap of "living in one's mind", substituting intellectualization for direct seeing. I suspect that wisdom, itself, is an immediate knowing which can directly apprehend the nature of all examined dhammas and the interrelationships among them, and thereby can supercede the conceptual faculty. ----------------------------------------------------- > > > Regards > > > Herman > > ============================= 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) 7406 From: Howard Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 6:36pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Testing - Erik Hi, Erik - Thank you for the following clarification! It seems we actually agree completely on this matter. :-) With metta, howard In a message dated 8/12/01 10:16:37 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Erik writes: > --- Howard wrote: > > Hi, Erik - > > > Howard: > > I am among the first to agree that the entire path, > including Right > > Concentration, which the Buddha defined as the jhanas, is needed. > However, I > > would also like to point out that nothing that happens in time > happens at any > > time other than the present, for, as the Buddha pointed out, > neither the past > > nor the future is existent. (Of course, the present doesn't remain > for even > > an instant, and so there is an essential magical quality to time, a > kind of > > unreality.) > > On this point we do not at all disagree, just to be perfectly clear. > There IS no other moment than the present moment. HOWEVER, this is > not what I was driving at. > > I don't recall seeing the Buddha teaching in those terms. This > is not an issue of whether or not awareness--or for that matter, > awakening--occur in the present moment. They MUST! Past & future are > mere mental elaborations, constructs. So nowhere will you see me > disagree with the notion that nothing, NOTHING, happens outside of > the "present moment"! > > What I am specifically questioning is any METHODOLOGY that appears to > get hung up on the "present moment" to the point of excluding the > more convenmtional view of past, present, and future, of kusala and > akusala, and more important, of directed PRACTICE. > > All of my objections are about pedagogy--strategic pedagogy. Any > objections I raise here are not denying there is only this present > moment because, let's face it, that's all there really is. > > But when there is no mention of anything BUT recognizing the present > moment as a pathway out of dukkha, BIG objection. The Buddha didn't > teach that way. The Buddha spoke of past, present, and future. The > Buddha spoke of conventional realities arising and passing away. The > Buddha taught practices like Right Mindfulness and Right > Concentration ande all the other limbs of the Noble Eightfold Path. > > If I were to really get cooking and go all Prajnaparamita on everyone > here, there are many who would no doubt accuse me of nihilism. In the > Perfection of Wisdom there ulitmately isn't even past, or present, > not to mention eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, mind; no Buddha, not > Path, no Path leading to cessation! There aren't even any suffering > sentient beings at all! But who really understands that directly? > > We have to begin where we are, coming back to my earlier point. And > where we are is a place where we are enmeshed in our confusion, stuck > in our stories about the past and our expectations for the future. > And we have to work with those as well. No amount of wishing to > understand realty in the present moment can change this fact. > > Therefore, we need to work SKILLFULLY with our delusions of past and > future, and to work SKILLFULLY with practices designed to finally > snap the grip of our delusion abuot how things exist (and don't > exist). What I question is just how skillful the strategy > of "recognizing realities this moment" is as a means of doing that. > > That is, and alwyas has been the question I've had about this. It's > pretty simple, I think. So again, no denial there is only now. But > HOW to recognize that--REALLY recognize that? How do we get from > point A (sufering sentient being) to point B (Buddha?). > > That is the MOST important question, in terms of putting the horse > before the cart. Can we realize this by just talking about present > moment? By just talking about paramattha dhammas? Or must there be, > in addition to this, skillfully working with the conventional > realities of sentient beings that perceive non-existent things like > the past or future? > > The Buddha taught in just this way, if you read all his suttas. The > Buddha spoke of past lives, and of future lives. The Buddha spoke of > practices that exist at the purely conventional level, like > cultivating Right Effort and Right Mindfulness and Right > Concentration. The Buddha, to the best of my knowledge, did NOT speak > about ONLY recognizing realities in the present moment as a way out > of dukkha, but taught a wide variety of skill-in-means approaches to > bringing that understanding about directly. > > To recognize there is only reality in the present moment would be a > FRUIT of these more boring, mundane practices. But then one wuold > also recognize at the same time there are not now, nor have there > ever been nor will there ever be sentient beings, the triple-realm, > no suffering, no origin of suffering, no cessation of suffering, not > even a path leading to the cessation of suffering! > > > Erik, I seem to be missing your point here. What is the > positive > > assertion that you are making? > > I hope the above clarifies my intent & meaning some more. > > Cheers, > Erik > > /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) 7407 From: Howard Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 6:38pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Testing - Erik Hi, Erik - In a message dated 8/12/01 10:20:55 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Erik writes: > --- Howard wrote: > > Hi, Erik - > > > > In a message dated 8/12/01 4:57:29 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > > Erik writes: > > > > > > > --- Cybele Chiodi > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Sarah > > > > > > > > Don't count on prompty replies from Erik because he is > > > > in a retreat in Angkor. > > > > > > And what a retreat it was! I thought the week before was > seriously > > > reality-bending, but this past few days takes the cake. Had > anyone > > > told me just a week ago I'd return to BKK with a new fiancee (not > in > > > tow, however), I'd have laughed them out of the room. > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > REALLY!! If you are serious - that is, not metaphorical in > some way - > > then you have my heartiest congratulations!! > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > Yes, that was SERIOUS, as in NOT metaphorical! :) (though don't think > for an instant that the metaphotrical dimension of this entire > situation isn't far greater than the conventional reality of this, > either :) :) :) > > > =========================== Wonderful! I'm very happy for you. Heartiest congratulations! 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) 7408 From: Howard Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 6:44pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Testing - Erik Hi, Derek - > Hi, Howard, > > > I'm a bit confused, Derek. Are you saying that someone on > this list > > is, in your estimation, like the person characterized by Ajahn > Chah? > > He was talking about people who don't actually practice. But I think > we already had the study vs practice discussion. > > Derek. > ============================ Mmm. I do think that we should keep in mind that right speech and lovingkindness are parts of the practice. 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) 7409 From: cybele chiodi Date: Mon Aug 13, 2001 10:48pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana hi Jon > > Indeed Jon, one can study, meditate and investigate our mind >>carefully >and therefore learn to discriminate and don't be TOO attached only to the >ancient texts and commentaries but be openminded also to different >approaches and interpretations. > >I agree (I think). True dhamma of one level or another can come from any >source, and we should not be closed to that possibility. > >But I'm not sure about the value of 'approaches and interpretations' that >are not supported by the texts and commentaries. Can these be regarded as >the teachings? Well Jon if you don't feel amenable to this possibility you are denying all Mahayana Buddhism for example as is an elaboration and expansion from the original teachings. I think that whatever teachings we learn must be necessarily supported by our capacity of assimilating them, the inner experience of understanding it properly. I don't rely on interpretations I can't relate inside me because I would be faking a knowledge I haven't attained. I maintain vivid and active my enquiring mind and I don't stick to anything at all without investigating and feeling responsive to it. > > > Sometimes our loyalty to the Tipitaka can lead to a kind of subtle > > fundamentalism and narrowmindness. > >On the other hand, and particularly when it comes to any instruction on >matters of actual 'practice', we need to be able to discriminate true >dhamma from non-dhamma. It is hardly sufficient, I think, to take things >on trust and rely on our own instincts, since these instincts are coloured >by our own (ample) ignorance and wrong view. I agree with you but as I contemplate the delusional configuration of my mind I also don't trust masters and schools for the sake of it. Our mind could be misleading us as well because that view is palatable to our conditionings. That's why I firmly believe in the power of meditation to develop right view. Only study and reasoning cannot accomplish this mental purification. The mind can figure out plenty of strategies very convincing to delude us. How can you trust that your interpretation of the traditional teachings is actually illuminating and trustworthy? > >The best source of true dhamma is of course the tipitaka and its >commentaries. We are extremely fortunate that they are still around in >relatively complete form. At some time in the future there will be only >the words of self-proclaimed teachers to go on. I think we should make the >most of the rare opportunity we have to familiarise ourselves with the >actual teachings. Very curious that you blame self proclaimed teachers as it seems you follow one of them. Nobody is 'appointed' as dhamma teacher and we follow the ones who resounds inside us. Rigidity is not discernement and avoiding contact with different sources doesn't imply in manipulating the original teachings. Considering that all traditional buddhist schools agree on meditation being the asset of the practice and in your approach is not considered fundamental I would dare to say that also you don't embrace fully the traditional teachings. Sometimes our fervour for Dhamma creates personal cults Jon and it can happens whether you use the 'true source' of Tipitaka or a Nichiren text. 'The map is not the territory.' Metta Cybele 7410 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 0:48am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Fwd: Re: Welcome to dhammastudygroup dear sumane, ayubowan and welcome. hope your stay here will be a pleasant and skillful experience. regards gayan 7411 From: Erik Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 2:20am Subject: Re: the object of citta --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Eric, Howard and all, > Eric wrote: > >Rather than talk about abstract notions like cittas (and until you > have had DIRECT experience of a citta, please don't come back to me > with this "paramattha dhammas" business--cittas are WAY too abstract > an concept before such direct experience of them; who but a Buddha or > nearly a Buddha directly discern the billionth of a second of > awareness each citta represents? > Nina: > I can very well understand that for several people it is difficult to > understand what citta is. Hello Nina! :) I don't think the concept of citta is at all difficult to grasp. To the contrary, for many, it appears to serve as an object of grasping all too easily! :) > Since it falls away extremely rapidly, it seems > impossible to grasp it. I would contend that it IS impossible to "grasp" (if you mean by grasp, to be aware of) a single moment of citta unless we have the omniscient mind of a Buddha or nearly so--in the same way the naked eye cannot ever hope to perceive a subatomic particle. In other words, no normal person can possibly directly cognize a single citta. Therefore, for all but Buddhas or those with some amazing degree of direct knowledge of such infinitestimally miniscule mind-moments, citta is a mere abstraction. It may be a helpful abstraction in terms of breaking out the difference between "mere awareness" (citta combined with the sabba-citta-sadharana cetasikas) vs. say "awareness accompanied by either wholesome or unwholesome qualities" (the combination of citta & cetasika, more specifically the 14 akusala cetasikas or the 25 sobhana cetasikas). Once we know that there is a difference between mere "knowing" (the most basic function of citta) and the various qualities that make up a moment of knowing, now, to me, THAT seems to be a very helpful thing to understand. Helpful in the sense that it is very useful in terms of helping us to distinguish between skillful vs. unskillful qualities of mind. Helpful in the sense of helping us to distinguish what is to be put down vs. what is to be taken up (e.g. sammapadhana). If this is NOT the aim of studying citta & cetasika, then it would appear to me that the entire point of studinyg the Buddha's Dharma has been lost, and the study of the technical sysetm of Abhidhamma has degenerated into an entirely pointless and stagnant exercise, exactly as fruitful as the study of quantum mechanics--at least in terms of the SOLE aim of the Buddha's Dharma, which is to help suffering sentient beings terminate that suffering once and for all. > It seems an abstract notion, like all the other > categories described in the Abhidhamma. However, would the Buddha speak > about paramattha dhammas, not only described in the Abhidhamma, but also in > the Vinaya and Suttanta, if their characteristics could not be experienced, > even now while we are beginning to develop understanding? I am not speaking against the utility of terms like paramattha dhammas, only against reifying our ideas about these paramattha dhammas, which is an activity that DIRECTLY blocks the very wisdom that sees things as they truly are, the very wisdom that leads directly to release--which means the permanent termination of the mental afflictions through the arising of supramundane wisdom. > As Sarah wrote : > very paramattha dhammas, the 6 worlds appearing through eyes, ears, and the > rest. Then perhaps we have been reading a different recensions of the Pali Canon, because I have have rarely seen the words attributed to the Buddha mention these paramattha dhammas. The bulk of the Suttas I have read (and I confess I have not read anything close to the entire Pali Canon, so I could be all wet here) deal with far more pedestrian things, like suffering, for example. Specifically ever one of the Suttas I've read all partake of One Taste: the taste of freedom from suffering--by whatever means happen to be most expedient. > He talks about different mental states- ignorance, clinging , wisdom > and > all the other states which accompany the moments of experience. I agree the Buddha ofetn speaks on wisdom, ignorance, clinging, etc. But I have not yet come across a single sutta where he talks about these qualities in terms of infinitestimally tiny mind-moments and the various accompanying mental-factors of these infinitestimally tiny mind-moments. I have only ever heard the Buddha speak in terms of what his disciples could comprehend at their exact level of understanding. I have often, for example, heard the Buddha employ metaphors, similes, and parables. Many of his listeners seemed to easily relate to these kinds of stories, such as the parable of the raft, or the parable of the poison arrow. In most of the Sutta I have read, the Buddha used the simplest terms to illuminate even the deepest truths, often to the point that those listening with wise attention came to directly see what was being pointed at. > These are > not > abstract concepts but what make up our lives now. The reason he talked about > these dhammas is because it is possible right now to be aware of seeing ( a > citta) or visible object (a rupa). > This is the aim of the teachings. If this is the aim of your system of teaching, then I can only wish you godspeed in achieving it, because the sooner you do, the sooner you will see how this aim, like the aim of quantum physics, is an aim having nothing to do with permanently terminating the round of suffering we call samsara. THAT aim in specific is the SOLE aim of the Buddha's doctrine, which, when boiled down to its most essential message, is simply nothing other than suffering and the end of suffering. If one believes there is any other aim to the Buddha's teaching than just suffering and the end of suffering, then the entire point of the Buddha's teaching has been lost. It's really that cut-and-dried. 7412 From: Fenny Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 2:02am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana Dear Cy and Jon and everybody, This may shed some light on your discussion regarding right view. Enjoy. ==================================== Right View-The Place of Coolness By Ajahn Chah The practice of Dhamma goes against our habits; the truth goes against our desires, so there is difficulty in the practice. Some things that we understand as wrong may be right, while the things we take to be right might be wrong. Why is this? Because our minds are in darkness, we don 't clearly see the Truth. We don't really know anything and so are fooled by people's lies. They point out what is right as being wrong and we believe it; that which is wrong, they say is right, and we believe that. This is because we are not yet our own masters. Our moods lie to us constantly. We shouldn't take this mind and its opinions as our guide, because it doesn't know the Truth. Some people don't want to listen to others at all, but this is not the way of a man of wisdom. A wise man listens to everything. One who listens to Dhamma must listen just the same whether he likes it or not, and not blindly believe or disbelieve. He must stay at the halfway mark, the middle point, and not be heedless. He just listens and then contemplates, giving rise to the right results accordingly. A wise man should contemplate and see the cause and effect for himself before he believes what he hears. Even if the teacher speaks the truth, don't just believe it, because you don't yet know the truth of it for yourself. It's the same for all of us, including myself. I've practiced before you; I've seen many lies before. For instance, "This practice is really difficult, really hard." Why is the practice difficult? It's just because we think wrongly; we have wrong view. Previously I lived together with a lot of monks, but I didn't feel right. I ran away to the forests and mountains, fleeing the crowd, the monks and novices, I thought that they weren't like me, they didn't practice as hard as I did. They were sloppy. That person was like this, this person was like that. This was something that really put me in turmoil; it was the cause for my continually running away. But whether I lived alone or with others I still have no peace. On my own I wasn't content, in a large group I wasn't content. I thought this discontent was due to my companions, due to my moods, due to my living place, the food, the weather, due to this and that. I was constantly searching for something to suit my mind. I was a dhutanga monk, I went traveling, but things still weren' t right. So I contemplated, "What can I do to make things right? What can I do?" Living with a lot of people I was dissatisfied, with few people I was dissatisfied. For what reason? I just couldn't see it. Why was I dissatisfied? Because I had wrong view, just that; because I still clung to the wrong Dhamma. Wherever I went I was discontent thinking, "Here is no good, there is no good." On and on like that. I bled others. I blamed the weather, heart and cold, I blamed everything! Just like the mad dog. It bites whatever it meets, because it's mad. When the mind is like this our practice is never settled. Today we feel good, tomorrow no good. It's like that all the time. We don't attain contentment or peace. The Buddha once saw a jackal, a wild dog. Run out of the forest where he was staying. It stood still for a while, then it ran into the underbrush, and then out again. Then it ran into a tree hollow, then out again. Then it went into a cave, only to run out again. One minute it stood, the next it ran, then it lay down, then it jumped up;. That jackal had mange. When it stood the mange would eat into its skin, so it would run. Running it was still uncomfortable, so it would stop. Standing was still uncomfortable, so it would lie down. Then it would jump up again, running into the underbrush, the tree hollow, never staying still. The Buddha said," Monks, did you see that jackal this afternoon? Standing it suffered, lying down it suffered. While in the underbrush, a tree hollow or a cave, it suffered. It blamed standing for its discomfort, it blamed sitting, it blamed running and lying down; it blamed the tree, the underbrush and the cave. In fact the problem was with none of those things. That jackal had mange. The problem was with the mange." We monks are just the same as that jackal. Our discontent is due to wrong view. Because we don't exercise sense restraint we blame our suffering on externals. Whether we live at Wat Pah Pong, in America or in London we aren't satisfied. Going to live at Bung Wai or any of the other branch monasteries we're still not satisfied. Why not? Because we still have wrong view within us, just that! Wherever we go we aren't content. But just as that dog, if the mange is cured, is content wherever it goes, so it is for us. I reflect on this often, and I teach you this often, because it's very important. If we know the truth of our various moods we arrive at contentment. Whether it's hot or cold we are satisfied, with may people or with few people we are satisfied. Contentment doesn't depend on how many people w area with; it comes only from right view. If we have right view then wherever we stay we are content. Bit most of us have wrong view. It's just like a maggot! A maggot's living place is filthy, its food is filthy.but they suit the maggot. If you take a stick and brush it ways from its lump of dung, it'll struggle and crawl back into it. It's the same when the Ajahn teaches us to see rightly. We opposed it; it makes us feel uneasy. We run back to sour 'lump of dung' because that' where we feel at home. We're all like this If we don't see the harmful consequences of all our wrong views then we can' t leave them, the practice is difficult. So we should listen. There's nothing else to the practice. If we have right view then wherever we go we are content. I have practiced and seen this already. These days there are many monks, novices and laypeople coming to see me. If I still didn't know, if I still hade wrong view, I'd be dead by now! The right abiding place for monks, the place of coolness, is just right view itself. We shouldn't look for anything else. To be continue........................ =================================== Let's practice the Dhamma, Fen ----- Original Message ----- From: "cybele chiodi" Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 10:48 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana > > hi Jon > > > > Indeed Jon, one can study, meditate and investigate our mind >>carefully > >and therefore learn to discriminate and don't be TOO attached only to the > >ancient texts and commentaries but be openminded also to different > >approaches and interpretations. > > > > >I agree (I think). True dhamma of one level or another can come from any > >source, and we should not be closed to that possibility. > > > >But I'm not sure about the value of 'approaches and interpretations' that > >are not supported by the texts and commentaries. Can these be regarded as > >the teachings? > > Well Jon if you don't feel amenable to this possibility you are denying all > Mahayana Buddhism for example as is an elaboration and expansion from the > original teachings. > I think that whatever teachings we learn must be necessarily supported by > our capacity of assimilating them, the inner experience of understanding it > properly. > I don't rely on interpretations I can't relate inside me because I would be > faking a knowledge I haven't attained. > I maintain vivid and active my enquiring mind and I don't stick to anything > at all without investigating and feeling responsive to it. > > > > > > Sometimes our loyalty to the Tipitaka can lead to a kind of subtle > > > fundamentalism and narrowmindness. > > > >On the other hand, and particularly when it comes to any instruction on > >matters of actual 'practice', we need to be able to discriminate true > >dhamma from non-dhamma. It is hardly sufficient, I think, to take things > >on trust and rely on our own instincts, since these instincts are coloured > >by our own (ample) ignorance and wrong view. > > I agree with you but as I contemplate the delusional configuration of my > mind I also don't trust masters and schools for the sake of it. > Our mind could be misleading us as well because that view is palatable to > our conditionings. > That's why I firmly believe in the power of meditation to develop right > view. > Only study and reasoning cannot accomplish this mental purification. > The mind can figure out plenty of strategies very convincing to delude us. > How can you trust that your interpretation of the traditional teachings is > actually illuminating and trustworthy? > > > > >The best source of true dhamma is of course the tipitaka and its > >commentaries. We are extremely fortunate that they are still around in > >relatively complete form. At some time in the future there will be only > >the words of self-proclaimed teachers to go on. I think we should make the > >most of the rare opportunity we have to familiarise ourselves with the > >actual teachings. > > Very curious that you blame self proclaimed teachers as it seems you follow > one of them. > Nobody is 'appointed' as dhamma teacher and we follow the ones who resounds > inside us. > Rigidity is not discernement and avoiding contact with different sources > doesn't imply in manipulating the original teachings. > Considering that all traditional buddhist schools agree on meditation being > the asset of the practice and in your approach is not considered fundamental > I would dare to say that also you don't embrace fully the traditional > teachings. > Sometimes our fervour for Dhamma creates personal cults Jon and it can > happens whether you use the 'true source' of Tipitaka or a Nichiren text. > 'The map is not the territory.' > > > Metta > > Cybele > 7413 From: Howard Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 1:36am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Abhidhamma and Cognitive Science Hi, Jon - In a message dated 8/13/01 5:34:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Jonothan Abbott writes with regard to my interest in possible confirmation (or the opposite) of such Abhidhamma positions as only one object of consciousness being possible at a time: > My point was simply this. Unless cognitive science can measure something > to a degree that is beyond the possibility of error, the result is of no > use, since it only *tends to* show one thing or the other. > > In any event, I think you'll find that what science investigates does not > coincide with the paramattha dhammas and other matters discussed by the > Buddha. > ============================== Perhaps so, Jon. I don't see this as a critical issue in any case, just an interesting one. 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) 7414 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 6:05am Subject: Satipatthana (was Testing - Erik MN 131, in > > the Middle Length Discourses (majjhima Nikaya): > > > > A Single Excellent Night > > > > Let not a person revive the past > > Or on the future build his hopes;.... > > > > ...Instead with insight let him see > > Each presently arisen state; > > Let him know that and be sure of it, > > .. > > ERIK:Excellent indeed, Robert! Now, HOW do we go about doing this, > precisely? ______________________ Dear Erik, Satipatthana is only taught by a surpreme Buddha. It can only be heard about during the rare times of a Buddha sasana. To understand its development we need to hear many details of the teachings. Now there is seeing, were the javana cittas after that moment of seeing kusala or akusala? There are so many different types of citta. Now I am typing, the cittas that condition the movement of the hand are not vipaka (result) they are different from the vipaka cittas that are seeing, hearing, tasting, touching and smelling. These are all realities they are happening now again and again. How much do we know about them? They are anatta, uncontrollable, aniccum, gone already. The buddha said in the sutta above "with insight let him see Each presently arisen state; Let him know that and be sure of it," The development of satipatthana is about seeing these dhammas now,as they appear. Life is so short- namas and rupas are arising and passing away at this moment. There is nothing else. By hearing enough and considering conditions are built up to gradually let go of the clinging to wrong practice that we have accumulated, Then there can be the opportunity for sati and panna to understand dhammas, as they are now. Whether we are sitting crosslegged, or standing there can be awareness of dhammas – but not by clinging and trying and thinking that we need volition. NinaVG and Khun sujin often say "reduce yourself into one moment". That is it. There is no Robert; that is the illusion formed by the rapid change and the different elements doing their functions. It is like a movie - merely different frames joined together and giving the appearance of life. None of the elements, the different cetasikas and cittas and rupas have any idea of wanting to do this or that. They are merely carrying out there function - which is to know, or to hear, or to see, or to crave and so many other elements with different functions. The more I learn about these things the more I see that lobha(attachment) and moha(ignorance) are very common. I do not feel that they can be quickly erased - the path seems much longer and harder than when I began. Yet strangely I feel happier and more relaxed about it all. Understanding works its way once "we" get out of the way. No technique. No shortcuts. Paramattha dhammas are in us and around us. If there are sufficient conditions then panna will arise in conjunction with sati, samadhi, effort and the other kusala cetasikas and understand one moment as it is. That is satipatthana. If there are not the conditions then listen more, consider more- this is essential. Learn about seeing and color- do you think this computer is real, or is there a level of panna that knows only color and hardness? This is the time of a Buddhasasana - it is the only time that the the deep teachings on khandas, dhatus, ayatanas; on paticcasamupada and the 24 paccaya etc. can be heard. It would be regretable not to listen. robert 7417 From: Victor Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 8:17am Subject: Re: Satipatthana (was Testing - Erik [snip] There is no Robert; [snip] > > robert Hi Robert, You wrote "There is no Robert". Could you explain who you were referring to by the name "Robert"? Metta, Victor 7418 From: Erik Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 0:25pm Subject: Re: Satipatthana (was Testing - Erik --- Robert wrote: > MN 131, in > > > the Middle Length Discourses (majjhima Nikaya): > > > > > > A Single Excellent Night > > > > > > Let not a person revive the past > > > Or on the future build his hopes;.... > > > > > > ...Instead with insight let him see > > > Each presently arisen state; > > > Let him know that and be sure of it, > > > .. > > > > ERIK:Excellent indeed, Robert! Now, HOW do we go about doing this, > > precisely? > ______________________ > Dear Erik, > > Satipatthana is only taught by a surpreme Buddha. It > can only be heard about during the rare times of a > Buddha sasana. To understand its development we need > to hear many details of the teachings. Indeed, and taking a single passage like you quoted above, without considering the greater context of the corpus of teachings the Buddha explicitly taught on Satipatthana, would be a quite unwise, I think. So then, to place the above passage into the proper context, I think we should examine those Suttas where the Buddha spelled out the meaning of Right Mindfulness in the greatest and most explicit detail. Would you not agree, given the importance of Right Mindfulness as a definite factor of enlightenment, that this is a wise strategy? > Now there is seeing, were the javana cittas after that > moment of seeing kusala or akusala? There are so > many different types of citta. Now I am typing, the > cittas that condition the movement of the hand are not > vipaka (result) they are different from the vipaka > cittas that are seeing, hearing, tasting, touching and > smelling. These are all realities they are happening > now again and again. How much do we know about them? > They are anatta, uncontrollable, aniccum, gone > already. The buddha said in the sutta above "with insight let him see > Each presently arisen state; > Let him know that and be sure of it," And how does the Buddha enjoin his disciples to do just that? Here's what I've been able to dig up (from the Satipatthana Sutta): http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn010.html Beginning with, yet again, Mindfulness of the Breath: "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." This is further continued with the various aspects of anapanasati (mediation on the breath--which you can read in the original Sutta in more detail--so no need to elaborate further on this vital aspect of Mindfulness). Robert: > The development of satipatthana is about > seeing these dhammas now,as they appear. Life is so > short- > namas and rupas are arising and passing away at this > moment. The Buddha seems to say this, but not in the way you're putting it. More specifically, the Buddha instructs us in Mindfulness of the Breath: "In this way he remains focused internally on the body in & of itself, or externally on the body in & of itself, or both internally & externally on the body in & of itself. Or he remains focused on the phenomenon of origination with regard to the body, on the phenomenon of passing away with regard to the body, or on the phenomenon of origination & passing away with regard to the body [Erik: do you consider the "body" a "paramattha dhamma"? Enquiring minds want to know! :)]. Or his mindfulness that 'There is a body' is maintained to the extent of knowledge & remembrance [Erik: uh oh! "Remembrance"? What has this to do with "right now"? Please elaborate for us here, Robert! :)]. And he remains independent, unsustained by (not clinging to) anything in the world. This is how a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself." > There is nothing else. By hearing enough and > considering conditions are built up to gradually let > go of the clinging to wrong practice that we have > accumulated, Then there can be the opportunity for > sati and panna to understand dhammas, as they are now. Agreed. That means coming to Right View through having wrong views pointed out as such, and by meditating carefully on such instructions, which thereby gradually loosens the fixations on wrong views, which in turn leads to Right View, which in turn leads to a correct understanding of right practice--the very practices that lead to total cessation of suffering. > Whether we are sitting crosslegged, or standing there can be > awareness of dhammas – Agreed completely, as the Buddha clearly notes in the Satipatthana Sutta. > but not by clinging and trying and thinking that we > need volition. Clinging is always a bad thing from the Buddha's perspective (especially clinging to ideas like getting "results" in meditation). But if you think we don't need to take volitional control of our actions to the degree possible RIGHT NOW, your contention is at serious variance with what the Buddha actually taught. The Buddha rejected the sort of determinism your statement imples in no uncertain terms, and in many, many places! > NinaVG and Khun sujin often say "reduce yourself > into one moment". That is it. Forget for a moment what anyone else you've heard has said on this point, Robert, and please consider listening carefully to what this collection of khandas is telling you for once. To quote Ajahn Chah on this point: "The practice of Dhamma goes against our habits; the truth goes against our desires, so there is difficulty in the practice. Some things that we understand as wrong may be right, while the things we take to be right might be wrong. Why is this? Because our minds are in darkness, we don't clearly see the Truth. We don't really know anything and so are fooled by people's lies. They point out what is right as being wrong and we believe it; that which is wrong, they say is right, and we believe that. This is because we are not yet our own masters. Our moods lie to us constantly. We shouldn't take this mind and its opinions as our guide, because it doesn't know the Truth. "Some people don't want to listen to others at all, but this is not the way of a man of wisdom. A wise man listens to everything. One who listens to Dhamma must listen just the same whether he likes it or not, and not blindly believe or disbelieve. He must stay at the halfway mark, the middle point, and not be heedless. He just listens and then contemplates, giving rise to the right results accordingly. "A wise man should contemplate and see the cause and effect for himself before he believes what he hears. Even if the teacher speaks the truth, don't just believe it, because you don't yet know the truth of it for yourself." Now, as to considering nama-rupa, what did Lord Buddha actually say on this point? Further examination of the Satipatthana Sutta may shed some more light on this point: "Furthermore, the monk remains focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the sixfold internal & external sense media. And how does he remain focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the sixfold internal & external sense media? There is the case where he discerns the eye, he discerns forms, he discerns the fetter that arises dependent on both. He discerns how there is the arising of an unarisen fetter. And he discerns how there is the abandoning of a fetter once it has arisen. And he discerns how there is no further appearance in the future of a fetter that has been abandoned. (The same formula is repeated for the remaining sense media: ear, nose, tongue, body, & intellect.)" Nowhere here does Lord Buddha speak about "realities in this moment" (though to a degree it's implied since we can't directly observe anything not arising here & now). What the Buddha EXPLICITLY enjoins us to reflect on (and REFLECTION involves notions of past, present AND future!) are the fetters! Not "realities arising right now," but the FETTERS, the very fetters (samyojanas) that keep us bound to the wheel of samsara! (I think I hear an echo here...) :) :) :) In fact, if you read every single one of the instructions the Buddha actually gave his disciples in the Suttas dealing with Right Mindfulness, in every one he mentions "remembrance" as a vital component of the practice of Right Mindfulness. Where does remembrance fit into "recognizing realities in the present moment"? (Other than noting the obvious fact that thre is nothing we can experience NOT happening in the present moment.) The fact is the Buddha NEVER teachers "just this moment," but SPECIFICALLY teaches REMEMBRANCE (which, to my understanding also happens to be the very definition of sati, or Mindfulness!) So then, I must inquire, what about sati has anything to do with "realities this moment"? Right Mindfulness litrally translated means RIGHT REMEMBRANCE of qualities that have ALREADY PASSED AWAY! But your definition of Satipatthana implies that sati is "remembrance of the present moment"! That would entail, in no uncertain terms, a total logical absurdity, my dear friend in the Dhamma. How can one possibly remember that which has not yet passed, been marked by sanna, for example? > There is no Robert; that is the > illusion formed by the rapid > change and the different elements doing their > functions. It is like a movie - merely different > frames joined together and giving the appearance of > life. None of the elements, the different cetasikas > and cittas and rupas have any idea of wanting to do > this or that. They are merely carrying out there > function - which is to know, or to hear, or to see, or > to crave and so many other elements with different > functions. Ultimately nothing arises apart from conditions, but again, we nontheless are not deterministically bound without any shred of free will. We DO have volition and CAN choose out actions--in however limited a way--and act, RIGHT HERE AND NOW, for example to DECIDE to either listen to and put into practice the Holy Dharma. Or to refuse to listen to the Holy Dharma and continue to suffer further runds of misery. We can choose to kill, steal, lie, committ sexual miscondut, take intoxicants to the point of heedlessness. We can also choose not to. It may be difficult to make chioces because we are so heavily conditioned by past thoughts and deeds. But it is decidedly NOT impossible. If it were, why would the Buddha have said: "Abandon what is unwholesome, oh monks! One can abandon the unwholesome, oh monks! If it were not possible, I would not ask you to do so. If this abandoning of the unwholesome would bring harm and suffering, I would not ask you to abandon it. But as the abandoning of the unwholesome brings benefit and happiness, Therefore, I say, 'Abandon what is unwholesome!' Cultivate what is wholesome, oh monks. One can cultivate the wholesome. If it were not feasible, I would not ask you to do it. If this cultivation of the wholesome would bring harm and suffering, I would not ask you to cultivate it. But as the cultivation of the wholesome brings benefit and happiness, Therefore, I say, 'Cultivate what is wholesome!'" (AN) > The more I learn about these things the more I > see that lobha(attachment) and moha(ignorance) are very common. Indeed they are at root (at least moha) of all suffering. Which of course conditions grasping--particular one of the nastiest forms of grasping, the grasping at views. > I do > not feel that they can be quickly erased - the path seems much > longer and harder than when I began. And yet it is much, much simpler that you can imagine. > Understanding works its way once "we" get out of the > way. No technique. I could not disagree more vehemently with this very wrong form of understanding. There is VERY MUCH technique, Robert! If there were no technique, the Buddha would have never taught technique in so many places! > No shortcuts. No disagreement there. There are truly no shortcuts, particularly when it comes to things like cultivating wholseome karma and directing one's best efforts at serious meditation practice. > Paramattha dhammas are in us and around us. If there > are sufficient conditions then panna will arise in > conjunction with sati, samadhi, effort and the other > kusala cetasikas and understand one moment as it is. Just as it is also possible that buying a lottery ticket will make one a millionare! :) > That is satipatthana. That is not, I am afraid, Satipatthana. Satipatthana is what the Buddha specifically taught in both the Satipatthana Sutta as well as the Maha-Satipatthana Sutta, which are avaialbe for all and sundery here to read firsthand. No sense my interjecting any moer commentary onto this very important parctice when the Buddhas direct and simple words are availbe for all to see so plainly. > This is the time of a Buddhasasana - it is the only > time that the the deep teachings on khandas, dhatus, > ayatanas; on paticcasamupada and the 24 paccaya etc. > can be heard. It would be regretable not to listen. And just as fortunate that during this Buddha-sasana there are those who have terminated all wrong views as well as all misunderstanding about intent and meaning of the Buddha's Dhamma. It would be even more regrettable if one chooses to ignore their direct instruction on the most essential points of the Dhamma! :) 7419 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 2:33pm Subject: Re: Satipatthana (was Testing - Erik --- Erik wrote: > > > Robert: > > The development of satipatthana is about > > seeing these dhammas now,as they appear. Life is so > > short- > > namas and rupas are arising and passing away at this > > moment. _________________ > > ERIKThe Buddha seems to say this, but not in the way you're putting it. > More specifically, the Buddha instructs us in Mindfulness of the > Breath: > [Erik: do you > consider the "body" a "paramattha dhamma"? Enquiring minds want to > know! :)]. Or his mindfulness that 'There is a body' is maintained to > the extent of knowledge & remembrance [Erik: uh oh! "Remembrance"? > What has this to do with "right now"? Please elaborate for us here, > Robert! If you think we don't need to take volitional control of our > actions to the degree possible RIGHT NOW, your contention is at > serious variance with what the Buddha actually taught. The Buddha > rejected the sort of determinism your statement imples in no > uncertain terms, and in many, many places! > >> Forget for a moment what anyone else you've heard has said on this > point, Robert, and please consider listening carefully to what this > collection of khandas is telling you for once. > > > Nowhere here does Lord Buddha speak about "realities in this moment" > (though to a degree it's implied since we can't directly observe > anything not arising here & now). > > > In fact, if you read every single one of the instructions the Buddha > actually gave his disciples in the Suttas dealing with Right > Mindfulness, in every one he mentions "remembrance" as a vital > component of the practice of Right Mindfulness. Where does > remembrance fit into "recognizing realities in the present moment"? > (Other than noting the obvious fact that thre is nothing we can > experience NOT happening in the present moment.) > > The fact is the Buddha NEVER teachers "just this moment," but > SPECIFICALLY teaches REMEMBRANCE (which, to my understanding also > happens to be the very definition of sati, or Mindfulness!) > > So then, I must inquire, what about sati has anything to do > with "realities this moment"? Right Mindfulness litrally translated > means RIGHT REMEMBRANCE of qualities that have ALREADY PASSED AWAY! > > But your definition of Satipatthana implies that sati is "remembrance > of the present moment"! That would entail, in no uncertain terms, a > total logical absurdity, my dear friend in the Dhamma. How can one > possibly remember that which has not yet passed, been marked by > sanna, for example? > > > We DO have volition and CAN choose out actions--in however > limited a way--and act, RIGHT HERE AND NOW, for example to DECIDE to > either listen to and put into practice the Holy Dharma. Or to refuse > to listen to the Holy Dharma and continue to suffer further runds of > misery. We can choose to kill, steal, lie, committ sexual miscondut, > take intoxicants to the point of heedlessness. We can also choose not -------------------------- RObERT;> > I do > > not feel that they can be quickly erased - the path seems much > > longer and harder than when I began. ________________ > > ERIK:And yet it is much, much simpler that you can imagine. _________________ > > > Robert:Paramattha dhammas are in us and around us. If there > > are sufficient conditions then panna will arise in > > conjunction with sati, samadhi, effort and the other > > kusala cetasikas and understand one moment as it is. > That is satipatthana. ____________________ > > That is not, I am afraid, Satipatthana. Satipatthana is what the > Buddha specifically taught in both the Satipatthana Sutta as well as > the Maha-Satipatthana Sutta, which are avaialbe for all and sundery > here to read firsthand. No sense my interjecting any moer commentary > onto this very important parctice when the Buddhas direct and simple > words are availbe for all to see so plainly. there are those > who have terminated all wrong views as well as all misunderstanding > about intent and meaning of the Buddha's Dhamma. It would be even > more regrettable if one chooses to ignore their direct instruction on > the most essential points of the Dhamma! :) _____________________ Dear Erik, I have ideas about what Dhamma is and you have different ideas. I think it would be unproductive to bother you with further explanations. best wishes robert 7420 From: Erik Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 4:13pm Subject: The Dhamma (was Satipatthana)-Robert --- Robert wrote: > I have ideas about what Dhamma is and you have different ideas. I > think it would be unproductive to bother you with further > explanations. Robert, there's no need to beat a full retreat on a debate like this! If I may be blunt, you seem to have become all of a sudden afraid to engage this mere student and beginner on the essential teachings of Right Mindfulness! What gives? This begs a question, I think. If my hunch is correct, what is the REAL fear, the REAL concern here? Is it the Suttas reputed to be the words of Lord Buddha I have been directly quoting regarding Satipatthana? The very Suttas, I should add, which do not appear to provide any substantial support for your presentation of the meaning and intent of the Buddha's Dhamma as I understand it, and as my teachers (who I should add are considered the "first among the first" in Tibet's Geluk-pa lineage--the lineage all the Dalai Lamas belong to) have taught it--i.e. your argument that the point of the Dhamma is to recognize "realities this moment" vs. my contention and that of my teachers that the Buddha taught only "suffering and its cessation"? Again, I am using ONLY the ACTUAL erputed words of the Buddha from the Suttanta Pitaka here, without the slightest need to resort to general Mahayana or even Tibetan texts. This is all from the from the very Pali Canon we BOTH agree on, in other words--with practically NO gloss added. That's largely because I feel there's little need for gloss, since the Buddha detailed the practices of Right Mindfulness in such simple, direct terms, that I feel addding much more would be akin to gilding the lotus. I really belieev that these Suttas are so simple that even one with relatively little accumulated wisdom could take and begin applying almost immediately, with only the barest training in Buddhist theory--such as what is skillful vs. what is unskillful, and how all things lack "core," and how by implication all composed things are impermanent and therefore by nature also a considered painful. And Robert, my dear friend, you have many more years of experience studying the Dhamma than I do, have read far more of the texts than I have. Certainly a mere beginner like me shouldn't be able to engender what appears to be this degree of consternation in one so well- studied. Unless, perhaps, there are a few things being said that are hitting a little too close to some very deeply-held and cherished views. Recall the Buddha enjoined us to give up ALL our clinging to views. And that will, inevitably, create very extreme discomfort when those views, beliefs, and suppositions are directly challenged. Even more so when we have invested serious time in building up an edifice of fabrications in support of maintaining those cherished views. As I quoted from Ajahn Chah (gleaned from another poster's kind effort earlier), the most important thing is to consider the Dhamma carefully and DISPASSIONATELY (actually one of the requisite qualities of a TRUE student of the Dharma as elaborated in the Tibetan Lam Rim instructions)--no matter the source. Even if it's from sources we may personally agree with. And even from those sources we DISAGREE with! ESPECIALLY those sources we disagree with! And then, most importantly, we should take and TEST THOSE TEACHINGS OUT DIRECTLY, IN OUR OWN EXPERIENCE, such that we come to see, through wise consideration and reflection based on our own direct experience, that THESE activities lead to the increase of unskillful qualities to be put aside and abandoned--to the increase of greed, to the increase of aversion, to the increase of ignorance; and that THESE activities lead to the increase of skillful qualities to be taken up and developed--to the increase of non-grasping, to the increase of non-aversion, to the increase of knowledge. It is ONLY by this totally ruthless and dispassionate process of burning, cutting, grinding--just as one does to test what one suspects to be gold but is not yet certain--and putting into DIRECT PRACTICE the Dhamma we come across, that we can ever come to confirm or refute its correctness based on the above criteria. Furthermore, this is the only way that we will EVER have the hope of creating appropriate conditions for the very special type of wisdom to arise that permanently terminates ignorance at its very root, and the entire mass of suffering that follows on from that, thus fulfilling the entire aim of the Holy Life as taught by Lord Buddha and as taught to me directly by my teachers. It should again be stated that this process, performed properly, will undoubtedly cause some very serious discomfort--even severe shock and pain--all due to to the ego's cherished views and opinions. Because the authentic Dhamma, as Ajahn Chah succinctly observed, is NOT easy. As my incredibly dear & sweet friend Amara mentioned in one post to me when I first joined DSG, there were some monks who, on hearing the correct Dhamma explained by Lord Buddha, actually became so physically discomfited by the powerful truth of the Holy Dhamma they vomited blood! In fact, the authentic Dhamma is the ego's very worst enemy. And the mental afflictions we sometimes label the "ego" will throw up ALL the defense mechanisms it can muster to avoid its being ruthlessly dismantled by totally compassionate wisdom that realizes the emptiness and impermanence and inherent suffering of all conditioned phenomena--the direct knowledge of which the wisdom of the authentic Buddha's Dhamma is certain to reveal at some point--which is the ENTIRE POINT of the Buddhist Dhamma (to see through the fiction of an independent "self" with the faculty of supramundane wisdom--which is the ONLY way to permanently terminate the round of samsara)! If the authentic Dhamma doesn't cause discomfort or challenge our most deeply-held views and prejudices at some point, then it isn't the real thing. It's like fool's gold. It may glitter; but all that glitters, as the saying goes, is not gold. All I can say is I am supremely grateful for the "bad cops" (vs. the "good cops" like my holy lamas and my wonderful Ajahn of Satipatthana meditation at Wat Mahatat, Section 5) of the Dhamma, who I consider among my greatest teachers of all--those who directly challenged and undermined my most cherished beliefs, suppositions, and views I was clinging to about what is and is not the authentic Dhamma. I consider myself extremely fortunate in that I came to see directly that in truth, in spite of the temporary pain they caused my ego, they were all along my very greatest allies, the most compassionate among the compassionate. I hope for your sake that someday you come to see this as well. 7421 From: Sarah Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 5:06pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Fwd: [d-l] Scholars and Meditators Dear Cybele & Friends, --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > >From the book "Numerical Discourses of the Buddha – An Anthology of > >Suttas from the Anguttara Nikaya" > >translated by Nyanaponika Thera and Bhikkhu Bodhi: > > > >125. Scholars and Meditators > > > >. . . "friends, you should train yourselves thus: `Though we > >ourselves are Dhamma-experts, we will praise also those monks who are > >meditators.' And why? Such outstanding men are rare in the world who have > >personal experience of the deathless element (Nibbana). > > And the other monks, too, should train themselves thus: `Though we > >ourselves are meditators, we will praise also those monks who are > >Dhamma-experts.' And why? Such outstanding persons are rare in the > >world who can by their wisdom clearly understand a difficult subject." > > (VI, 46) Thank you for posting this sutta. I like this anthology trans. by B.Bodhi and hope we see a complete Ang.Nik. by him in due course. I think this is a good example of a sutta that can be read and understood at many levels and so, even though (as I've been reminded by Jon & Rob) it's been posted and discusssed on dsg before, I'd like to make a few comments for those of us (read me) who had forgotten and for those who are relatively new to the list. When we first read it, we may appreciate the reminders for tolerance and respect and wise speech in regard to those who appear to follow different paths. We also note how useless bickering and disparaging others are. How easily these can lead to pride and 'puffing-up'. These are useful reminders at any level, for sure! When we just read a translation like this, it is easy to take 'scholars' for being those who are experts in book-learning without any 'inner' developed wisdom and it is easy to take 'meditators' for being those who do not study and who merely follow a 'practice'. If we really wish to know more about these two groups (of monks) who should be highly respected, we need to look at the Pali and commentary notes, I think. The Pali term for the first group is 'dhammayoga' . B.Bodhi adds 'AA says the term refers to preachers (dhamma-kathika). The second group of 'meditators' refers those who have attained jhanas. As Rob (or Nina) pointed out, obviously neither group are arahants, otherwise there would not have been any dispute! From the commentary notes, it seems that the second group, the 'meditators' have already realized the jhanas and they 'touch the deathless (amata) element by nama-kaya, (The mental body i.e.cetasikas)' The Dhammayoga bhikkus (the ones dedicated to Dhamma or the Scholars) "penetrate the deep meaning of the khandas (aggregates), the dhatus (elements) the ayatanas (sense fields). They clearly see it by magga-citta (i.e the citta that experiences nibbana)together with vipassana panna. But here it should be panna which penetrates by considering, and also panna on the level of asking questions and learning" Commentary ends. The last part of the sutta about the Dhammayoga Bhikkhus says 'Such outstanding persons are rare in the world who can by their wisdom (panna) clearly understand a difficult subject' (i.e realize nibbana). Obviously there is no suggestion that this is merely an intellectual approach. How could Nibbana be realized if it were? Likewise, Those who have jhana experience and have attained at least the first stage of enlightenment should be highly respected. Cybele, I should add that even now when I read a sutta like this, with extra notes, I still have many more questions than answers, but I just wished to give an indication about how these suttas can be read at different levels and with different interpretations and why I understand there should be high respect for these Bhikkhus. Best wishes as always and I hope you're enjoying some Italian sunshine! Sarah 7422 From: Sarah Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 5:42pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The Dhamma (was Satipatthana)-Robert Dear Erik, --- Erik wrote: > --- Robert wrote: > > > I have ideas about what Dhamma is and you have different ideas. I > > think it would be unproductive to bother you with further > > explanations. > > Robert, there's no need to beat a full retreat on a debate like this! > If I may be blunt, you seem to have become all of a sudden afraid to > engage this mere student and beginner on the essential teachings of > Right Mindfulness! What gives? > > This begs a question, I think. If my hunch is correct, what is the > REAL fear, the REAL concern here? Is it the Suttas reputed to be the > words of Lord Buddha I have been directly quoting regarding > Satipatthana? Let me make one or two other wild guesses:-)) 1. Rob has repeated many times what he understands satipatthana to be, how the texts should be considered, but doesn't think you're really listening to what he's saying (or what K.Sujin, Nina and others are saying). 2. He's busy and tired and so it's difficult to go on repeating the same debates. 3. He may be considering writing to others who have other questions and appear to be more receptive to what he says. 4. He's run out of patience, and feels like a break;-)) 5. His kids want to go for a swim! 6. He knows you have the real expert (in his opinion) 'on your doorstep' so to speak. 7. He knows that many of his most helpful writings can be found under topics such as 'Satipatthana' in 'Useful Posts': http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts 8. He'd like to encourage other members to 'have a say'! Don't worry, Erik, you're doing fine...we all have our limits and sometimes need some 'refuelling'.....! there are just very few of us who have your stamina! 'Hang in' and someone will get back to you (although I note you don't respond to EVERY post to Erik and EVERY point yourself!). One hint: you might consider a question and answer approach, just for a change, but no rule at all! Thanks for keeping us all 'challenged' and for your relatively recent sincere interest in the Tipitaka. Looking f/w to seeing you soon in Bkk (around 8th Sept). Sarah p.s Rob - excuse the presumptions and wild guesses!!;-)) 7423 From: Erik Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 5:47pm Subject: Re: Fwd: [d-l] Scholars and Meditators --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Cybele & Friends, > > --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > > >From the book "Numerical Discourses of the Buddha – An Anthology of > > >Suttas from the Anguttara Nikaya" > > >translated by Nyanaponika Thera and Bhikkhu Bodhi: > > > > > >125. Scholars and Meditators > > > > > >. . . "friends, you should train yourselves thus: `Though we > > >ourselves are Dhamma-experts, we will praise also those monks who are > > >meditators.' And why? Such outstanding men are rare in the world who have > > >personal experience of the deathless element (Nibbana). > > > And the other monks, too, should train themselves thus: `Though we > > >ourselves are meditators, we will praise also those monks who are > > >Dhamma-experts.' And why? Such outstanding persons are rare in the > > >world who can by their wisdom clearly understand a difficult subject." > > > (VI, 46) > > Thank you for posting this sutta. I second your thanks, Sarah. > When we first read it, we may appreciate the reminders for tolerance and > respect and wise speech in regard to those who appear to follow different > paths. Indeed, there are many, many ways to rightly understanding the Dhamma. The Buddha listed several different avenues for this in the Sammaditthi Sutta, for example. This is one reason I always find that sutta among the most inspiring of them all. > We also note how useless bickering and disparaging others are. How > easily these can lead to pride and 'puffing-up'. These are useful reminders at > any level, for sure! Indeed, the affliction of mana is a nasty one! Though, let's be honest, for us beings who yet lack the enlightenment of arahants, it is an affliction we all remain subject to. :( > When we just read a translation like this, it is easy to take 'scholars' for > being those who are experts in book-learning without any 'inner' developed > wisdom and it is easy to take 'meditators' for being those who do not study and > who merely follow a 'practice'. I agree completely with this very wise observation. There is no disjunction at all, in my eyes, between scholarship and authentic wisdom, nor meditation as a practice combined with scholarship. Nor does scholarship in any way preclude meditative realization, and in no way does meditative realization preclude scholarship. For many (particularly in my own lineage), the two are teated as inseparable aspects of the path. For example, Tibetan Geluk-pa monks undergo a rigiorous twenty-five-year course of scholarship into the deepest aspects of the textual Dharma, including several years devoted specifically to the study of Abhidhamma--simultaneously, of course, with a clear and directed meditative practice emphasizing the jhanas and the union of samatha and vipassana. Many of Tibet's most revered sages have in fact also been scholars of great renown. For example, the Sakya Pandita, Je Tsongkhapa, Rinchen Zangpo, Lama Atisha, Marpa the Translator, not to mention the Dalai Lamas, etc. In addition, some of Tibet's most revered sages have been instead the unscholarly "meditator" types as well, for example Tibet's most famous yogi-meditator, the illustrious Jetsun Milarepa (disciple of Marpa the translator). There is truly no reason scholarship and realization are in any way inimical to one another. In fact, for those of my lineage, again, the two are treated as inseparable aids to the path. For others of other schools, meditation may be primarily emphasized (I think of Zen, for example). That said, in no school that I am aware of is scholarship alone--entirely devoid of a firm basis in the practice of meditation-- taught as a valid path. Thanks for the great and very dead-on comments, Sarah! May our collective studies and practices all bring about the direct awakening to the Deathless! :) 7424 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 5:58pm Subject: Re: Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana & welcome Dear Fenny, --- "Fenny" wrote: > Dear Cy and Jon and everybody, > This may shed some light on your discussion regarding right view. Enjoy. Thanks for adding this article. We certainly all need lots of light.Of course there can be discontent with and without wrong view, but I like the examples of blaming the companions, moods, place, food, weather and this or that for our problems and also the story about the Jackal. Can someone give me a sutta reference for this story? I think this was your first post on dsg. I'm sure everyone would appreciate it if you'd fill us in a little with regard to your interest in dhamma, where you live and anything else you care to share. Hope you find dsg useful and we hear more of your own comments! Best wishes, Sarah p.s We try to encourage everyone to use hyperlinks for long articles which are on the net. Thanks. 7425 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 6:11pm Subject: Re: pls advice Dear Kelvin, --- "kelvin liew peng chuan" wrote: > > May u all b well & happy! long time since i've written to this group. > > i'm currently conducting a Dhamma get together for the Buddhist students in > my university, learning Dhamma weekly yes, it does seem like a long time..we've missed you! You've already received a couple of suggestions and i think both the books mentioned would be useful for studying and discussing Dhamma. Good for you for organising these activities! you could also invite any of the students who really show some interest in dhamma to join us here and ask any questions, the more basic the better! You could even use some of the questions and answers for your dhamma group. Please let us know how it goes and hope to hear more from you, Kelvin. Perhaps you can even arrange a field trip to Hong Kong! Best of luck, Sarah 7426 From: Erik Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 6:15pm Subject: Re: The Dhamma (was Satipatthana)-Robert --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Erik, > > This begs a question, I think. If my hunch is correct, what is the > > REAL fear, the REAL concern here? Is it the Suttas reputed to be the > > words of Lord Buddha I have been directly quoting regarding > > Satipatthana? > > Let me make one or two other wild guesses:-)) > > 1. Rob has repeated many times what he understands satipatthana to be, how the > texts should be considered, but doesn't think you're really listening to what > he's saying (or what K.Sujin, Nina and others are saying). That may well be. But for the record, I have listened VERY carefully to what all my aforementioned friends in the Dhamma have said. VERY carefully. :) > 4. He's run out of patience, and feels like a break;-)) Well then, he's found a true friend in Erik! :) :) :) As Master Shantideva said, "there is no evil equal to anger; and no virtuwe equal to patience." (sorry to quote outside the Tipitaka, but I don't know any other similar quote off the top of my head here :) :) :) > 5. His kids want to go for a swim! Now there's an idea! (not kids--not just yet anyway--I mean, we haven't even tied the knot yet! :) :) :) I have yet to take a dip in my apartment building's swimming pool, and I've been here a month already! > 6. He knows you have the real expert (in his opinion) 'on your doorstep' so to > speak. Perhaps I was being a tad impatient in getting back there to continue this specific debate in greater detail and dragged Robert in by proxy. :) > Don't worry, Erik, you're doing fine...we all have our limits and sometimes > need some 'refuelling'.....! there are just very few of us who have your > stamina! I can only hope my bride-to-be will be as kind with her comments! :) 'Hang in' and someone will get back to you (although I note you don't > respond to EVERY post to Erik and EVERY point yourself!). I know, I know. But pleaase be patient and give me a little time already! I'm still working on the abhinnas thingy of "from one form he becomes many, and from many he becomes one again," so I can do justice to all the points I'm now forced to skip due to lack of sufficient digits (I wonder if this iddhi also allows for the creation of emanations of computers and keyboards--this is not explicitly mentioned in the texts, though)! And I really do hope the wish I made at Phnom Kulen immediately after descending from seeing the 2,000-year-old reclining Buddha entering Parinibbana my fiancee had insisted on taking me to see (it is her favorita place in the world, according to her--talk about auspicious, and that ain't the HALF of it! :)--the wish to reach Buddhahood in this lifetime for the sake of all sentient beings--comes to pass just as the fortune-teller woman indicated on her reading immediately thereafter (that whatever you wish for will be fulfilled!)! :) > One hint: you might consider a question and answer approach, just for a change, > but no rule at all! I'll take this under consideration. I think a change of style may be helpful. Do you mean the sort of style the Buddha used, for example, with Yamaka? Also, as I recall, the Yamaka is one of the books of the Abhidhamma dealing with "paired logic." Is there anyone here who can explain a bit more about this volume to me? What about the provenance of "Yamaka" as a term--from the Sutta and the eponymous monk? Or does "Yamaka" actually mean "paired logic"? > Thanks for keeping us all 'challenged' and for your relatively recent sincere > interest in the Tipitaka. Recent interest? Why, I've been sincerely interested in the Tipitaka ever since I got my second book on the Buddhist Dhamma by Ven. Walpola Rahula, "What the Buddha Taught." I have made it a point to always read the Zen and Tibetan along with the Pali Suttas. My general interst is in, and has only been in, the actual Dhamma. The "schools" or "canon" to me matters not a whit, so long as I am convinced it is indeed a teaching that leads to the permanent cessation of suffering. It is only the Abhidhamma that is a recent development in my studies. > Looking f/w to seeing you soon in Bkk (around 8th Sept). Indeed, and I have MANY, MANY photos fropm my trip to Angkor to share with you! :) 7427 From: Herman Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 7:35pm Subject: Re: Satipatthana (was Testing - Erik Robert, I acknowledge up front that I am completely out of my depth here, and that what appears on your screen is what welled up out of , well, nowhere really. But it just seems to me that if you didn't pay your ISP account regularly , you wouldn't be able to share with the rest of us re Parramattha Dhammas. And why would you fly all the way to Bangkok just to experience a storm that isn't a storm, and meet a whole bunch of friends that aren't friends, just Parramattha Dhammas. Aren't there enough Parramattha Dhammas wherever we all are? No need to travel, I would think. Robert, I am not expecting a reply, the above is probably fairly trivial, but I do think that the distinction between absolute and convential reality is a very meaningless one. I think there are many, many different levels at which matter organises itself in a very coherent fashion. Surely you don't explain society in terms of protons, or the vascular system in terms of colour? Even though I know there is no absolute Robert, I know there is a tendency , a probability known as Robert, and that's what this tendency/probability known as Herman relates to. And I tend to want to keep it up, while conditions permit. Again, no answer required. BECAUSE SWIMMING WITH YOUR KIDS IS MUCH MORE IMPORTANT !!!!! (sorry for shouting :-) With Kind Regards Herman > _____________________ > Dear Erik, > I have ideas about what Dhamma is and you have different ideas. I > think it would be unproductive to bother you with further > explanations. > best wishes > robert 7428 From: m nease Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 8:42pm Subject: Re: Satipatthana (was Testing - Erik Good to hear from you again, Victor. I hope you don't mind if I put in my two cents' worth. > There is no Robert; > [snip] > > > > robert > > Hi Robert, > > You wrote "There is no Robert". Could you explain who you were > referring to by the name "Robert"? > > Metta, > Victor As I understand it it isn't 'who', but 'what'--that is, a confluence of continuous conditions resulting from a very great number of conditions with nearly identical 'histories', I guess. The 'who' is a kind of dancing image resulting from the present manifestations of these conditions. Not real at all, but much more convincingly so than the momentary constituents which seem to give it life. The problem the Buddha defined, in a sense, is 'taking it personally'- -whether form, feeling, perception, mental formations or consciousnesses. For sure there is no Robert, no Victor and no Mike, except on a very superficial level. At least that's the way I see it. What do you think? 7429 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 10:30pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Satipatthana Sutta and its commentaries Joshua --- Joshua wrote: > > > In the case of the article below, there are several passages which > contain > > statements, inferences or assumptions that are not supported by the > > ancient commentators, > > Could you give some examples? I will give one or two examples of what I had in mind. With this reservation, however: I do not mean to be questioning the personal views of the author. I am simply commenting on the article taken at its face value, as any reader might see it. With that caveat, I will give one example of a difference of detail and one of 'doctrine', both of which can be discussed from a reading of the Satipatthana Sutta itself or its commentary, as translated by Soma Thera in 'The Way of Mindfulness' (page numbers below are to this book). Here is the matter of detail. The description of the 4 Foundations of Mindfulness The article describes the four Foundations/Focuses of Mindfulness as "your own body, the pleasure and pain associated with each sense, the mind consciousness and the objects of the mind". In the Satipatthana Sutta, the first Foundation of Mindfulness, usually referred to as 'Contemplation of the Body', is not limited to one's own body, but include another's body as well. Each of the several aspects of contemplation of the body (breathing, the modes of deportment, the 4 kinds of clear comprehension, repulsiveness of the body, the modes of materiality, and the 9 cemetery contemplations) concludes with the passage -- "Thus he lives contemplating the body in the body internally, or he lives contemplating the body in the body externally, or he lives contemplating the body in the body internally and externally." The commentary to the section on breathing explains (p.51) that this refers to contemplation of the body in one's own 'respiration-body', in another's 'respiration-body' or at one time in one's own and at another in another's 'respiration-body'. A similar comment is made after each of the other sections. There is quite a difference between one's own body as object of contemplation and one's own or another's body as object of contemplation (especially when it comes to breath!). The wrong understanding could, for example, lead one to the idea that this contemplation is best 'practised' in solitude, an idea that is not supported by a reading of the sutta as a whole. In fact, although the section on contemplation on the body in the sutta talks in term of different bodily postures, activities, cemetery contemplations etc (ie. in terms of conventional situations), the underlying meaning according to the commentary is all rupa-dhammas, the dhammas that comprise the first khandha. Indeed, the 4 Foundations between them refer to all the 5 khandhas (ie all paramattha dhammas that are subject to clinging). The commentary says on this (p. 119) -- "In the contemplation on the body, the laying hold of the aggregate of corporeality or materiality was spoken of by the Master; in the contemplation on feeling, the laying hold of the aggregate of feeling; in the contemplation on mind, the laying hold of the aggregate of consciousness; and now [ie. in the contemplation on mental objects] … the laying hold of the aggregates of perception and formations, …". The rupa-kkhandha includes of course not only the rupas that we take for our own body, but all rupas that are experienced through the various doorways. Most importantly, it refers to realities that are arising at the present moment, not at any other time. It is not necessary to 'choose' one or other of the 4 Foundations as the focus for contemplation. If there is awareness of any reality appearing at the present moment, that awareness is a moment of the development of (one or other of) the 4 Foundations of Mindfulness as taught in the Satipatthana Sutta. I hope this has given some idea of how careful we should be in taking parts of suttas at their face value, without reference to the whole sutta and its commentaries. Jon PS This post turned out longer than expected! I will mention the 'doctrinal' issue in a separate post. 7430 From: Binh A Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 11:12pm Subject: The Jackal suffering from mange... --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > Thanks for adding this article. We certainly all need lots of > light.Of course there can be discontent with and without wrong > view, but I like the examples of blaming the companions, moods, > place, food, weather and this or that for our problems and also > the story about the Jackal. > > Can someone give me a sutta reference for this story? ================================================================= BA: Perhaps it was taken from this story in Samyutta Nikaya: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn17-8.html Metta, Binh 7431 From: Howard Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 7:13pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Satipatthana (was Testing - Erik Hi, Erik (and Robert) - In a message dated 8/14/01 12:26:36 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Erik writes a lengthy post which I am about to lengthen even further! ;-)) > > --- Robert wrote: > > MN 131, in > > > > the Middle Length Discourses (majjhima Nikaya): > > > > > > > > A Single Excellent Night > > > > > > > > Let not a person revive the past > > > > Or on the future build his hopes;.... > > > > > > > > ...Instead with insight let him see > > > > Each presently arisen state; > > > > Let him know that and be sure of it, > > > > .. > > > > > > ERIK:Excellent indeed, Robert! Now, HOW do we go about doing this, > > > precisely? > > ______________________ > > Dear Erik, > > > > Satipatthana is only taught by a surpreme Buddha. It > > can only be heard about during the rare times of a > > Buddha sasana. To understand its development we need > > to hear many details of the teachings. > > Indeed, and taking a single passage like you quoted above, without > considering the greater context of the corpus of teachings the Buddha > explicitly taught on Satipatthana, would be a quite unwise, I think. > > So then, to place the above passage into the proper context, I think > we should examine those Suttas where the Buddha spelled out the > meaning of Right Mindfulness in the greatest and most explicit > detail. Would you not agree, given the importance of Right > Mindfulness as a definite factor of enlightenment, that this is a > wise strategy? > > > Now there is seeing, were the javana cittas after that > > moment of seeing kusala or akusala? There are so > > many different types of citta. Now I am typing, the > > cittas that condition the movement of the hand are not > > vipaka (result) they are different from the vipaka > > cittas that are seeing, hearing, tasting, touching and > > smelling. These are all realities they are happening > > now again and again. How much do we know about them? > > They are anatta, uncontrollable, aniccum, gone > > already. The buddha said in the sutta above "with insight let him > see > > Each presently arisen state; > > Let him know that and be sure of it," > > And how does the Buddha enjoin his disciples to do just that? Here's > what I've been able to dig up (from the Satipatthana Sutta): > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn010.html > > Beginning with, yet again, Mindfulness of the Breath: "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." > > This is further continued with the various aspects of anapanasati > (mediation on the breath--which you can read in the original Sutta in > more detail--so no need to elaborate further on this vital aspect of > Mindfulness). > > Robert: > > The development of satipatthana is about > > seeing these dhammas now,as they appear. Life is so > > short- > > namas and rupas are arising and passing away at this > > moment. > > The Buddha seems to say this, but not in the way you're putting it. > More specifically, the Buddha instructs us in Mindfulness of the > Breath: > > "In this way he remains focused internally on the body in & of > itself, or externally on the body in & of itself, or both internally > & externally on the body in & of itself. Or he remains focused on the > phenomenon of origination with regard to the body, on the phenomenon > of passing away with regard to the body, or on the phenomenon of > origination & passing away with regard to the body [Erik: do you > consider the "body" a "paramattha dhamma"? Enquiring minds want to > know! :)]. ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I agree. The mind is used here, and a conventional object is being observed. This is all that one *can* do at less than the most advanced stages of insight meditation. ------------------------------------------------------- Or his mindfulness that 'There is a body' is maintained to > the extent of knowledge & remembrance [Erik: uh oh! "Remembrance"? > What has this to do with "right now"? Please elaborate for us here, > Robert! :)]. > ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes. This, I think, is an aspect of "clear comprehension". ------------------------------------------------------- And he remains independent, unsustained by (not clinging > to) anything in the world. This is how a monk remains focused on the > body in & of itself." > > > There is nothing else. By hearing enough and > > considering conditions are built up to gradually let > > go of the clinging to wrong practice that we have > > accumulated, Then there can be the opportunity for > > sati and panna to understand dhammas, as they are now. > > Agreed. That means coming to Right View through having wrong views > pointed out as such, and by meditating carefully on such > instructions, which thereby gradually loosens the fixations on wrong > views, which in turn leads to Right View, which in turn leads to a > correct understanding of right practice--the very practices that lead > to total cessation of suffering. > > > Whether we are sitting crosslegged, or standing there can be > > awareness of dhammas – > > Agreed completely, as the Buddha clearly notes in the Satipatthana > Sutta. > > > but not by clinging and trying and thinking that we > > need volition. > > Clinging is always a bad thing from the Buddha's perspective > (especially clinging to ideas like getting "results" in meditation). > > But if you think we don't need to take volitional control of our > actions to the degree possible RIGHT NOW, your contention is at > serious variance with what the Buddha actually taught. The Buddha > rejected the sort of determinism your statement imples in no > uncertain terms, and in many, many places! ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I think your statement is put a tad strongly, Erik. However, I agree that there is a suggestion of determinism in what you write here, Robert, and more strongly so in the writings of some others on the DSG. Volition, in the form of conventional right effort is, as I understand it, an *essential* part of the Buddha's path. Either cultivation occurs because we have made the effort to cultivate, or, if it occurs at all, it will be a random event *in the sense* that it occurs independent of our efforts. But if that latter circumstance were the case, why would the Buddha have enjoined us to exert right effort, and,in fact, why would he have presented the 8-fold path at all? ----------------------------------------------------- > > > NinaVG and Khun sujin often say "reduce yourself > > into one moment". That is it. > > Forget for a moment what anyone else you've heard has said on this > point, Robert, and please consider listening carefully to what this > collection of khandas is telling you for once. To quote Ajahn Chah on > this point: ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Heh, heh, heh! ;-)) Sorry, Erik, I couldn't resist. Forget about what others say .. uh, except for perhaps Ajahn Chah!! ;-)) ------------------------------------------------------ > > "The practice of Dhamma goes against our habits; the truth goes > against our desires, so there is difficulty in the practice. Some > things that we understand as wrong may be right, while the things we > take to be right might be wrong. Why is this? Because our minds are > in darkness, we don't clearly see the Truth. We don't really know > anything and so are fooled by people's lies. They point out what is > right as being wrong and we believe it; that which is wrong, they say > is right, and we believe that. This is because we are not yet our own > masters. Our moods lie to us constantly. We shouldn't take this mind > and its opinions as our guide, because it doesn't know the Truth. > > "Some people don't want to listen to others at all, but this is not > the way of a man of wisdom. A wise man listens to everything. One who > listens to Dhamma must listen just the same whether he likes it or > not, and not blindly believe or disbelieve. He must stay at the > halfway mark, the middle point, and not be heedless. He just listens > and then contemplates, giving rise to the right results accordingly. > > "A wise man should contemplate and see the cause and effect for > himself before he believes what he hears. Even if the teacher speaks > the truth, don't just believe it, because you don't yet know the > truth of it for yourself." > > Now, as to considering nama-rupa, what did Lord Buddha actually say > on this point? Further examination of the Satipatthana Sutta may shed > some more light on this point: > > "Furthermore, the monk remains focused on mental qualities in & of > themselves with reference to the sixfold internal & external sense > media. And how does he remain focused on mental qualities in & of > themselves with reference to the sixfold internal & external sense > media? There is the case where he discerns the eye, he discerns > forms, he discerns the fetter that arises dependent on both. He > discerns how there is the arising of an unarisen fetter. And he > discerns how there is the abandoning of a fetter once it has arisen. > And he discerns how there is no further appearance in the future of a > fetter that has been abandoned. (The same formula is repeated for the > remaining sense media: ear, nose, tongue, body, & intellect.)" > > Nowhere here does Lord Buddha speak about "realities in this moment" > (though to a degree it's implied since we can't directly observe > anything not arising here & now). > > What the Buddha EXPLICITLY enjoins us to reflect on (and REFLECTION > involves notions of past, present AND future!) are the fetters! > Not "realities arising right now," but the FETTERS, the very fetters > (samyojanas) that keep us bound to the wheel of samsara! (I think I > hear an echo here...) :) :) :) > > In fact, if you read every single one of the instructions the Buddha > actually gave his disciples in the Suttas dealing with Right > Mindfulness, in every one he mentions "remembrance" as a vital > component of the practice of Right Mindfulness. Where does > remembrance fit into "recognizing realities in the present moment"? > (Other than noting the obvious fact that thre is nothing we can > experience NOT happening in the present moment.) > > The fact is the Buddha NEVER teachers "just this moment," but > SPECIFICALLY teaches REMEMBRANCE (which, to my understanding also > happens to be the very definition of sati, or Mindfulness!) ------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I do agree that sa~n~na is essential for the process. The path to insight lies, in part, in the cultivation of the faculty of recognition, by means of joining clear comprehension to the bare attention of mindfulness. It has seemed to me for a long time that pa~n~na (wisdom) must, in fact, be a transformation of sa~n~na. ------------------------------------------------------------ > > So then, I must inquire, what about sati has anything to do with "realities > this moment"? Right Mindfulness litrally translated > means RIGHT REMEMBRANCE of qualities that have ALREADY PASSED AWAY! ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, there is another way of thinking about sati (mindfulness) as remembrance/recollection, and that is that it consists of remembering to stay present, to not get lost in thought, to not lose track of exactly what is happening to and in oneself right now. ----------------------------------------------------------- > > But your definition of Satipatthana implies that sati is "remembrance > of the present moment"! That would entail, in no uncertain terms, a > total logical absurdity, my dear friend in the Dhamma. How can one > possibly remember that which has not yet passed, been marked by > sanna, for example? > ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, as I put it above, it isn't a matter of "remembrance of the present moment", but rather "remembering to stay present". ----------------------------------------------------- > > > There is no Robert; that is the > > illusion formed by the rapid > > change and the different elements doing their > > functions. It is like a movie - merely different > > frames joined together and giving the appearance of > > life. None of the elements, the different cetasikas > > and cittas and rupas have any idea of wanting to do > > this or that. They are merely carrying out there > > function - which is to know, or to hear, or to see, or > > to crave and so many other elements with different > > functions. > > Ultimately nothing arises apart from conditions, but again, we > nontheless are not deterministically bound without any shred of free > will. We DO have volition and CAN choose out actions--in however > limited a way--and act, RIGHT HERE AND NOW, for example to DECIDE to > either listen to and put into practice the Holy Dharma. Or to refuse > to listen to the Holy Dharma and continue to suffer further runds of > misery. We can choose to kill, steal, lie, committ sexual miscondut, > take intoxicants to the point of heedlessness. We can also choose not > to. It may be difficult to make chioces because we are so heavily > conditioned by past thoughts and deeds. But it is decidedly NOT > impossible. If it were, why would the Buddha have said: > > "Abandon what is unwholesome, oh monks! > One can abandon the unwholesome, oh monks! > If it were not possible, I would not ask you to do so. > If this abandoning of the unwholesome would bring harm and suffering, > I would not ask you to abandon it. > But as the abandoning of the unwholesome brings benefit and > happiness, > Therefore, I say, 'Abandon what is unwholesome!' > Cultivate what is wholesome, oh monks. > One can cultivate the wholesome. > If it were not feasible, I would not ask you to do it. > If this cultivation of the wholesome would bring harm and suffering, > I would not ask you to cultivate it. > But as the cultivation of the wholesome brings benefit and happiness, > Therefore, I say, 'Cultivate what is wholesome!'" (AN) > > > > The more I learn about these things the more I > > see that lobha(attachment) and moha(ignorance) are very common. > > Indeed they are at root (at least moha) of all suffering. Which of > course conditions grasping--particular one of the nastiest forms of > grasping, the grasping at views. > > > I do > > not feel that they can be quickly erased - the path seems much > > longer and harder than when I began. > > And yet it is much, much simpler that you can imagine. > ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: If I may add something here: It is easy to despair of real progress being made. But each act of cultivation leaves a trace, and awakening can occur at any time. As the Buddha said: "Practice diligently". And I think we need to include "Do it without hope or expectation.", because, as Dhammapiyo Bhikkhu wrote on another list, "Get rid of the hope. It has a partner - despair.", and as I replied there, the hoping, itself, is suffering. ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Understanding works its way once "we" get out of the > > way. No technique. > > I could not disagree more vehemently with this very wrong form of > understanding. There is VERY MUCH technique, Robert! If there were no > technique, the Buddha would have never taught technique in so many > places! > > > No shortcuts. > > No disagreement there. There are truly no shortcuts, particularly > when it comes to things like cultivating wholseome karma and > directing one's best efforts at serious meditation practice. > > > Paramattha dhammas are in us and around us. If there > > are sufficient conditions then panna will arise in > > conjunction with sati, samadhi, effort and the other > > kusala cetasikas and understand one moment as it is. > > Just as it is also possible that buying a lottery ticket will make > one a millionare! :) ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Yes. And just as pa~n~na requires certain conditions for it to arise, these conditions, in turn, have certain conditions for *their* arising, among which is that we exert the volition and right effort of practice. The conditions for the arising of pa~n~na do not themselves arise randomly. It is, indeed, not a lottery-type situation. The limited-control aspect of anatta does not imply either a deterministic fatalism or a powerlessness due to randomness. There is a path we can *choose* to follow , else the Buddha was a fool or worse. ------------------------------------------------------ > > > That is satipatthana. > > That is not, I am afraid, Satipatthana. Satipatthana is what the > Buddha specifically taught in both the Satipatthana Sutta as well as > the Maha-Satipatthana Sutta, which are avaialbe for all and sundery > here to read firsthand. No sense my interjecting any moer commentary > onto this very important parctice when the Buddhas direct and simple > words are availbe for all to see so plainly. > > > This is the time of a Buddhasasana - it is the only > > time that the the deep teachings on khandas, dhatus, > > ayatanas; on paticcasamupada and the 24 paccaya etc. > > can be heard. It would be regretable not to listen. > > And just as fortunate that during this Buddha-sasana there are those > who have terminated all wrong views as well as all misunderstanding > about intent and meaning of the Buddha's Dhamma. It would be even > more regrettable if one chooses to ignore their direct instruction on > the most essential points of the Dhamma! :) > > ============================= My response here was rather strong, because this is a matter of great concern to me. Please be assured, Robert, that I mean no disrespect at all - just the opposite, in fact. If, at any point in this post I may have said anything to offend, let me assure that that was not my intent, and I apologize in advance for possibly coming on "too strongly". 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) 7432 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 1:09am Subject: concepts and realities Dear Hermann, Eric, Howard and all, Hermann wrote: Forgive me if I have misunderstood, but to my limited understanding a person who dwelt in a realm of colours, hardnesses and softnesses, sounds, smells, tastes, coldness and warmness etc only, and makes no further associations and connections between these separate events, would be a completely dysfunctional person. The diagnosis would be along the lines of disassociative state. Is it incorrect to say that the process of combining information from separate events and so forming concepts, is the actual basis for insight and wisdom, and that the reverse process of deconstructing concepts into separate and non-related events would remove all foundations for wisdom and insight? --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: Khun Sujin > explained that when we are reading, we translate colours into letters, > sentences, meaning. It goes on by conditions. > Sati has to study with awareness the characteristic of visible object whioch > appears, until one knows clearly that what appears through eyes is only > colour. Khun Sujin said that if it is not in this way one cannot detach from > the inclination to take realities for self, being, person. > Knowing that what was seen is this or that thing, this or that person, it is > a type of nama... There must be a reality that knows the meaning of sound > which appeared through the ears, there are different namas experiencing > objects through different doorways... When we know it is nama it means it is > not self. When we know it is rupa, it means it is not self. > Nina: Eric is perfectly right when he says that if you would only live in the world of colours, sounds, etc. there would be a cognitive dysfunction. How unnatural and forced it would be. The Buddha, as Howard says, used concepts, he knew who was Sariputta , who were his other disciples. But he had no wrong view, he did not take concepts for ultimate realities, paramattha dhammas. We read in the "Kindred Sayings"(I, The Devas, Ch II, § 5) that the Buddha said: He of the monks who is arahat, Who has accomplished all there was to do, Who drug-immune does live the final life: He might say thus: ' "I" say '; 'they say it is "mine." ' So saying he, expert in usages Of men, aware of the worth of common names, Would speak merely conforming to such use. As Howard explained, concepts are helpful to understand the world, and we also need them to understand paramattha dhammas. They can also be a trap, as he said. That is, if we do not know the difference between concepts and paramattha dhammas. Thus, wrong view and ignorance make them into a trap. Long ago I heard of someone who was in a meditation center and thought that she should not look at her watch, and that she should not recognize her parents. But insight should be developed very naturally, otherwise it is attachment, not paññå. Some people believe that they have to lead two kinds of lives: their meditation life and their daily life. But whatever one does is conditioned, and gradually we can learn that there are in the ultimate sense nama and rupa arising because of conditions. Usually we only pay attention to concepts, we have done this our whole life and during many former lives, we do not have to be reminded of concepts. Through the Buddha's teachings we learn that in the ultimate sense there are only nama and rupa and that in developing vipassanå we can come to realize the truth directly. Sati can be aware of what appears through the six doors, but there are very few moments of sati in a day. We cannot force sati by special practices, then attachment to a result is in the way again. What we need, as Khun Sujin often said, is listening to the Dhamma and considering it. We need reminders of the fact that paramattha dhammas appear in daily life, no need to go apart. We can pursue all our hobbies, do our work. We will not fall in a hole in the street, we will not drive carelessly, because we know what different things and situations are. But in between, if there is a short moment of sati, understanding can develop. It is so short anyway, and then there is thinking again of concepts for a long time, that is natural. How could awareness of realities interfere with daily life? On the contrary, when there is sati accompanying the kusala citta, arising sometimes in between, we shall do our chores with more efficiency. Thinking of concepts is natural, and we can learn that also thinking is a conditioned nama. Awareness of nama and rupa is not a matter of deconstructing concepts into entities, I would not put it this way. We don't do anything with concepts, we think of a person, that is one moment of thinking. At another moment there can be awareness of what is seen or of the thinking itself, it depends on conditions what the object of citta is. Summarizing, no need to lead an unnatural life and only pay attention to paramattha dhammas, but, it is beneficial if we remind one another of paramattha dhammas in daily life. Paññå is so weak, we need reminders. That is why I appreciate so much the reminders of Sarah and Robert K. Looking forward to these. Nina. 7433 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 1:09am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] three rounds op 12-08-2001 18:09 schreef m. nease op m nease: > --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Sati has to study with awareness the characteristic of >> visible object which > appears, until one knows clearly that what appears > through eyes is only > colour. > Where you write, 'until one knows clearly' what is the > nature of this knowledge (since there's obviously no > one knowing)? Is it conceptual understanding > 'assembling' itself out of the memories of many recent > instants of sati, or is it yet another instantaneous > and conventionally unknowable moment? > > In other words, when 'sati studies with awareness the > characteristic of visible object which appears', what > accumulates as a result? Conceptual understanding > (vitakka, I guess), or pa??aa which can only be > 'known' by other incomprehensively brief dhammas--or > both, or neither? >Dear Mike, When sati studies visible object, there is a beginning of right understanding, paññå, but it is very weak. There have to be countless moments of awareness again, so that right understanding of paramattha dhammas can be accumulated. When sati is aware, and studies, this is different from studying a Dhamma book, which is understanding of the level of pariyatti, theoretical understanding, which is however a firm foundation of the practice, pa.tipatti, eventually leading to the realization of the truth, pa.tivedha. Pariyatti is not just vitakka, or as you say, conceptual thinking; it is paññå, right understanding accompanying kusala citta. Vitakka accompanies many cittas, also akusala cittas which think with attachment of concepts. I would not use the term conceptual thinking for pariyatti. When you study a Dhamma book, you read about realities and there are concepts that are used for denoting realities. Even while reading or listening there can be moments of awareness of nama and rupa in between. Another way of explaning different levels of understanding: there are three rounds of understanding the four noble truths: knowledge of what should be realized (sacca ~naa.na), the practice, developing direct understanding of realities (kicca ~naa.na) and the direct realization of the truth (kata ~naa.na). (Commentary to the Kindred Sayongs V, Book XII, Ch 2,§1, The Foundation of the Kingdom of the Norm). Khun Sujin often stresses these three rounds to indicate that paññå develops gradually, going through different stages. Best wishes, Nina. 7434 From: Howard Date: Tue Aug 14, 2001 10:39pm Subject: The Paradox of Volition Hi, all - All dhammas other than nibbana arise according to causes and conditions. This includes acts of volition. Volition never arises without cause, randomly, but only when the conditions necessary for its arising have come together. Are we unhappy with this? I think so. But if volition were to arise randomly, without cause, there where would lie any source of pleasure in that? What would be "free will" if volition arose in such a manner? We would be at least as unhappy if choosing were to be choosing for no reason whatsoever! The fact is that given that volition, as all other worldly dhammas, only arises when the necessary conditions are in place, there is no *uncaused* choosing to act volitionally; it just happens when it is appropriate for it to happen. After all, any choosing to act volitionally is, itself, an act of volition, which is not random, but caused. So we seem caught between the Scylla and Charybdis of strict determinism and strict randomness, between a rock and a hard place. The middle way out of this dilemma seems to elude us. But why does this upset us so much? Why is this an obsessive philosophical problem for us? I suspect that we are consumed by this because we are distraught over the idea that WE might not be able to exercise free will. But there IS no "we". There is no self to be exercising anything!! I suspect that the paradox/problem of volition is a pseudo-problem which will be solved by its disappearance. When? With the advent of full liberation, if not sooner. And meanwhile, we can be happy that conditions have brought "us" to the current happy circumstances in which we can study and practice the Dhamma. 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) 7435 From: Victor Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 8:20am Subject: Re: Satipatthana (was Testing - Erik --- <> wrote: > Good to hear from you again, Victor. I hope you don't mind if I put > in my two cents' worth. > > --- <> wrote: > > [snip] > > There is no Robert; > > [snip] > > > > > > robert > > > > Hi Robert, > > > > You wrote "There is no Robert". Could you explain who you were > > referring to by the name "Robert"? > > > > Metta, > > Victor > > As I understand it it isn't 'who', but 'what'--that is, a confluence > of continuous conditions resulting from a very great number of > conditions with nearly identical 'histories', I guess. The 'who' is > a kind of dancing image resulting from the present manifestations of > these conditions. Not real at all, but much more convincingly so > than the momentary constituents which seem to give it life. > > The problem the Buddha defined, in a sense, is 'taking it personally'- > -whether form, feeling, perception, mental formations or > consciousnesses. > > For sure there is no Robert, no Victor and no Mike, except on a very > superficial level. At least that's the way I see it. What do you > think? Hi Mike, Good to hear from you again too. Are you a confluence of continuous conditions resulting from a very great number of conditions with nearly identical 'histories'? Are you a kind of dancing image resulting from the present manifestations of these conditions? The names "Robert", "Victor", "Mike" are used for designation. I use the name "Mike" to refer to you, and you use it to refer to yourself. Similary, you use the name "Victor" to refer to me, and I use it to refer to myself. What do you think? Does the view "there is no Mike, no Victor, no Robert" convey any of the three characteristics of the conditioned phenomenon; namely, form(or feeling, or perception, or formations, or consciousness) is impermanent, dukkha, to be regarded as it actually is thus: "This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self"? If so, how? Metta, Victor 7436 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 8:36am Subject: Re: Satipatthana , Dear Howard, I'm at an internet cafe so can only give a quickly thought out reply to your post. > > >Robert: Now there is seeing, were the javana cittas after that > > moment of seeing kusala or akusala? There are so > > many different types of citta. Now I am typing, the > > cittas that condition the movement of the hand are not > > vipaka (result) they are different from the vipaka > > cittas that are seeing, hearing, tasting, touching and > > smelling. These are all realities they are happening > > now again and again. How much do we know about them? > > They are anatta, uncontrollable, aniccum, gone > > already. The buddha said in the sutta above "with insight let him > see > > Each presently arisen state; > > Let him know that and be sure of it,"" > > The development of satipatthana is about > > seeing these dhammas now,as they appear. Life is so > > short- > > namas and rupas are arising and passing away at this > > moment. > > ERIK: The Buddha seems to say this, but not in the way you're putting it. > More specifically, the Buddha instructs us in Mindfulness of the > Breath: > > "In this way he remains focused internally on the body in & of > itself, or externally on the body in & of itself, or both internally > & externally on the body in & of itself. Or he remains focused on the > phenomenon of origination with regard to the body, on the phenomenon > of passing away with regard to the body, or on the phenomenon of > origination & passing away with regard to the body [Erik: do you > consider the "body" a "paramattha dhamma"? Enquiring minds want to > know! :)]. ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I agree. The mind is used here, and a conventional object is being observed. This is all that one *can* do at less than the most advanced stages of insight meditation. ------------------------------------------------------- Or his mindfulness that 'There is a body' is maintained to > the extent of knowledge & remembrance [Erik: uh oh! "Remembrance"? > What has this to do with "right now"? Please elaborate for us here, > Robert! :)]. > ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes. This, I think, is an aspect of "clear comprehension". ------------------------------------------------------- Dear Howard I think that when we read the suttas we should not forget what we know from the Abhidhamma. It is sometimes thought that the Dhamma is easy to understand, but I think this is not so. The Buddha knew how difficult it was for people to understand the deep aspects of Dhamma. After his enlightenment he was at first inclined not to teach the Dhamma when he reflected on the tendencies of people and the Dhammas extreme profundity (all Buddha's have this initial hestitation the commentaries say). Many people do not like the idea that there is no self and that all dhammas are uncontrollable. In the 'Discourse to Vacchagotta on Fire' (Aggi- Vacchagotta-sutta, Majjhima Nikaya II, Paribbajaka-vagga)the Buddha said to Vacchagotta: "".. this dhamma is deep, difficult to see, difficult to understand, peaceful, excellent, beyond dialectic, subtle, intelligible to the wise;.."" The Atthasalini refers to (translated as the expositor p31)those monks who know sutta but don't know Abhidhamma "the bhikkhu who is ill-trained in the Suttas gets a wrong idea, ..consequently he arrives at wrong view" It notes that this is because the suttas use conventional language. If one doesn't have clear understanding of the difference between conventional truth and paramattha dhammas this is bound to happen. (I picked up more copies of Realities and Concepts while in bangkok and would be happy to send you a copy Howard? And anyone else on the list -please write) Now about the meaning of 'Body' in the satipatthana sutta quoted above and what awareness of the 'body' means. Here is a section from the attahakatha to the satipatthana sutta . """"The Buddha, after dealing in the aforesaid manner with body- contemplation in the form of respiration-meditation, in detail, said: "And further," in order to deal exhaustively with body- contemplation, here, according to the meditation on the modes of deportment [iriyapatha]. Gacchanto va gacchamiti pajanati = "When he is going (a bhikkhu) understands: 'I am going.'" In this matter of going, readily do dogs, jackals and the like, know when they move on that they are moving. But this instruction on the modes of deportment was not given concerning similar awareness, because awareness of that sort belonging to animals does not shed the belief in a living being, does not knock out the percept of a soul, and neither becomes a subject of meditation nor the development of the Arousing of Mindfulness. Going. The term is applicable both to the awareness of the fact of moving on and to the knowledge of the (true) characteristic qualities of moving on. The terms sitting, standing and lying down, too, are applicable in the general sense of awareness and in the particular sense of knowledge of the (true) characteristic qualities. Here (in this discourse) the particular and not the general sense of awareness is to be taken. "" ENDQUOTE Howard, please note "knowledge of the (true) characteristic quality" (which refers exclusively to paramattha dhamma)and that "the particular and NOT the general sense of awareness is to be taken." It carries on: "From the sort of mere awareness denoted by reference to canines and the like, proceeds the idea of a soul, the perverted perception, with the belief that there is a doer and an experiencer. One who does not uproot or remove that wrong perception owing to non- opposition to that perception and to absence of contemplative practice cannot be called one who develops anything like a subject of meditation."" Endquote. Hope this helps. On your questions about determinism I will try to answer later. best wishes robert 7437 From: m. nease Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 8:49am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Satipatthana (was Testing - Erik Hello Again, Victor, --- Victor wrote: > Are you a confluence of continuous conditions > resulting from a very > great number of conditions with nearly identical > 'histories'? Are > you a kind of dancing image resulting from the > present manifestations > of these conditions? Yes--as I see it, that's what 'I' always is. > The names "Robert", "Victor", "Mike" are used for > designation. I use > the name "Mike" to refer to you, and you use it to > refer to > yourself. Similarly, you use the name "Victor" to > refer to me, and I > use it to refer to myself. Even the Buddha and the Arahats spoke in conventional terms (names, nouns, pronouns etc.) in the discourses and surely knew that these were terms designating illusory identification with the aggregates of attachment (not 'selves'). Those (like me) who understand this only conceptually can hardly expect to communicate without them. > What do you think? Does the view "there is no Mike, > no Victor, no > Robert" convey any of the three characteristics of > the conditioned > phenomenon; namely, form(or feeling, or perception, > or formations, or > consciousness) is impermanent, dukkha, to be > regarded as it actually > is thus: "This is not mine, this I am not, this is > not my self"? If > so, how? You truncated the sentence, "there is no Mike, no Victor, no Robert" in a way that lost its original meaning. Without the phrase, "except on a very superficial level" I wouldn't have written it. My point is just that 'Mike', 'Victor', 'Robert' and even common nouns refer to concepts--that's all. I believe this is consistent with the Dhammavinaya. You asked > Does the view...convey any of the three > characteristics of > the conditioned > phenomenon; namely, form(or feeling, or perception, > or formations, or > consciousness) is impermanent, dukkha, to be > regarded as it actually > is thus: "This is not mine, this I am not, this is > not my self"? If > so, how? As I understand it, the idea of the 'selves' of things and people falls into the fourth aggregate, sankharupaadaana. This surely partakes of the three characteristics of unsatisfactoriness, impermanence and emptiness and is also surely "to be regarded as it actually is thus: "This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self." My apologies if I've misunderstood you. I certainly didn't mean to start a debate--I'm not much for debates. Best wishes, sir, mike 7438 From: Howard Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 5:06am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Satipatthana , Hi, Robert - In a message dated 8/14/01 8:37:47 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Robert Kirkpatrick writes: > > Dear Howard, > I'm at an internet cafe so can only give a quickly thought out reply > to your post. > ------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Well, I've already looked ahead to what you write here, and I'm impressed with what you can do quickly! ;-) ------------------------------------------------------------ >> > > > >Robert: Now there is seeing, were the javana cittas after that > > > moment of seeing kusala or akusala? There are so > > > many different types of citta. Now I am typing, the > > > cittas that condition the movement of the hand are not > > > vipaka (result) they are different from the vipaka > > > cittas that are seeing, hearing, tasting, touching and > > > smelling. These are all realities they are happening > > > now again and again. How much do we know about them? > > > They are anatta, uncontrollable, aniccum, gone > > > already. The buddha said in the sutta above "with insight let him > > see > > > Each presently arisen state; > > > Let him know that and be sure of it,"" > > > > The development of satipatthana is about > > > seeing these dhammas now,as they appear. Life is so > > > short- > > > namas and rupas are arising and passing away at this > > > moment. > > > > ERIK: The Buddha seems to say this, but not in the way you're > putting it. > > More specifically, the Buddha instructs us in Mindfulness of the > > Breath: > > > > "In this way he remains focused internally on the body in & of > > itself, or externally on the body in & of itself, or both > internally > > & externally on the body in & of itself. Or he remains focused on > the > > phenomenon of origination with regard to the body, on the > phenomenon > > of passing away with regard to the body, or on the phenomenon of > > origination & passing away with regard to the body [Erik: do you > > consider the "body" a "paramattha dhamma"? Enquiring minds want to > > know! :)]. > ------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I agree. The mind is used here, and a conventional object is > being > observed. This is all that one *can* do at less than the most > advanced stages > of insight meditation. > ------------------------------------------------------- > Or his mindfulness that 'There is a body' is maintained to > > the extent of knowledge & remembrance [Erik: uh oh! "Remembrance"? > > What has this to do with "right now"? Please elaborate for us here, > > Robert! :)]. > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Yes. This, I think, is an aspect of "clear comprehension". > ------------------------------------------------------- > > Dear Howard > I think that when we read the suttas we should not forget what we > know from the Abhidhamma. It is sometimes thought that the Dhamma is > easy to understand, but I think this is not so. > The Buddha knew how difficult it was for people to understand the > deep aspects of Dhamma. After his enlightenment he was at first > inclined not to teach the Dhamma when he reflected on the tendencies > of people and the Dhammas extreme profundity (all Buddha's have this > initial hestitation the commentaries say). ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, it is certainly profound. I think that the main depth lies in the resistance people have to seeing all dhammas as empty, insubstantial, fleeting, and like foam, and especially in seeing the impersonality of all dhammas. We are primed to misinterpret the Dhamma. We even tend to misinterpret the fundamental scheme of dependent arising, thinking that it pertains to real, self-existent entities between which a connecting relation of causality holds. -------------------------------------------------------------- Many people do not like > the idea that there is no self and that all dhammas are > uncontrollable. ------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: For sure. This is a point I was making in my post on the "Paradox of Volition". ----------------------------------------------------------- In the 'Discourse to Vacchagotta on Fire' (Aggi- > Vacchagotta-sutta, Majjhima Nikaya II, Paribbajaka-vagga)the Buddha > said to Vacchagotta: > > "".. this dhamma is deep, difficult to see, difficult to understand, > peaceful, excellent, beyond dialectic, subtle, intelligible to the > wise;.."" > > > The Atthasalini refers to (translated as the expositor > p31) those monks who know sutta but don't know Abhidhamma "the bhikkhu > who is ill-trained in the Suttas gets > a wrong idea, ..consequently he arrives at wrong view" > It notes that this is because the suttas use conventional language. ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes. But those of us who are mired in illusion - and this, I believe, includes all of us - are prone to arrive at wrong view also when studying Abhidhamma, because we will cling to and reify the notions there as well. Only real practice can ultimately be a cure as I see it. --------------------------------------------------- > If one doesn't have clear understanding of the difference between > conventional truth and paramattha dhammas this is bound to happen. (I > picked up more copies of Realities and Concepts while in bangkok and > would be happy to send you a copy Howard? And anyone else on the > list -please write) -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I would be MOST appreciative of receiving a copy, Robert. Should I e-mail you my address? -------------------------------------------------------- > > Now about the meaning of 'Body' in the satipatthana sutta quoted > above and what awareness of the 'body' means. > Here is a section from the attahakatha to the satipatthana sutta . > > """"The Buddha, after dealing in the aforesaid manner with body- > contemplation in the form of respiration-meditation, in detail, > said: "And further," in order to deal exhaustively with body- > contemplation, here, according to the meditation on the modes of > deportment [iriyapatha]. > > Gacchanto va gacchamiti pajanati = "When he is going (a bhikkhu) > understands: 'I am going.'" In this matter of going, readily do dogs, > jackals and the like, know when they move on that they are moving. > But this instruction on the modes of deportment was not given > concerning similar awareness, because awareness of that sort > belonging to animals does not shed the belief in a living being, does > not knock out the percept of a soul, and neither becomes a subject of > meditation nor the development of the Arousing of Mindfulness. > > Going. The term is applicable both to the awareness of the fact of > moving on and to the knowledge of the (true) characteristic qualities > of moving on. > The terms sitting, standing and lying down, too, are applicable in > the general sense of awareness and in the particular sense of > knowledge of the (true) characteristic qualities. Here (in this > discourse) the particular and not the general sense of awareness is > to be taken. "" ENDQUOTE > > Howard, please note "knowledge of the (true) characteristic quality" > (which refers exclusively to paramattha dhamma)and that "the > particular and NOT the general sense of awareness is to be taken." > > It carries on: "From the sort of mere awareness denoted by reference > to canines and the like, proceeds the idea of a soul, the perverted > perception, with the belief that there is a doer and an experiencer. > One who does not uproot or remove that wrong perception owing to non- > opposition to that perception and to absence of contemplative > practice cannot be called one who develops anything like a subject of > meditation."" Endquote. --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, of course. One's observation must be a direct seeing of what is actually there. It must have the flavor of the initial phase of consciousness wherein there is a mere observing of the object without further reaction of a conceptual or emotional sort. When these arise, they simply constitute further objects to which bare attention is to be applied. --------------------------------------------------------- > > Hope this helps. > On your questions about determinism I will try to answer later. --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I look forward to that. --------------------------------------------------------- > best wishes > robert > > ============================ 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) 7439 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 11:19am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Hi, Howard --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Jon - > ============================== > Thank you for this. I do understand it, seeing it as a > "higher-order", > Abhidhammic explanation of Right Effort, without disputing the > conventional > Right Effort emphasized in the Sutta Pitaka. I would be interested in > sutta > references which also suggest such an interpretation. Would you or > anyone > know of such? Well, it's a matter of the wider context of the Eightfold Path and the body of the Suttanta as a whole. I will try to come back on this later. In the meantime, I would be interested to hear an example/instance of 'conventional' Right Effort of the Eightfold Path, as might apply in your own case. (I think that would help this discussion - and your 'Paradox' post - move forward.) And I have 2 questions for you to ponder, Howard. 1. As far as effort for kusala generally is concerned, would it be correct to say that the more one's understanding is developed and the more one sees the value in kusala and the danger in akusala, the less 'effort' is required for kusala to arise? 2. I think we have all had experiences of occasions when kusala has arisen spontaneously, without the slightest 'effort' on our part, for example when giving a hand to someone in need, or responding to a request for assistance from a colleague, etc., while at other times kusala manifestly fails to arise despite our best 'efforts'. What would be the explanation for this? Jon PS Thanks for the excellent posts recently, I have enjoyed the useful reminders. 7440 From: Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 11:15am Subject: satipatthana Hello all dsg members, Since the subject of satipatthana is currently being discussed online, I thought it might be appropriate to share a very interesting example of satipatthana which arose for me a few days ago. The important things to note are: --it arises unbidden; there is no control one can have over the process since there is no “one” who can control it. It is only cittas, cetasikas arising and then falling away in a process. --it can arise any time in the course of daily life if the conditions are there for it to do so. Focusing on realities as they arise at any moment in the course of a day and study of the Dhamma act as conditions for satipatthana to arise later. When one has made some initial study of the process itself, one can be better aware of what is happening when it actually does arise. Our teachers, kalayanamitr, are guides, good friends in Dhamma who can lead the way. But only “I” or “we” can take the steps that lead to the conditions that will allow understanding to arise later. This is my story: I had been very upset with the turn of events over the opening Sunday night of my cousin's epic movie Suriyothai, in which I did the subtitles. However, his team put them onto the film itself and they are not native English speakers. There were too many careless mistakes to count when viewing it in its entirety at the gala premier performance which Their Majesties attended. I felt totally mortified when many who knew I had done them pointed out the mistakes to me. To add insult to injury, my name was not even listed among the credits. My mana intensified a great deal and brought many tears the following day. Late Monday night I was sitting and ruminating when (thankfully) panna arose and it was realized that I had nothing to be ashamed of. I did them well, to the best of my ability. And if others think I am to blame, that is their problem of moha, not mine. And if they think less of me, that is my vipaka and there is nothing I can or should do about it. But mostly I realized how much mana had arisen to cause such unhappiness for me. And even more important: who is really "there" to feel any hurt? An analysis then ensued as to which cetasikas had probably been arising throughout that day of unhappiness. So, instead of feeling dhosa against my cousin, I silently thanked him and his team for being part of the conditions for panna to arise. I thank Achaan Sujin, my guide and kalayanamitr, for having given me the "tools" with which to have done that analysis. It is this same satipatthana process which we all need to understand if we are to see our own daily situations clearly. For, only when panna arises can the various defilements, moha, lobha, dhosa, be let go. with metta, Betty __________________________ Mom Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala 38 Soi 41 Phaholyothin Road Bangkok 10900, Thailand tel: 662-579-1050; 661-826-7160 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/post?protectID=Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala 7441 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 0:06pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Eightfold Path vs 5-fold path Mike --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Kom, Howard an Jon, > > This is extremely interesting. Kom, 'fermentations' > or 'taints' here is from 'aasavas', one definition of > which is 'ideas which intoxicate the mind'. Jon has > often stated that the 8-(or5-)fold path refers > exclusively to moments on the brink of awakening (my > apologies, Jon, if I've mis-paraphrased you). Just to clarify, because I may not have been clear or consistent throughout, here is a summary in purely 'technical' terms of what I have been trying to say-- 1. A reference in the suttas to the Eightfold Path as the Fourth Noble Truth means a moment of consciousness when all 8 path-factors arise together. This occurs only at a moment of magga-citta (path-consciousness), ie. at one of the 4 stages of enlightenment. It is a moment of supramundane consciousness, with Nibbana as its object. 2. There is a mundane version of the path, which is a moment when 5 (or sometimes 6) of the factors of the eightfold path (in their 'mundane version') arise. This refers to a moment of satipatthana (or 'mundane path-consciousness'). Its object will be any presently appearing reality. It may arise at any time, given the right understanding and other conditions. 3. A reference in the suttas to the Eightfold Path as one of the 37 requisites of enlightenment means, at any time before actual enlightenment, a moment of mundane (5-fold) path-consciousness and, at or subsequent to the first stage of enlightenment, the supramundane 8-fold path consciousness. Thanks for giving me the opportunity to clarify, and apologies for any past confusion. Jon 7442 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 2:38pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Path-factors with/without the asavas Mike > It's obvious from reading the discourses (and the > discipline) that the Buddha sometimes spoke of > thought, speech and action leading to happy rebirths > (e.g. the divine abodes) and other times of thought, > (sometimes with and sometimes without) speech and > action leading to unbinding--I say obvious because he > stated so explicitly. (By the way, there's one > discourse in which the Buddha chides Ananda (I think) > for having taught the divine abodes to a dying person > who could have attained enlightenment before death had > he taught the path instead--anyone remember where this > is?) > > Anyway, the Great Forty seems to me to support Jon's > position on this to some extent--not quite to the > extent that the path-factors refer only to > near-enlightenment, but certainly to the extent that > there's a real and important difference between the > factors with and without aasavas. > > The question remaining to me is, if the Buddha taught > 'only dukkha and the way out of dukkha', then why did > he teach kusala that doesn't lead to nibbana? > Off-hand I'm inclined to think that, kusala that > doesn't lead to nibbana mayabe leads to kusala that > DOES lead to nibbana. Maybe. Another answer, and this may sound trite but it's not, is that the Buddha taught *all* realities, including even the akusala ones. Whatever the reality, he taught how it can be known for what it is, and he taught how it conditions, or is conditioned by, other realities. If you look closely at the language of this sutta, I think the Buddha talks in much the same terms whether the reality under discussion is akusala or (one or other kind of) kusala. He leaves it very much to the listener to draw his own conclusions, according to the listener's accumulations and level of understanding. (This is another example of what I call descriptive rather than prescriptive language.) > Another thought: The Buddha also taught, right > through the discourses and the discipline, the > (temporary) subduing of the defilements by various > skilful reflections. Do you think there is a link > between this sort of reflection and the > path-factors-with-aasavas? I'm sure there is a link. Unless and until the kusala qualities have been developed to a high degree, they cannot perform the function of subduing the defilements. Defilements cannot be subdued by 'willing' kusala, even though it may sometimes seem that we can do this. Jon 7443 From: Sarah Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 3:03pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The Paradox of Volition Dear Howard, You've really considered carefully and I enjoyed this piece very much. --- Howard wrote: > Hi, all - > > All dhammas other than nibbana arise according to causes and > conditions. This includes acts of volition. Volition never arises without > cause, randomly, but only when the conditions necessary for its arising have > come together. Are we unhappy with this? I think so. > But if volition were to arise randomly, without cause, there where > would lie any source of pleasure in that? What would be "free will" if > volition arose in such a manner? We would be at least as unhappy if choosing > were to be choosing for no reason whatsoever! > The fact is that given that volition, as all other worldly dhammas, > only arises when the necessary conditions are in place, there is no > *uncaused* choosing to act volitionally; it just happens when it is > appropriate for it to happen. After all, any choosing to act volitionally is, > > itself, an act of volition, which is not random, but caused. So we seem > caught between the Scylla and Charybdis of strict determinism and strict > randomness, between a rock and a hard place. The middle way out of this > dilemma seems to elude us. May I add a comment? I think the missing piece here is sati or awareness. Thinking alone can never solve the dilemma although the wise reflecting and considering as you're doing here are essential requisites for sati to arise. At the moment of thinking that 'this is a dilemma' or that 'we seem caught between A & B', there can be awareness of thinking at that very moment. It's a nama (mental pheonomenon) arising for a moment, thinking about concepts. When there is a moment of awareness of its characteristic, there's no dilemma and no 'being caught...'. and no upset either! > But why does this upset us so much? Why is this an obsessive > philosophical problem for us? I suspect that we are consumed by this because > we are distraught over the idea that WE might not be able to exercise free > will. But there IS no "we". There is no self to be exercising anything!! Exactly so....the problem is created by the clinging to self and the wrong view associated with this. I > suspect that the paradox/problem of volition is a pseudo-problem which will > be solved by its disappearance. When? With the advent of full liberation, if > not sooner. Yes, sooner! At any moment of satipatthana, when awareness is aware of thinking or seeing or any other paramattha dhamma, there is no paradox and no pseudo problem for a moment. Of course, afterwards there are bound to be the doubts and dilemmas again, but as you seem to be finding, they become fewer and it becomes clearer that there is no self that has any control over them! >And meanwhile, we can be happy that conditions have brought "us" > to the current happy circumstances in which we can study and practice the > Dhamma. Yes and very well put....... I can't imagine, Howard, why you would consider that anything you write might ever cause any offence;-)) You're a model for the rest of us in terms or wise and considered speech! Many thanks. Btw, while I was watching the news on CNN this morning and doing my yoga, I found I was reflecting on your question about the timing of awareness. We talk about awareness of a reality when that reality in actuality occurred in a process just fallen away. As Nina replied, the characteristic still appears (not a memory or concept) and hence we say it is (and for all intents and purposes it is) the reality which appears at the present moment. When sati is aware of it, there is no thought or concern about processes or billionth of a second intervals or any other time concepts which only the Buddha could fully appreciate. Back to CNN and an analogy which may not work (not my strong point!) We say we're watching live coverage from Jerusalem and for our purposes that is correct. It is being relayed direct by satellite and what we see is what is being transmitted at that time. In fact, however, I'm told that there is a very small interval between what appears on my gym's TV screen and what is being transmitted. Now the experts can give a scientific explanation of how this works, but it doesn't affect the live coverage I see. This doesn't mean it's not helpful to understand intellectually the detailed processes and timing of cittas or of satellite transmission (as an analogy only!), but it shouldn't distract us from understanding what sati is, what the objects of sati are or enjoying the picture in front of us on CNN! ....And while thinking of processes, satellites, yoga poses and other stories, there can be a moment of awareness again of thinking, a conditioned citta or hardness or visible object for a moment. Just for that moment, there is true calm from any restlessnes or other unwholesome mental factors and no dilemma at all. Then the stories continue, but this is so natural as Nina has been stressing. No need to TRY and change it or stop thinking of concepts..... I know you're getting full mail bags these days Howard....hope you find something useful! Sarah Sarah 7444 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 3:09pm Subject: Determinism? Dear Howard, Your post today about the paradox was spot on; I find it encouraging when I read Dhamma such as this. On Dsg several of us to tend to put a lot of emphasis on anatta, and some find that disturbing. They think it means we are saying are 'anything goes'. We should know that all types of kusala except satipatthana vipassana can be done with self-view still firmly embedded. However, knowing about anatta doesn't mean one forgets sila or dana or metta or other types of kusala (I personally don't practice anapanasati but if others do that's fine with me). True insight into anatta develops only to the degree that there is understanding of conditions. And since one of the main conditions is kamma if there is any insight then one is becoming ever more sensitive to the fact that what is done or even thought now brings a result in the future - as well as accumulating more tendencies to do whatever type of deed of thought is been done. I am still a little pushed for time so I did a copy /paste job from a couple of earlier letters. The "Kindred Sayings"(III, Khandha vagga, Middle Fifty, Ch V, par. 99, The Leash) Just as, monks, a dog tied up by a leash to a strong stake or pillar, keeps running round and revolving round and round that stake or pillar, even so, monks, the untaught many folk... regard body as self, regard feeling, perception, activities, consciousness as self... they run and revolve round and round from body to body, from feeling to feeling, from perception to perception, from activities to activities, from consciousness to consciousness...they are not released therefrom, they are not released from rebirth, from old age and decay, from sorrow and grief, from woe, lamentation and despair... they are not released from dukkha, I declare... " It then says that the ariyan disciple who does not take any dhamma for self is released from dukkha. This applies just as much to cetana(volition) as to any other dhamma. Often when "I" investigate the 6 doors there is just that: "I". Sati is taken for self or I think "I" made awareness happen. But cetana (volition, intention) and awareness are part of sankharakkhandha, they are "not-self because uncontrollable" Visuddhimagga xiv224. This doesn't mean fatalism or that nothing can be done but it should remind us that the right conditions are needed for the right results. It is to our great advantage to learn more about the Dhamma. The Atthasalini, (triplets p451)defines "ignorant average man" as: "owing to the absense of access to the Scriptures, and of the higher attainment of the path and fruition. For to whoever owing to the absense of learning by heart and deduction therefrom regarding the khandas(aggregates) elements(dhatus) sense-organs(ayatanas) the causal mode, the applications of mindfulness etc there is NO attainment of that learning which represses opinionativeness, nor any access, owing to the non-attainment of what should be attained by conduct. Such a person, from the absense of such access and such attainment should be known as ignorant".ENDQUOTE Anatta is the core of the Buddha's teaching and so is hard to fathom. Visudd. XViii31 "The mental and physical (nama and rupa) are really here, but here no human being is to be found, for it is void and merely fashioned like a doll;just suffering piled up like grass and sticks" Do we think in this way yet? It is not so easy even to reflect in such a manner; hence we should expect that deeper insight into nama and rupa takes time. xix19 "there is no doer of a deed or one who reaps the fruit; phenomena alone flow on- no other view than this is right" XX47 talks about sankhara khanda (the agregate of formations) this includes all cetasikas except feeling and sanna. It includes sati, intention, effort, metta, dosa etc. "they are void of the possibilty of any power being exercised over them, they are therefore not-self beacuse void, because owner less, because unsusceptible to the weilding of power, and because of precluding a self". This last quote may disturb some because if nothing is controllable then "what the hell can we do?!!!" This sort of reaction is rooted in "we" - it comes from an assumption of self and control. (Just as you mentioned in your paradox post Howard) Now for the good news: vis.xvi "there IS a path but no goer". This round of births and deaths is beginningless. However, it is not random in any sense. Because of conditions birth occurs in one plane and because of different conditions birth occurs in another plane. Panna (wisdom) is a conditioned phenomena and it is a conditioning factor. What are the conditions for panna to develop : hearing the Dhamma, considering it, applying it and also accumulations of merit from the infinite past (pubekata punnata). Why are we so interested in Dhamma? Why isn't the leader of the Taliban interested; surely he makes effort, surely he has the intention to do what is best? Why do some people hear Dhamma but find it unappealing while others can't get enough even after hearing it just once? Why are some initially not interested and then later they get interested and surpass in understanding those who studied much longer? It is clear that there must be reasons for all this; and the Dhamma explains it all. ___________ BRUCE: "that's where I get stuck...if all dhammas except nibbana > are > conditioned (i'm going on saddha with this, of course), then > thinking one > can develop anything seems like an exercise in > micchaditthi.... _______ _________________ Good point. I think it depends on the thinking. If we have the idea of "I can do it", then we are likely to be caught in self view. Or we think we can manufacture sati by effort or intention - self. But there can be wisdom - not us- that sees the danger in samsara and thus there is naturally effort that arises with that understanding. It is subtle: often we slip into self view; either towards the freewill end of the continuum or towards the fatalistic end that thinks nothing can be done. ____________________________ > > can the path be developed? or do we just leave it up to (for > lack of a > better f-word) "fate"? "" __________________ Fate implies a preordained outcome. In that case whether we did this that or the other nothing would make a thread of difference. We could go out and kill and pillage and nothing would have any effect and we would all get enlightened or not get enlightened depending on our "fate". This is not what the Buddha taught. He explained in detail many different conditions. It is true that some are past conditions but there are also present ones thus it is not fatalism. Both the idea of fatalism and the idea of freewill are bound up in self view - a self who can control and a self who can't. The Dhamma is the middle way and is neither. When we hear a teacher like sujin say "develop it" this can be a condition for either wrong effort or right effort. It depends on the understanding of the listener. I think we all have vastly different accumulations and so we have to learn what is most suitable each for his own. For me when I first saw the nature of the mind I realized how powerful ignorance and desire were and I became frightened by these powerful energies. I just wanted to stop them - but without wisdom. It was because I didn't understand anatta. Later, I understood that defilements can't be quickly got rid of. That when desire arises it is by conditions - that the uncontrollabilty of it demonstrates the truth of anatta. Now my focus is to understand conditions and to see that there is nobody at all doing anything. This doesn't mean that nothing is being done. In the Majjhima Nikaya 148 Chachakka Sutta The Blessed One said: "The six internal media should be known. The six external media should be known. The six classes of consciousness should be known. The six classes of contact should be known. The six classes of feeling should be known. The six classes of CRAVING should be known." Note that it says the six classes of craving should be known. I think this is important. Most of us are very keen to get the stage where all craving is gone but first it should be understood. If we are afraid of it (as I was) then it is not possible to insight it. Craving, as much as other dhammas, can be an object for understanding. if it is seen through the lens of anatta it is not mistaken for "my" craving and so its true characteristic can be seen. Howard, as you see some of this adressed your points and some was a bit off target. I would be very happy to continue if you make further comments. Just one further point. I personally don't find in any way that accepting the uncontrollabilty of dhammas hinders effort. I think we spend a lot of energy worrying and wanting and trying to control. Knowing that deeper conditions than just intention and effort are needed for any result, even in the material world, should mean we become more detached from expectation and desire. One knows that the past is completely gone, the future unknown and so it is very natural to live more in the moment, giving and doing as much as we can here and now. And yes please send me your adress off-list so I can send the book (and any others who want a copy please write) best wishes robert 7445 From: Sarah Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 3:40pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] satipatthana Dear Betty, Thank you for your good reminders and for sharing this story: --- "Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala" wrote > This is my story: I had been very upset with the turn of events over the > opening Sunday night of my cousin's epic movie Suriyothai, in which I did > the subtitles. However, his team put them onto the film itself and they are > not native English speakers. There were too many careless mistakes to count > when viewing it in its entirety at the gala premier performance which Their > Majesties attended. I felt totally mortified when many who knew I had done > them pointed out the mistakes to me. To add insult to injury, my name was > not even listed among the credits. My mana intensified a great deal and > brought many tears the following day. Late Monday night I was sitting and > ruminating when (thankfully) panna arose and it was realized that I had > nothing to be ashamed of. I did them well, to the best of my ability. And if > others think I am to blame, that is their problem of moha, not mine. And if > they think less of me, that is my vipaka and there is nothing I can or > should do about it. But mostly I realized how much mana had arisen to cause > such unhappiness for me. And even more important: who is really "there" to > feel any hurt? An analysis then ensued as to which cetasikas had probably > been arising throughout that day of unhappiness. So, instead of feeling > dhosa against my cousin, I silently thanked him and his team for being part > of the conditions for panna to arise. As Erik reminded us yesterday in 'Scholars and Meditators', we're stuck with a lot of mana for a very long time.....Such an ugly best that brings so many tears and only occasionally is there enough wisdom and clarity to be brave and honest enough to recognise it, better still be aware of it, when it raises its ugly head. Afterwards, of course it's only thinking and reflecting about it, but still it's very skilful reflecting and hopefully can help us to see 'the mange' as the problem that the poor Jackal never could. Thanks, Betty......like Nina, I find these daily life reminders very helpful and hope to hear more! Your cousin is fortunate indeed to have your help and I hope the movie's a success. (Ooops! Howard and Ven Dhammapiyo, that's a lot of hoping for one paragraph!!;-)) Sarah 7446 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 3:45pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Abhidhamma and Cognitive Science Herman --- Herman wrote: > Dear Jon, > > > > Put another way, can the findings of cognitive science really > give any > > > indication either way about any crucial aspect of the teachings? > > > > > My readings in cognitive science, and most other sciences for that > matter, certainly confirm that the notion of a controlling self is > without foundation. We are a mass of fermenting chemical processes, > each one ultimately knowable and predicatable in its outcome, > conforming as they all are to knowable laws. > > I take this not so much as a confirmation of the teachings, but as > the honest finding of open minded enquiry. For the object of true > scientific investigation is to know, not to confirm Planck, Newton or > the Buddha. > > And how does modern science know it knows? When it is able to > accurately predict and recreate. This is one kind of knowledge. But it shows, I think, the different worlds inhabited by cognitive science and dhamma. The teachings of the Buddha are not concerned with the knowledge that can accurately predict or recreate events, but with knowledge about the essential characteristic of a reality that appears and its conditioning factors. That's why I suggested that no confirmation of the teachings could be found in the works of cognitive science. (That is not to deny the very important role that cognitive science plays in our lives.) > What is the basis for confidence in a Theradavin worldview? > You can start with rebirth if you like. Is not all of Buddhism > predicated on the notion of rebirth? Is there anything in rebirth > that is knowable? > > Personally, I see more heuristic value in the the anatta, anicca and > duhka of modern genetics. As far as I know, there is only one basis for confidence in the Theravadin view of things, namely the understanding gained by the study and application of the teachings. In terms of an objective basis, such as could be explained to another with a QED as the conclusion, I am sure there is none. However, there are aspects of the teachings that can be verified by anyone right away and at this very moment, such as the fact that the object appearing through, say, the eye-door is wholly different in nature from the experiencing of that object, and is also wholly different from the object appearing through the ear door or any other sense-door. From such beginnings, the teachings can be knowable, but only 'by each person for themself' ie. not by any objectively demonstrable experiment, thoerem or the like. Both kinds of knowledge can be pursued without mutual inconsistency. Jon 7447 From: Fenny Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 5:04pm Subject: Hello, everyone Clear Day Dear Sarah and everyone in the list, Hello. Yeah, Sarah, you're right. That was the first time I posted on the list. Indeed I've been monitoring the activities of the list for some time (about a week) before I started posted. I'm 21 years old, a female (I've more than once be mistaken as being a male), originated from Medan, Indonesia, and currently undergoing my tertiary study in Singapore. I've been in the path of Buddhism for 3 years, starting in July 1998, and have been praticing on and off since then. My line of practice inclines more towards the Theravada tradition, but I'm an admirer of Thich Nhat Hanh(Zen) and Bhante Abhinnaya(Mahayana). I do find this dsg useful. Thank you. Gassho, Fen 7449 From: Herman Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 5:12pm Subject: Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Jon, To be totally honest, I wouldn't know kusala or akusala if I fell over them. Especially since joining this forum. This is not a criticism of the forum, by the way. How on earth do I know the difference between wrong view and kusala? Where is the yardstick that tells me that? Could there not be a deception lurking near every citta that suggests wholesomeness? What is the basis for a monks confidence that there was a wholesome citta? Regards Herman --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Hi, Howard > > > And I have 2 questions for you to ponder, Howard. > > 1. As far as effort for kusala generally is concerned, would it be > correct to say that the more one's understanding is developed and the more > one sees the value in kusala and the danger in akusala, the less 'effort' > is required for kusala to arise? > > 2. I think we have all had experiences of occasions when kusala has > arisen spontaneously, without the slightest 'effort' on our part, for > example when giving a hand to someone in need, or responding to a request > for assistance from a colleague, etc., while at other times kusala > manifestly fails to arise despite our best 'efforts'. What would be the > explanation for this? > > Jon 7450 From: Herman Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 5:27pm Subject: The limits of awareness Hi all, Cognitive science teaches that awareness is just a bubble of froth on the ocean of reality. It is a Johny-come-lately in the evolution of matter. Awareness is a by-product of matter coalesced in a particular sequence. Rupas arise without nama. Nama does not arise without rupa. Nama is effect, not cause. Time for dinner. It smells good. Wish you were here :-) Herman 7451 From: Ong Teng Kee Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 7:28pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Satipatthana Sutta and its commentaries Dear Jonothan, You said any 4 objects can be done for anyone.Please beware that com said kaya and vedana for samathayanika /craving people but citta and dhamma for sukkhavipassaka /viewing people. >From: Jonothan Abbott >Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Satipatthana Sutta and its commentaries >Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 22:30:39 +0800 (CST) > >Joshua > >--- Joshua wrote: > > > > In the case of the article below, there are several passages which > > contain > > > statements, inferences or assumptions that are not supported by the > > > ancient commentators, > > > > Could you give some examples? > >I will give one or two examples of what I had in mind. With this >reservation, however: I do not mean to be questioning the personal views >of the author. I am simply commenting on the article taken at its face >value, as any reader might see it. > >With that caveat, I will give one example of a difference of detail and >one of 'doctrine', both of which can be discussed from a reading of the >Satipatthana Sutta itself or its commentary, as translated by Soma Thera >in 'The Way of Mindfulness' (page numbers below are to this book). > >Here is the matter of detail. > >The description of the 4 Foundations of Mindfulness >The article describes the four Foundations/Focuses of Mindfulness as "your >own body, the pleasure and pain associated with each sense, the mind >consciousness and the objects of the mind". > >In the Satipatthana Sutta, the first Foundation of Mindfulness, usually >referred to as 'Contemplation of the Body', is not limited to one's own >body, but include another's body as well. Each of the several aspects of >contemplation of the body (breathing, the modes of deportment, the 4 kinds >of clear comprehension, repulsiveness of the body, the modes of >materiality, and the 9 cemetery contemplations) concludes with the passage >-- > >"Thus he lives contemplating the body in the body internally, or he lives >contemplating the body in the body externally, or he lives contemplating >the body in the body internally and externally." > >The commentary to the section on breathing explains (p.51) that this >refers to contemplation of the body in one's own 'respiration-body', in >another's 'respiration-body' or at one time in one's own and at another >in another's 'respiration-body'. A similar comment is made after each of >the other sections. > >There is quite a difference between one's own body as object of >contemplation and one's own or another's body as object of contemplation >(especially when it comes to breath!). The wrong understanding could, for >example, lead one to the idea that this contemplation is best 'practised' >in solitude, an idea that is not supported by a reading of the sutta as a >whole. > >In fact, although the section on contemplation on the body in the sutta >talks in term of different bodily postures, activities, cemetery >contemplations etc (ie. in terms of conventional situations), the >underlying meaning according to the commentary is all rupa-dhammas, the >dhammas that comprise the first khandha. Indeed, the 4 Foundations >between them refer to all the 5 khandhas (ie all paramattha dhammas that >are subject to clinging). The commentary says on this (p. 119) -- > >"In the contemplation on the body, the laying hold of the aggregate of >corporeality or materiality was spoken of by the Master; >in the contemplation on feeling, the laying hold of the aggregate of >feeling; >in the contemplation on mind, the laying hold of the aggregate of >consciousness; >and now [ie. in the contemplation on mental objects] … the laying hold of >the aggregates of perception and formations, …". > >The rupa-kkhandha includes of course not only the rupas that we take for >our own body, but all rupas that are experienced through the various >doorways. Most importantly, it refers to realities that are arising at >the present moment, not at any other time. > >It is not necessary to 'choose' one or other of the 4 Foundations as the >focus for contemplation. If there is awareness of any reality appearing >at the present moment, that awareness is a moment of the development of >(one or other of) the 4 Foundations of Mindfulness as taught in the >Satipatthana Sutta. > >I hope this has given some idea of how careful we should be in taking >parts of suttas at their face value, without reference to the whole sutta >and its commentaries. > >Jon > >PS This post turned out longer than expected! I will mention the >'doctrinal' issue in a separate post. > 7452 From: Howard Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 3:58pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The Paradox of Volition Hi, Sarah - Thank you for your insightful comments below and also for your kind words. With metta, Howard In a message dated 8/15/01 3:05:13 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Sarah Procter Abbott writes: > Dear Howard, > > You've really considered carefully and I enjoyed this piece very much. > > --- Howard wrote: > Hi, all - > > > > All dhammas other than nibbana arise according to causes and > > conditions. This includes acts of volition. Volition never arises without > > cause, randomly, but only when the conditions necessary for its arising > have > > come together. Are we unhappy with this? I think so. > > But if volition were to arise randomly, without cause, there where > > would lie any source of pleasure in that? What would be "free will" if > > volition arose in such a manner? We would be at least as unhappy if > choosing > > were to be choosing for no reason whatsoever! > > The fact is that given that volition, as all other worldly > dhammas, > > only arises when the necessary conditions are in place, there is no > > *uncaused* choosing to act volitionally; it just happens when it is > > appropriate for it to happen. After all, any choosing to act volitionally > is, > > > > itself, an act of volition, which is not random, but caused. So we seem > > caught between the Scylla and Charybdis of strict determinism and strict > > randomness, between a rock and a hard place. The middle way out of this > > dilemma seems to elude us. > > May I add a comment? I think the missing piece here is sati or awareness. > Thinking alone can never solve the dilemma although the wise reflecting and > considering as you're doing here are essential requisites for sati to arise. > > At the moment of thinking that 'this is a dilemma' or that 'we seem caught > between A & B', there can be awareness of thinking at that very moment. > It's a > nama (mental pheonomenon) arising for a moment, thinking about concepts. > When > there is a moment of awareness of its characteristic, there's no dilemma > and no > 'being caught...'. and no upset either! > > > But why does this upset us so much? Why is this an obsessive > > philosophical problem for us? I suspect that we are consumed by this > because > > we are distraught over the idea that WE might not be able to exercise > free > > will. But there IS no "we". There is no self to be exercising anything!! > > Exactly so....the problem is created by the clinging to self and the wrong > view > associated with this. > > I > > suspect that the paradox/problem of volition is a pseudo-problem which > will > > be solved by its disappearance. When? With the advent of full liberation, > if > > not sooner. > > Yes, sooner! At any moment of satipatthana, when awareness is aware of > thinking or seeing or any other paramattha dhamma, there is no paradox and > no > pseudo problem for a moment. Of course, afterwards there are bound to be the > doubts and dilemmas again, but as you seem to be finding, they become fewer > and > it becomes clearer that there is no self that has any control over them! > > >And meanwhile, we can be happy that conditions have brought "us" > > to the current happy circumstances in which we can study and practice the > > Dhamma. > > Yes and very well put....... I can't imagine, Howard, why you would consider > that anything you write might ever cause any offence;-)) You're a model for > the > rest of us in terms or wise and considered speech! Many thanks. > > Btw, while I was watching the news on CNN this morning and doing my yoga, I > found I was reflecting on your question about the timing of awareness. We > talk > about awareness of a reality when that reality in actuality occurred in a > process just fallen away. As Nina replied, the characteristic still appears > (not a memory or concept) and hence we say it is (and for all intents and > purposes it is) the reality which appears at the present moment. When sati > is > aware of it, there is no thought or concern about processes or billionth of > a > second intervals or any other time concepts which only the Buddha could > fully > appreciate. > > Back to CNN and an analogy which may not work (not my strong point!) We say > we're watching live coverage from Jerusalem and for our purposes that is > correct. It is being relayed direct by satellite and what we see is what is > being transmitted at that time. In fact, however, I'm told that there is a > very > small interval between what appears on my gym's TV screen and what is being > transmitted. Now the experts can give a scientific explanation of how this > works, but it doesn't affect the live coverage I see. > > This doesn't mean it's not helpful to understand intellectually the detailed > processes and timing of cittas or of satellite transmission (as an analogy > only!), but it shouldn't distract us from understanding what sati is, what > the > objects of sati are or enjoying the picture in front of us on CNN! > > ....And while thinking of processes, satellites, yoga poses and other > stories, > there can be a moment of awareness again of thinking, a conditioned citta or > hardness or visible object for a moment. Just for that moment, there is true > calm from any restlessnes or other unwholesome mental factors and no > dilemma at > all. Then the stories continue, but this is so natural as Nina has been > stressing. No need to TRY and change it or stop thinking of concepts..... > > I know you're getting full mail bags these days Howard....hope you find > something useful! > > Sarah > > /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) 7453 From: Sukinderpal Narula Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 8:30pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Path-factors with/without the asavas Dear Jonothan, > If you look closely at the language of this sutta, I think the Buddha > talks in much the same terms whether the reality under discussion is > akusala or (one or other kind of) kusala. He leaves it very much to the > listener to draw his own conclusions, according to the listener's > accumulations and level of understanding. (This is another example of > what I call descriptive rather than prescriptive language.) Acharn Sujin once said that Buddha's teachings are meant to be descriptive but people mistake thinking he taught paths of action. Sukin. 7454 From: Howard Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 4:14pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Determinism? Hi, Robert - Thank you for this wonderful post! There is nothing in it with which I have any disagreement. It is, indeed, a deep and difficult matter. I would like to point out that the material you present on anatta and uncontrollability is like a venomous snake; if it is grasped wrongly, it can turn and bite the grasper. Much care needs to be taken. It is better to have a completely conventional, and even somewhat atta view, I think, than to misinterpret the view expressed in your post (and mine on the Paradox of Volition), and take it to suggest a complete impotence leading to despair. With metta, Howard In a message dated 8/15/01 3:10:54 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Robert Kirkpatrick writes: > Dear Howard, > Your post today about the paradox was spot on; I find it > encouraging when I read Dhamma such as this. > On Dsg several of us to tend to put a lot of emphasis on anatta, > and some find that disturbing. They think it means we are saying > are 'anything goes'. > We should know that all types of kusala except satipatthana > vipassana can be done with self-view still firmly embedded. > However, knowing about anatta doesn't mean one forgets sila or > dana or metta or other types of kusala (I personally don't > practice anapanasati but if others do that's fine with me). > True insight into anatta develops only to the degree that there > is understanding of conditions. And since one of the main > conditions is kamma if there is any insight then one is becoming > ever more sensitive to the fact that what is done or even > thought now brings a result in the future - as well as > accumulating more tendencies to do whatever type of deed of > thought is been done. > > I am still a little pushed for time so I did a copy /paste job > from a couple of earlier letters. > > The "Kindred Sayings"(III, > Khandha vagga, Middle Fifty, Ch V, par. 99, The Leash) > Just as, monks, a dog tied up by a leash to a strong stake > or pillar, keeps running > round and revolving round and round that stake or pillar, > even so, monks, the > untaught many folk... regard body as self, regard feeling, > perception, activities, > consciousness as self... they run and revolve round and > round from body to body, > from feeling to feeling, from perception to perception, > from activities to activities, > from consciousness to consciousness...they are not released > therefrom, they are not > released from rebirth, from old age and decay, from sorrow > and grief, from woe, > lamentation and despair... they are not released from > dukkha, I declare... " > > It then says that the ariyan disciple who does not take any > dhamma for self is released from dukkha. This applies just as > much to cetana(volition) as to any other dhamma. > > Often when "I" investigate the 6 doors there is just > that: "I". Sati is taken for self or I think "I" made awareness > happen. But cetana (volition, intention) and awareness are part > of sankharakkhandha, they are "not-self because > uncontrollable" Visuddhimagga xiv224. > This doesn't mean fatalism or that nothing can be done but it > should remind us that the right conditions are needed for the > right results. > > It is to our great advantage to learn more about the > Dhamma. The Atthasalini, (triplets p451)defines "ignorant > average man" as: > "owing to the absense of access to the Scriptures, and of the > higher attainment of the path and fruition. > For to whoever owing to the absense of learning by > heart and deduction therefrom regarding the > khandas(aggregates) elements(dhatus) > sense-organs(ayatanas) the causal mode, the > applications of mindfulness etc there is NO attainment > of that learning which represses opinionativeness, nor > any access, owing to the non-attainment of what should > be attained by conduct. Such a person, from the > absense of such access and such attainment should be > known as ignorant".ENDQUOTE > > Anatta is the > core of the Buddha's teaching and so is hard to fathom. > Visudd. XViii31 "The mental and physical (nama and rupa) are > really here, but here no human being is to be found, for it is > void and merely fashioned like a doll;just suffering piled up > like grass and sticks" > Do we think in this way yet? It is not so easy even to reflect > in such a manner; hence we should expect that deeper insight > into nama and rupa takes time. > xix19 "there is no doer of a deed or one who reaps the fruit; > phenomena alone flow on- no other view than this is right" > > XX47 talks about sankhara khanda (the agregate of formations) > this includes all cetasikas except feeling and sanna. It > includes sati, intention, effort, metta, dosa etc. > "they are void of the possibilty of any power being exercised > over them, they are therefore not-self beacuse void, because > owner less, because unsusceptible to the weilding of power, and > because of precluding a self". > This last quote may disturb some because if nothing is > controllable then "what the hell can we do?!!!" This sort of > reaction is rooted in "we" - it comes from an assumption of self > and control. (Just as you mentioned in your paradox post Howard) > Now for the good news: vis.xvi "there IS a path but no goer". > > This round of births and deaths is beginningless. However, it is > not random in any sense. Because of conditions birth occurs in > one plane and because of different conditions birth occurs in > another plane. Panna (wisdom) is a conditioned phenomena and it > is a conditioning factor. > What are the conditions for panna to develop : hearing the > Dhamma, considering it, applying it and also accumulations of > merit from the infinite past (pubekata punnata). Why are we so > interested in Dhamma? Why isn't the leader of the Taliban > interested; surely he makes effort, surely he has the intention > to do what is best? Why do some people hear Dhamma but find it > unappealing while others can't get enough even after hearing it > just once? Why are some initially not interested and then later > they get interested and surpass in understanding those who > studied much longer? It is clear that there must be reasons for > all this; and the Dhamma explains it all. > ___________ > BRUCE: "that's where I get stuck...if all dhammas except > nibbana > > are > > conditioned (i'm going on saddha with this, of course), then > > thinking one > > can develop anything seems like an exercise in > > micchaditthi.... > _______ > > _________________ > Good point. I think it depends on the thinking. If we have the > idea of "I can do it", then we are likely to be caught in self > view. Or we think we can manufacture sati by effort or > intention - self. But there can be wisdom - not us- that sees > the danger in samsara and thus there is naturally effort that > arises with that understanding. It is subtle: often we slip into > self view; either towards the freewill end of the continuum or > towards the fatalistic end that thinks nothing can be done. > > ____________________________ > > > > > can the path be developed? or do we just leave it up to (for > > lack of a > > better f-word) "fate"? "" > __________________ > Fate implies a preordained outcome. In that case whether we did > this that or the other nothing would make a thread of > difference. We could go out and kill and pillage and nothing > would have any effect and we would all get enlightened or not > get enlightened depending on our "fate". This is not what the > Buddha taught. He explained in detail many different conditions. > It is true that some are past conditions but there are also > present ones thus it is not fatalism. Both the idea of fatalism > and the idea of freewill are bound up in self view - a self who > can control and a self who can't. The Dhamma is the middle way > and is neither. > When we hear a teacher like sujin say "develop it" this can be a > condition for either wrong effort or right effort. It depends on > the understanding of the listener. > I think we all have vastly different accumulations and so we > have to learn what is most suitable each for his own. For me > when I first saw the nature of the mind I realized > how powerful ignorance and desire were and I became > frightened by these powerful energies. I just wanted to stop > them - but without wisdom. > It was because I didn't understand > anatta. Later, I understood that defilements can't be > quickly got rid of. That when desire arises it is by > conditions - that the uncontrollabilty of it > demonstrates the truth of anatta. Now my focus > is to understand conditions and to see that there is nobody at > all doing anything. > This doesn't mean that nothing is being done. In the Majjhima > Nikaya 148 > Chachakka Sutta > The Blessed One said: "The six internal media should be known. > The six external media should be known. The six classes of > consciousness should be known. The six classes of contact should > be known. The six classes of feeling should be known. The six > classes of CRAVING should be known." > > Note that it says the six classes of craving should be known. I > think this is important. Most of us are very keen to get the > stage where all craving is gone but first it should be > understood. If we are afraid of it (as I was) then it is not > possible to insight it. Craving, as much as other dhammas, can > be an object for understanding. if it is seen through the lens > of anatta it is not mistaken for "my" craving and so its true > characteristic can be seen. > > > Howard, as you see some of this adressed your points and some > was a bit off target. I would be very happy to continue if you > make further comments. > Just one further point. I personally don't find in any way that > accepting the uncontrollabilty of dhammas hinders effort. I > think we spend a lot of energy worrying and wanting and trying > to control. Knowing that deeper conditions than just intention > and effort are needed for any result, even in the material > world, should mean we become more detached from expectation and > desire. One knows that the past is completely gone, the future > unknown and so it is very natural to live more in the moment, > giving and doing as much as we can here and now. > And yes please send me your adress off-list so I can send the > book (and any others who want a copy please write) > best wishes > robert > /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) 7455 From: Howard Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 5:04pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Hi, Jon - In a message dated 8/14/01 11:21:26 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Jonothan Abbott writes: > In the meantime, I would be interested to hear an example/instance of > 'conventional' Right Effort of the Eightfold Path, as might apply in your > own case. (I think that would help this discussion - and your 'Paradox' > post - move forward.) > ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I'll try to answer this in a few ways. An example of conventional right effort during meditation is to initiate mindfulness and focus on the meditation subject, to further these when already present, and to return to these when the mind has wandered. When not meditating, a general example is to let go of akusala thoughts when these are present, to initiate kusala thoughts when not present, and to further kusala thoughts when already present. A somewhat dramatic application of right effort in daily life occurred about 5 years ago to me. I had gone through a year of extreme tiredness, discomfort in the lower-left abdomen, and a constant low-grade fever. My doctor threw every test in the book at me except the right one. Finally I saw a gastroenterologist who arranged for me to get a colonoscopy in the hospital. After only five minutes into it, the procedure was stopped. The doctor couldn't get any further than the sigmoid colon because of an impassable blockage! They immediately arranged for surgery for later the same day. When they showed my wife and me the full-color glossies taken during the colonoscopy, it was obvious that the situation was a bad one, and the doctors didn't mince any words in describing the possibilities. That afternoon I had a colon resection done during which they removed several feet of colon. Afterwards, the doctors spoke to me. They said that it would take 6 days for the biopsy results to be returned. Meanwhile they talked to me about the use of radioative seeding vs radiation! From the way the gastroenterologist and the surgeon were talking, I considered it likely that I had colon cancer, and that I might very well die from it. (The doctors had ordered a catscan to check on the status of the liver!) At that point, in the depths of my non-existant soul ;-)), I made a decision. The decision was that I *would* not hope! I *would* not desire that things be "okay". I decided to be openly accepting of however things were and of however events would unfold. I *knew* that without hoping for things to be "a certain way", there would be no suffering. This decision of mine was deep, thoroughgoing, and *real*. For the next six days, while my wife was terribly distraught and my doctors were upset, I was truly and completely at peace. At the end of the six days, my gastroenterologist bounced into the room, positively beaming! Grinning ear to ear, he said that despite the surgeon's certainty of cancer when he held the huge mass of abscessed colon tissue in his hands, there was no malignancy at all, just a severe case of diverticulits (quite dangerous in itself, but now no problem). And my reaction, unspoken, was not one of great joy, but rather a completely calm one, which, if voiced, would be: "Oh, so it's that way, and not the other." Craving, I had learned first hand, was suffering. And lack of craving is peace. But a decision was required, an instance of the exercise of conventional right effort. --------------------------------------------------------------------- > And I have 2 questions for you to ponder, Howard. > > 1. As far as effort for kusala generally is concerned, would it be > correct to say that the more one's understanding is developed and the more > one sees the value in kusala and the danger in akusala, the less 'effort' > is required for kusala to arise? > ----------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Certainly. But effort is required to pay attention. ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > 2. I think we have all had experiences of occasions when kusala has > arisen spontaneously, without the slightest 'effort' on our part, for > example when giving a hand to someone in need, or responding to a request > for assistance from a colleague, etc., while at other times kusala > manifestly fails to arise despite our best 'efforts'. What would be the > explanation for this? ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Previous cultivation. Current "efforts" towards kindness can only affect our current *action*, not our current mental state. We cannot *make* ourselves feel warmth and kindness at the moment. But a lifetime or lifetimes of cultivation can transform the mind into one which typically is loving. ================================= 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) 7456 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 9:12pm Subject: Re: Path-factors with/without the asavas Dear Mike and Jon, Mike, I don't have many comments on your response as I am still trying to understand the sutta meaning. Jon, I have some questions for you. --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Mike > > > The question remaining to me is, if the Buddha taught > > 'only dukkha and the way out of dukkha', then why did > > he teach kusala that doesn't lead to nibbana? > > Off-hand I'm inclined to think that, kusala that > > doesn't lead to nibbana mayabe leads to kusala that > > DOES lead to nibbana. Maybe. > > Another answer, and this may sound trite but it's not, is that the Buddha > taught *all* realities, including even the akusala ones. Whatever the > reality, he taught how it can be known for what it is, and he taught how > it conditions, or is conditioned by, other realities. The sutta definitely mentioned akusala realities. However, the Buddha explicitly divided each of the right (kusala) factor into two: one accompanying by taints, and one without. Although it is apparent (to me) that each kusala one without taint is mentioned to be supramundane as a factor of the path, do you interpret satipatthana to be one with or without taints? > > Another thought: The Buddha also taught, right > > through the discourses and the discipline, the > > (temporary) subduing of the defilements by various > > skilful reflections. Do you think there is a link > > between this sort of reflection and the > > path-factors-with-aasavas? > > I'm sure there is a link. Unless and until the kusala qualities have been > developed to a high degree, they cannot perform the function of subduing > the defilements. Defilements cannot be subdued by 'willing' kusala, even > though it may sometimes seem that we can do this. I have also heard that the supramundane path factors will not rise unless one has developed the 10 perfections (parami) to the appropriate degree. If you look at the 10 parami, it is all (obviously!) about subduing defilements. However, even the paramis are subtle (do you expect othewise?). For example, I have heard that only dana for the explicit purpose of relieving defilements (attachment, stinginess, etc.) can be considered parami. Dana for the purpose of having a good rebirth or the 5-sensualities is not a parami. kom 7457 From: Erik Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 9:16pm Subject: Re: Path-factors with/without the asavas --- Sukinderpal Narula wrote: > Dear Jonothan, > > If you look closely at the language of this sutta, I think the Buddha > > talks in much the same terms whether the reality under discussion is > > akusala or (one or other kind of) kusala. He leaves it very much to the > > listener to draw his own conclusions, according to the listener's > > accumulations and level of understanding. (This is another example of > > what I call descriptive rather than prescriptive language.) > > Acharn Sujin once said that Buddha's teachings are meant to be descriptive > but people mistake thinking he taught paths of action. I find this comment most unusual, and certainly not in accord with anything I've heard taught by Lord Buddha (or taught to me by my teachers, who have an uncanny knack for restating the Buddha's teachings as they do). For example, how, in light of this notion that "it is a mistake to think the Buddha taught paths of action" would you explain, for example, the following passage? [AN X.176 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an10- 176.html]? "Now, Cunda, there are three ways in which one is made pure by bodily action, four ways in which one is made pure by verbal action, and three ways in which one is made pure by mental action. "And how is one made impure in three ways by bodily...verbal...mental action? [...] And how is one made pure in three ways by bodily...verbal...mental action? [...] ***"These, Cunda, are the ten courses of skillful action."*** [my emphasis] Sukinderpal, if you read the actual words Lord Buddha reputedly spoke to his disciples, what he says sounds an awful lot to me like ***paths of action***! (the word "courses" is, after all, a synonym for the word path!--and just to reiterate Howar'd wise reminder from another post, we're not talking about "courses of ***expectations of results***" here, just to be clear, which is a rather nasty form of grasping in & of itself) :) Then again, perhaps the the Buddha was just a horribly confused individual (all those years wandering around naked, eating a single grain of rice a day, etc., aren't exactly what many people would associate with sanity, after all; not to mention sitting like a catatonic schiziphrenic under a tree for days on end, unmoving...but I digress) and couldn't properly express himself in any meaningful way. Perhaps the Buddha was just goofing around and babbling things to confuse us all, for chuckles or something. I don't know about you, but I would consider anyone who articulated their intended meaning so poorly, who spoke words having nothing to do with their understanding, to be either a liar, a fool, or completely insane. To get down to specifics, I'm curious to examine how the notion that there are "no paths of action" can possibly be supported when the following passage is taken into wise consideration, especially given the Buddha explicitly uses words like "DEVELOP" and "PURSUE"? "And how are the seven factors of awakening developed & pursued so as to bring clear knowing & release to their culmination? There is the case where a monk develops mindfulness as a factor of awakening dependent on seclusion ... dispassion ... cessation, resulting in relinquishment. He develops analysis of qualities as a factor of awakening ... persistence as a factor of awakening ... rapture as a factor of awakening ... serenity as a factor of awakening... concentration as a factor of awakening ... equanimity as a factor of awakening dependent on seclusion ... dispassion ... cessation, resulting in relinquishment. "This is how the seven factors of awakening, when developed & pursued, bring clear knowing & release to their culmination." Khun Sukinderpal, again, what does the pair of terms "DEVELOPED AND PURSUED" mean to you? Are these merely adjectives describing something? They certainly don't fall under the category adjective in my dictionary. Rather, they both fall distinctly into the category of words we call VERBS--ACTION words, in other words. To use a little analogy. What if you went to the doctor dying of a horrible terminal illness and he simply began describing all the various wondderful qualities of a healthy body? What if he further suggested that by merely DESCRIBING what health is you'll be cured of your disease? Would you trust that physician with your life? I know I wouldn't. In fact, I'd be on the phone to the medical board asking that his license be revoked immediately for total quackery! :) :) :) Just to be perfectly clear, I think would be most helpful to examine a few more passages from the Pali Suttas: "And how are the four frames of reference developed & pursued so as to bring the seven factors of awakening to their culmination? "[1] On whatever occasion the monk remains focused on the body in & of itself -- ardent, alert, & mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world, on that occasion his mindfulness is steady & without lapse. When his mindfulness is steady & without lapse, then mindfulness as a factor of awakening becomes aroused. He develops it, and for him it goes to the culmination of its development. [Erik: Geez, there the Buddha goes AGAIN! Talking all this pointless nonsense about DEVELOPING and PURSUING. And regarding things like DEVELOPING and PURSUING ***mindfulness** even! I mean, who could possibly do such a thing!?!? :) :) :) I mean come on, Sukinderpal, what sort of quack physician must he be to think that we can POSSIBLY DEVELOP and PURSUE ANYTHING at all? Especially when we all know the SOLE cure for the terminal disease of dukkha is found in merely DESCRIBING its cessation!?!?!? :) :) :)] "[2] Remaining mindful in this way, he examines, analyzes, & comes to a comprehension of that quality with discernment. When he remains mindful in this way, examining, analyzing, & coming to a comprehension of that quality with discernment, then analysis of qualities as a factor of awakening becomes aroused. He develops it, and for him it goes to the culmination of its development. "[3] In one who examines, analyzes, & comes to a comprehension of that quality with discernment, unflagging persistence is aroused. When unflagging persistence is aroused in one who examines, analyzes, & comes to a comprehension of that quality with discernment, then persistence as a factor of awakening becomes aroused. He develops it, and for him it goes to the culmination of its development. [Erik: Now the Buddha gets REALLY wacky! Talking about things involving EFFORT, like PERSISTENCE! (viriya)! We ought to haul him up in front of the Guru board and have his license to preach Dhamma revoked outright for this sort of quackery! :) :) :)] "[4] In one whose persistence is aroused, a rapture not-of-the-flesh arises. When a rapture not-of-the-flesh arises in one whose persistence is aroused, then rapture as a factor of awakening becomes aroused. He develops it, and for him it goes to the culmination of its development. "[5] For one who is enraptured, the body grows calm and the mind grows calm. When the body & mind of an enraptured monk grow calm, then serenity as a factor of awakening becomes aroused. He develops it, and for him it goes to the culmination of its development. "[6] For one who is at ease -- his body calmed -- the mind becomes concentrated. When the mind of one who is at ease -- his body calmed - - becomes concentrated, then concentration as a factor of awakening becomes aroused. He develops it, and for him it goes to the culmination of its development. "[7] He oversees the mind thus concentrated with equanimity. When he oversees the mind thus concentrated with equanimity, equanimity as a factor of awakening becomes aroused. He develops it, and for him it goes to the culmination of its development. [Erik: And now the Buddha's REALLY gone off the deep-end, talking about, Devas forbid, CONCENTRATION! Oh my! I can see the class-action- suit lawyers slavering already over this one! :) :) :)] [Similarly with the other three frames of reference: feelings, mind, & mental qualities.] "This is how the four frames of reference are developed & pursued so as to bring the seven factors of awakening to their culmination." So, Khun Sukinderpal, I am quite curious to hear how the idea that there are no paths to be developed and pursued is supported by what Lord Buddha actually taught in any way, shape, or form! Enquiring minds, as they say, want to know! :) :) :) 7458 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 9:22pm Subject: Re: The limits of awareness Dear Herman, --- Herman wrote: > Hi all, > > Cognitive science teaches that awareness is just a bubble of froth on > the ocean of reality. It is a Johny-come-lately in the evolution of > matter. Awareness is a by-product of matter coalesced in a particular > sequence. > > Rupas arise without nama. Nama does not arise without rupa. Nama is > effect, not cause. This is of course, unprovable yet or anytime soon unless you are developing arupa-jhana. The beings in the arupa planes are said to exist as mental states only, and their mental states don't have any rupa as a condition, whereas in the plane with 5-kandhas, all nama is conditioned by rupas. kom 7459 From: Erik Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 9:45pm Subject: Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Jon - > > > > In the meantime, I would be interested to hear an example/instance of > > 'conventional' Right Effort of the Eightfold Path, as might apply in your > > own case. (I think that would help this discussion - and your 'Paradox' > > post - move forward.) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I'll try to answer this in a few ways. An example of conventional > right effort during meditation is to initiate mindfulness and focus on the > meditation subject, to further these when already present, and to return to > these when the mind has wandered. Yes! > When not meditating, a general example is > to let go of akusala thoughts when these are present, to initiate kusala > thoughts when not present, and to further kusala thoughts when already > present. That sounds suspiciously like something the Buddha would have said :) (i.e. sammapadhana :)) > A somewhat dramatic application of right effort in daily life occurred > about 5 years ago to me. I had gone through a year of extreme tiredness, > discomfort in the lower-left abdomen, and a constant low-grade fever. Thanks for telling this story, Howard! I still recall this story so vividly from your telling me over that delicious lunch of sword-fish steak (I wonder if they may have come from aquine emanations of Manjushri just for the occasion :) :) :) at that little place nearby Columbus Circle. Mmmm... YUMMY!!! 7460 From: Howard Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 6:01pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was ... Hi, Erik - In a message dated 8/15/01 9:46:45 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Erik writes: > Thanks for telling this story, Howard! I still recall this story so > vividly from your telling me over that delicious lunch of sword-fish > steak (I wonder if they may have come from aquine emanations of > Manjushri just for the occasion :) :) :) at that little place nearby > Columbus Circle. Mmmm... YUMMY!!! > ======================== Mmm, hmm! That was a nice afternoon. Great fish, and even better company! BTW, I agree completely with the recent post of yours about the Buddha's teaching being prescriptive and not just descriptive. OF COURSE! He taught a path of ACTION! 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) 7461 From: Sarah Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 10:05pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello, everyone Dear Fenny, Thanks for sharing your background.....there are a few other Indonesians here, but not from Medan I think. I'm very, very impressed by your keen interest in the Dhamma at a relatively young age (but not the youngest here;-)) Thanks for also telling us you're female as it is easy to make mistakes;-) I'm also very glad you're following so keenly and finding the list useful. Sarah --- Fenny wrote: > Clear Day Dear Sarah and everyone in the list, > Hello. Yeah, Sarah, you're right. That was the first time I posted on the > list. Indeed I've been monitoring the activities of the list for some time > (about a week) before I started posted. > I'm 21 years old, a female (I've more than once be mistaken as being a > male), originated from Medan, Indonesia, and currently undergoing my tertiary > study in Singapore. I've been in the path of Buddhism for 3 years, starting > in July 1998, and have been praticing on and off since then. My line of > practice inclines more towards the Theravada tradition, but I'm an admirer of > Thich Nhat Hanh(Zen) and Bhante Abhinnaya(Mahayana). > I do find this dsg useful. Thank you. 7462 From: Erik Date: Wed Aug 15, 2001 11:22pm Subject: Re: Path-factors with/without the asavas --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: Hello again, Khun Jonothan! :) > Defilements cannot be subdued by 'willing' kusala, even > though it may sometimes seem that we can do this. I beg to differ, counsel! (please, stop looking so surprised!!! :) :) :) Sure we can "will" kusala! Or more accurately, we can use our "will" to help establish the appropriate conditions for the non-arising of abandoning of unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen; the abandoning of unskillful qualities that have already arisen; the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen, and the increase of skillful qualities that have already aerisen. For example, we can DEFINITELY "will" to sit down and "will" to endeavour to mindfully follow the in-breath and the out-breath, and when our mindfulness lapses, we can use our "will" to help bring our attention back to the breath (keeping in mind not to strain too hard while doing so, in keeping with the lute-string analogy Lord Buddha taught). These acts of "will," while not DIRECTLY "creating" skillful mental qualities, nevertheless create a far more favorable climate for wholesome mental qualities to sprout, grow, and and thrive--in this case by helping pacify the five hindrances of ill-will, sensuous desire, sloth & torper, restlessness & brooding, and doubt. That, for example, is the entire reason to perform samatha (calm abiding) meditation in the first place! In a similar way, though we can't "will" a Bodhi tree to grow from a seed we're holding in our palm, we can nevertheless find a favorable, sunny and secluded location with the appropriate soil, diligently clear that soil of any weeds, plant our seed, add fertilizer, and water our little seed every day without fail, all the while ensuring we keep our patch of soil cleared of dangerous clinging vines and creepers and other nasty hindering growths. All of this takes quite a bit of will and effort. It involves sweating and getting our hands dirty. And yet even after all this work and effort, it is still quite possible that even given all these favorable conditions, no Bodhi tree will sprout because, perhaps, we just didn't happen to have a viable seed this time around, or for some other reason we can't quite make out. But any wise gardener won't get upset over something like this; we can't force it to happen, after all, and perhaps all we need is instead to plant a better seed. At least the effort of clearing out our little patch of soil will enable us to quickly begin again right where we left off before. No matter what, though, what we CAN be assured of is that if we DON'T clear the soil of nasty clinging vines and creepers and other weeds, DON'T ever plant the seed, ignore adding nutrients in the form of fertilizer, and neglect to water it daily, that there is NO chance AT ALL we will ever live to see that seed sprout, grow, and thrive, no matter how much we may wish it to, no matter what gods we pray to, no matter how much we BELIEVE it will sprout! And consequently, all our wishing and thinking about this wonderful tree that we keep hoping and wishing for will never appear. And the reason reqwuires very little analysis to understand: it lacked one or more of the appropriate conditions for its sprouting, growth, and thriving. An in precisely because it lacked one or more of the appropriate conditions it is assured we will NEVER, EVER know the incomparable bliss of the taste of its fruit. 7463 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 3:57am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation ----- Original Message ----- From: Derek Cameron Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 11:45 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation > Hi, Anders, > > I just bought the Wisdom Publications translations because they're > the most recent and widely-available. I didn't do any comparisons > with other translations. > > If you only want to buy one, I'd recommend getting the Majjhima > Nikaya first. I find it the best source for the core teachings -- > assuming that's what you want. Well, I wanted the Samyuttas because they cover such a wide range of subjects. > I'm also getting fond of the Sutta Nipata, which is a short > collection of verses that have quite a different flavor to them than > the first four Nikayas. > > The Samyutta Nikaya has lots of miscellaneous teachings in it > covering many, many minor points -- though curiously enough this is > the only one with the Buddha's very first sermon it. > > And the Digha Nikaya, as you know, has the longer narratives. So the Majhimas would be better than the Digha? 7464 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 3:48am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation ----- Original Message ----- From: Sarah Procter Abbott Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2001 11:54 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation > unless your name is Anders!> Well, since I do fall into that category..... :-) > --- Anders Honoré wrote: > > There's a sutta which says: > > "Luminous, monks, is the mind, and it is defiled by incoming defilements. > > "Luminous, monks, is the mind, and it is free'd from incoming defilements." > > > > That seems to be a mind pretty much unconditioned conditioned factors, as it > > retains its luminousity in spite of conditioned circumstances > > Anders, whenever the mind is referred to, I understand that cittas ( > conditioned moments of consciousness) are being referred to and indeed the > Buddha made it clear there are only 5 khandhas, not 5 khandhas and a mind. Five Kandhas and Nibbana? > back to Anders and Sarah! Well, as you did with the two venerable Ajahns, I shall take the liberty of disregarding this too. > >(and this > > pretty much accords with the Tathagatagarbha doctrine: That Nirvana is > > always present in us, Regardless of it is realised or not). > > Not according to the Tipitaka as we understand it. Well, then I would like your opinion on this: Do you regard the Mahayana Canon as being contradictory to the Buddha's true teachings? An answer to this, would make the discussion a whole lot clearer. > > Which pretty much spells Nibbana, but Kom pointed out that the translation > > as this being consciousness was dubious, although I get the impression that > > this was primarily because Nibbana as consciousness like this is mentioned > > very few places in the Pali Canon (correct me if I'm wrong here, Kom). > > B.Bodhi translates the passage as: > 'the consciousness that makes no showing, > And in becoming about to disbecome, > Not claiming being with respect to all: > that is not partaken of by the earthness of earth etc > > I think your comments are correct according to BB's notes. He adds, "MA takes > the subject of the sentence to be Nibbana, called 'consciousness' in the sense > that "it can be cognized" '. Hmm, well, we enter the realm of speculation as regards to the definition of "consciousness" in this case. > Anders, I don't know any of the pali here (which probably wouldn't help > anyway), but I fail to see why this description of nibbana has anything to do > with the idea of Nivana being present in us..... Well, I would have to explain the whole Tathagatagarbha doctrine to make it really clear.... > > But as I said, I'm not the first to say something like this. Quote Ajahn > > Chah: > > I think I'll leave comments on his writings as I may misunderstand him. And Mun? > Now i know why i've been slow to reply to you! OK just tracked it down. I just > have the PTS translation of this with no footnotes or Pali. Haha :-) > I find the 'unrestricted awareness' to be misleading above. > > Here it says (with my notes after S.): > 'The Wayfarer dwells free, detached and released from physical body, > feeling,perception, mental factors and consciousness and released in the sense of no clinging to the 5 khandhas>....from rebirth, > decay and death ....from the passions, Bahuna, > the Wayfarer is free, detached and released, and dwells with a mind whose > barriers are broken down' kilesa eradicated, so no more akusala cittas> "The Wayfarer" as with Tathagata is of course a conventional image, but do we find support in the Sutta pitaka for the view that this conventional image does not point to an actuality (Nibbana-mind - Buddha-nature)? > I hope I have at least given an indication of why some of us say that reading > the suttas is not quite as simple as it seems and how a little understanding of > abhidhamma comes into play here. Hmm, I don't know what to make of the Abhidhamma myself, so I am uncertain as to its validity. I was told just today by someone that Buddhasasa once commented that the Abidhamma could easily be canned without much lost, and many other famous teachers have actually joined in this view (Ajahn Chah, I think, too). > Anders, I really appreciate your keen interest and Tipitaka citations. I look > forward to more. Well, I must say I find this discussion fascinating. I am sorry for being so late to reply to all messages, but I have been quite busy recently. School started just this week, so my interaction on this forum might be somewhat limited in the near future. 7465 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 3:49am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana ----- Original Message ----- From: Jonothan Abbott Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 4:27 AM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana > Anders > > Just a question here to clarify, please. > > --- Anders Honoré wrote: > ----- Original > Message ----- > > From: > > > > Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 6:33 PM > > Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana > > > > > > > Hi, Anders - > > > > That's my problem whenever I meditate on the breath: As soon as my > > body > > > > calms down in half lotus (in full lotus I'm still gasping for breath > > because > > > > of the pain so that's not a problem :-)), my breath becomes > > extremely > > faint > > > > after just a few minutes, and it becomes hard to observe it, and > > hence > > my > > > > attention wanders. > > > > > > > > Anyone got any advice? > > > ============================== > > > The fact that the breath becomes faint and subtle *is* a > > problem, > > but > > > also a great opportunity. As the breath sensation fades, there must be > > a > > > corresponding strengthening of energy, mindfulness, and concentration > > > (directed by will) in order to "stay in touch", and this will take the > > mind > > > to a deeper and stronger levels. This becomes easier to carry out the > > longer > > > and more consistently one practices. > > > > Wow, thanks a lot. Just that change of perspective is something I find > > quite > > illuminating. > > When you talk about meditation on breath, do you mean breath as object of > the development of samatha or of vipassana? ('Meditation' is such a vague > term, don't you find?) Samatha. That's what I feel I need to develop right now. 7466 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 3:21am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 6:03 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation > Again, there is never a tagatha in the sense of identification or self. The > conventional buddha was in reality just a stream of kandhas that end > when there are no more conditions for the kandhas to arise. Hmmm, you got a sutta to prove it? :-) 7467 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 3:55am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity ----- Original Message ----- From: Jonothan Abbott Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2001 3:57 PM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity > > I'd say that from a Samatha perspective, it's kusala (not much, but a > > little), but from the perspective of Vipassana, it's akusula. > > Perhaps you refer to the concentration aspect, when you say kusala from a > samatha perspective? Concentration can be either kusala or akusala -- it > is not intrinsically one or the other. Unless one knows by direct > experience the characteristics of kusala and akusala, it would not be > possible to say for sure in any particular case. However, we do know that > only certain objects of concentration are conducive to calm (samatha). > These include the body, in its repulsive aspect(!). Oh, when I said Kusala from the Samatha perspective, I just meant conduicive to concentration. I dodn't think of "right objects". In that case, I guess it's akusala anyhow. > Happy finger-watching! Haha, thanks! 7468 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 4:09am Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Diamond Sutra ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2001 4:50 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana > Hi, Anders - ================================ > If you would like to post parts of that sutra so that we and others might discuss it from various vantage points, especially that of Theravada, I would be very happy to participate. (David Kalupahana, an academic who is a Theravadin is much appreciative of this sutra and others from the Perfcion of Wisdom writings.) I would be delighted (provided it's not off-topic?), as this is also my favourite sutra. Two passages I would like quote in this regard. The first is more in relation to the discussion about the existence or non-existence of the Tathagata, which some of us has been discussing recently (translation: Patton): "If by form one looks for the Tathàgata Or by the sound of the voice seeks me, This person walks the wrong path And is unable to see the Tathàgata." I think someone mentioned that there never really was a Tathagata in the first place, and that this is only a conventional term for the impermanent kandhas we know as the Buddha. Yet this passage seems to indicate otherwise... Any suggestions? The other one I would like to quote, is the following, in relation to Buddhist practises in the Pali Canon: "This is why, Subhuti, the Bodhisattva should be free of all images when engendering the supremely unexcelled bodhicitta. He should not dwell in forms when giving rise to that mind. He should not dwell in sounds, odors, tastes, tactile sensations, or ideas when giving rise to that mind. He should dwell nowhere when giving rise to that mind. If in that mind he has an abode, then it would be the non-abode." How does this practise as explained here, relate to the practises expounded in the Pali Canon? 7469 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 4:24am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana ----- Original Message ----- From: Fenny Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 8:02 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana > Dear Cy and Jon and everybody, > This may shed some light on your discussion regarding right view. Enjoy. > > ==================================== > > Right View-The Place of Coolness > > By Ajahn Chah Although I am perhaps more fond of Zen than Theravada, I'll grant Theravada one thing: It produced the greatest Buddhist teacher of this century. No modern Zen teachers come even close to Ajahn Chah. 7470 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 4:19am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Friday, August 10, 2001 4:39 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana > > Hi Robert E. > > As I am the one the one who posted Ajahn Bramavamso, I would suggest you to > read more of his texts as well. Actually, it was me, but feel free to take credits... :-) 7471 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 3:52am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 3:55 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation Dear Anders, --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Kom Tukovinit > Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 2:32 PM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation > >Thank you for explaining the (not yours) view point. Why do we say the > tathagatha doesn't exist at the first place? What exists? What doesn't= > exist? > > Nibbana? >So, you are saying that you think we understand that the only thing that exists in Nibbana, and not all the kandhas? Your guess is as good as mine ;-) 7472 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 4:21am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana ----- Original Message ----- From: Jonothan Abbott Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 9:40 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana > Cybele > > Thanks for your comments. > > --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > > Dear Jon > > Dear Robert E. > > > > > > > > Or is it the whole Canon.................... > > > > > >that matter, and find 'support' for just about any way of practice. > > > > > >In the case of the article below, there are several passages which > > contain > > >statements, inferences or assumptions that are not supported by the > > >ancient commentators, so one might want to consider things carefully. > > >Only by one's own study and investigation over a long period of time > > can > > >one learn to discriminate. > > > > > >Jon > > > > Indeed Jon, one can study, meditate and investigate our mind carefully > > and > > therefore learn to discriminate and don't be TOO attached only to the > > ancient texts and commentaries but be openminded also to different > > approaches and interpretations. > > I agree (I think). True dhamma of one level or another can come from any > source, and we should not be closed to that possibility. > > But I'm not sure about the value of 'approaches and interpretations' that > are not supported by the texts and commentaries. Can these be regarded as > the teachings? > > > Sometimes our loyalty to the Tipitaka can lead to a kind of subtle > > fundamentalism and narrowmindness. > > On the other hand, and particularly when it comes to any instruction on > matters of actual 'practice', we need to be able to discriminate true > dhamma from non-dhamma. It is hardly sufficient, I think, to take things > on trust and rely on our own instincts, since these instincts are coloured > by our own (ample) ignorance and wrong view. > > The best source of true dhamma is of course the tipitaka and its > commentaries. We are extremely fortunate that they are still around in > relatively complete form. At some time in the future there will be only > the words of self-proclaimed teachers to go on. I think we should make > the most of the rare opportunity we have to familiarise ourselves with the > actual teachings. well, could you explain how Ajahn Brahms contradicts the commentaries? 7473 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 4:31am Subject: Eightfold path - Mundane and not so mundane... Hi, all. I think everybody here knows what constitutes the Mundane Eightfold Path. But I was wondering if anyone here might want to try and give a definition of the supramundane eightfold path for me? Thanks. Anders Honore ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* 7474 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 6:15am Subject: Re: looking for good Pali translation --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > Well, I wanted the Samyuttas because they cover such a wide range of > subjects. > So the Majhimas would be better than the Digha? Hi, Anders, I wouldn't say the Majjhima is "better" than the Digha. It just depends what you want. Certainly the Majjhima has the most comprehensive coverage of the core teachings. But if you like Zen, you might appreciate the Sutta Nipata, especially the verses in the fourth section (A.t.thkavaggo). Derek. 7475 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 7:38am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation Dear Anders > > >(and this > > > pretty much accords with the Tathagatagarbha doctrine: That Nirvana is > > > always present in us, Regardless of it is realised or not). > > > > Not according to the Tipitaka as we understand it. > >Well, then I would like your opinion on this: Do you regard the Mahayana >Canon as being contradictory to the Buddha's true teachings? An answer to >this, would make the discussion a whole lot clearer. You are too smart to don't have yet fully realized that here only Tipitaka is recognized as genuine teachings and reliable source. Refer to my recent discussion with Jon. They stick to Abhiddhamma in Pali Canon version therefore obviously they don't regard Mahayana youngish viking. :-))) By the way, transferring my mails to Outlook I lost the links you gave me off list; if you still have the mails, could you resend them to me please or at least the links. Thank you very much, I have messed up my mails with this syncronization in Outlook. Gassho Cybele 7476 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 7:44am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana Sweetheart > > Hi Robert E. > > > > As I am the one the one who posted Ajahn Bramavamso, I would suggest you >to > > read more of his texts as well. > >Actually, it was me, but feel free to take credits... :-) Really? I thought it was one of the texts I sent and indeed have been rebuked because it was too long and the moderators prefer only the link for access. Are you sure? Well then I posted the very same thing on d-l and intended to post here as well...what a syncronism! Sorry I disclaim the credit then; you are the only heretic this time. :-( Love Cybele 7477 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 7:50am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana Anders Sadhu, Sadhu, Sadhu. Cybele > > Dear Cy and Jon and everybody, > > This may shed some light on your discussion regarding right view. >Enjoy. > > > > ==================================== > > > > Right View-The Place of Coolness > > By Ajahn Chah > > >Although I am perhaps more fond of Zen than Theravada, I'll grant Theravada >one thing: It produced the greatest Buddhist teacher of this century. No >modern Zen teachers come even close to Ajahn Chah. > 7478 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 8:04am Subject: Re: Modern masters (was Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > Although I am perhaps more fond of Zen than Theravada, I'll grant Theravada > one thing: It produced the greatest Buddhist teacher of this century. No > modern Zen teachers come even close to Ajahn Chah. Well, that may be true, but two contemporary Zen monks I've enjoyed reading about are Kyudo Roshi (as described in Lawrence Shainberg's book, "Ambvivalent Zen"), and Ta Tsung (whom I know only from the article "Keep Sweeping" in Tricycle magazine for Winter 1996). Derek. 7479 From: Herman Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 9:18am Subject: Re: The limits of awareness Dear Kom, The beings in the arupa plane are, of course, also unprovable. And there is a distinct lack of devas lighting up my grove at night :-) The only seeing I am capable of always includes the tip of my nose as object, though I tend to ignore it. Regards Herman --- "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > Dear Herman, > > --- Herman wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Cognitive science teaches that awareness is just a bubble of froth on > > the ocean of reality. It is a Johny-come-lately in the evolution of > > matter. Awareness is a by-product of matter coalesced in a particular > > sequence. > > > > Rupas arise without nama. Nama does not arise without rupa. Nama is > > effect, not cause. > > This is of course, unprovable yet or anytime soon unless you are > developing arupa-jhana. The beings in the arupa planes are said to exist > as mental states only, and their mental states don't have any rupa as a > condition, whereas in the plane with 5-kandhas, all nama is conditioned by > rupas. > > kom 7480 From: Erik Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 9:54am Subject: Abhidhamma and the Termination of Suffering --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > Hmm, I don't know what to make of the Abhidhamma myself, so I am uncertain > as to its validity. I was told just today by someone that Buddhasasa once > commented that the Abidhamma could easily be canned without much lost, and > many other famous teachers have actually joined in this view (Ajahn Chah, I > think, too). Anders, the more I study of the Abhidhamma, the more my opinion is finding harmony with the words of these great masters like Ajahn Chah, and I find my previous enthusiasm for the Abhidamma waning by the day. Of course, not the Abhidharmakosa--which details very many important aspects of the Bodhisattva path I have to learn more about. I am finding that the Abhidhamma of the Pali Canon is engendering interpretations in many that are quite remote from the actual meanings and teachings the Buddha gave during his forty-five year ministry in this sasana. While I do not question the Abhidhamma as the word of the Buddha, and I find it theoretically sound and technically correct, it appears that the study of this system alone-- particularly when divorced from the words Lord Buddha spoke in the Suttas and the practice of directed meditation--has little or no bearing on actually helping suffering sentient beings bring that suffering to complete and total cessation. This is not to say at all I'm giving up on my Abhidhamma studies. To the contrary. I haev found the theoretical underpinnings of the Dhamma elaborated in the Abhidhamma Pitaka to be incredibly helpful aids for one whose aim is to act as translator (or possibly even Dhamma-instructor in the kalyana-mitrata sense) of Buddhist texts, and is therefore something I still consider an indispensible aspect of my own pariyatti (study). However, as a means to the cessation of sufering, the Abhidhamma (not to mention the commentaries) taken by itself, without being placed in the proper context of the original words spoken by Lord Buddha directly to his disciples, appears to me more and more to be leading only to the establishment of the very worst enemy of true insight- wisdom: "a thicket of views, a wilderness of views, a contortion of views, a writhing of views, a fetter of views." And as Lord Buddha said in the Sabbasava Sutta: "Bound by a fetter of views, the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person is not freed from birth, aging, and death, from sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, and despair. He is not freed from suffering, I say." "The well-taught noble disciple...discerns what ideas are fit for attention, and what ideas are unfit for attention. This being so, he does not attend to ideas unfit for attention, and attends instead to ideas fit for attention...He attends appropriately, This is stress...This is the origin of stress...This is the cessation of stress...This is the way leading to the cessation of stress. As he attends appropriately in this way, three fetters are abandoned in him: identity-view, doubt, and grasping at precepts and practices." It is the Suttas--the oh-so simple and direct words of the Buddha-- that for me, anyway, I find most clearly and succinctly articulate the SOLE intent of ALL of Lord Buddha's teachings: "dukkham ceva pannapemi, dukkhassa ca nirodham" (suffering and the end of suffering), whis is specifically the reason the Buddha arose in this sasana at all, and for no other reason than this. 7481 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 0:51pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The limits of awareness Herman You got me concerned... >> >The only seeing I am capable of always includes the tip of my nose as >object, though I tend to ignore it. > I cannot even see the tip of my nose, I tried and makes me fee dizzy. It means that I cannot follow the path? Or that you have a long nose? :-) Can you smile... I can smile a lot at least but I cannot see my smile - is it serious? Please advice. Love Cybele 7482 From: ranil gunawardena Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 1:33pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello, everyone Sarah & Fenny, This kind of interest to Dhamma - we here call in Sinhala "Sansara Puruddha". Sansara is your past lives and Puruddha is "habbits". Nice to know you Fenny... ~mettha Ranil >From: Sarah >Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello, everyone >Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 22:05:26 +0800 (CST) > >Dear Fenny, > >Thanks for sharing your background.....there are a few other Indonesians >here, >but not from Medan I think. > >I'm very, very impressed by your keen interest in the Dhamma at a >relatively >young age (but not the youngest here;-)) > >Thanks for also telling us you're female as it is easy to make >mistakes;-) > >I'm also very glad you're following so keenly and finding the list useful. > >Sarah > >--- Fenny wrote: > Clear Day Dear Sarah and >everyone in the list, > > Hello. Yeah, Sarah, you're right. That was the first time I posted >on the > > list. Indeed I've been monitoring the activities of the list for some >time > > (about a week) before I started posted. > > I'm 21 years old, a female (I've more than once be mistaken as being >a > > male), originated from Medan, Indonesia, and currently undergoing my >tertiary > > study in Singapore. I've been in the path of Buddhism for 3 years, >starting > > in July 1998, and have been praticing on and off since then. My line of > > practice inclines more towards the Theravada tradition, but I'm an >admirer of > > Thich Nhat Hanh(Zen) and Bhante Abhinnaya(Mahayana). > > I do find this dsg useful. Thank you. > > > > 7483 From: Herman Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 3:40pm Subject: Re: The limits of awareness Dear Cybele, As long as one understands that a smile is nothing more than facial muscles tensed in a particular fashion, nothing will be serious :-) But it's interesting how smiling can alter the mood. Unless you're an arahant, of course, but you are in no danger of that for a couple of aeons yet :-) Now be good and leave those nice viking boys to their Dhamma :-))))) Those extra )))'s are my double and triple chins, by the way. Love Herman --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > > Herman > > You got me concerned... > > >> > >The only seeing I am capable of always includes the tip of my nose as > >object, though I tend to ignore it. > > > > I cannot even see the tip of my nose, I tried and makes me fee dizzy. > It means that I cannot follow the path? > Or that you have a long nose? :-) > Can you smile... I can smile a lot at least but I cannot see my smile - is > it serious? > Please advice. > > Love > > Cybele 7484 From: Sukinderpal Narula Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 4:53pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Path-factors with/without the asavas Dear Erik, I hope you don't mind that I do not answer your mail since we already discussed this in person just a couple of hours ago. Feeling somewhat exhausted coming back from the income tax people. Our difference I think is not so much on whether there need to be any kind of development, but on when, where and how that development can take place. In other words I understand the verb 'to do' more like meaning 'to be and to understand'. See you on saturday at the foundation. May all grow in wisdom. Sukin. Erik wrote: > --- Sukinderpal Narula wrote: > > Dear Jonothan, > > 7485 From: Herman Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 7:20pm Subject: Re: Path-factors with/without the asavas Erik, you are undoubtedly one of the great Danes :-). I am not much given to saying sadhu, sadhu, sadhu, but there is little reason to do otherwise here. Sadhu, Sadhu, Sadhu !!!!!!!!!!!!!! When the lute string resonates, let it resonate....... Heartfelt congrats on your engagement. There are hearts breaking all over the net :-) Herman --- Erik wrote: > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Hello again, Khun Jonothan! :) > > > Defilements cannot be subdued by 'willing' kusala, even > > though it may sometimes seem that we can do this. > > I beg to differ, counsel! (please, stop looking so > surprised!!! :) :) :) > > Sure we can "will" kusala! Or more accurately, we can use our "will" > to help establish the appropriate conditions for the non-arising of > abandoning of unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen; the > abandoning of unskillful qualities that have already arisen; the > arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen, and the > increase of skillful qualities that have already aerisen. > > For example, we can DEFINITELY "will" to sit down and "will" to > endeavour to mindfully follow the in-breath and the out-breath, and > when our mindfulness lapses, we can use our "will" to help bring our > attention back to the breath (keeping in mind not to strain too hard > while doing so, in keeping with the lute-string analogy Lord Buddha > taught). > > These acts of "will," while not DIRECTLY "creating" skillful mental > qualities, nevertheless create a far more favorable climate for > wholesome mental qualities to sprout, grow, and and thrive--in this > case by helping pacify the five hindrances of ill-will, sensuous > desire, sloth & torper, restlessness & brooding, and doubt. That, for > example, is the entire reason to perform samatha (calm abiding) > meditation in the first place! > > In a similar way, though we can't "will" a Bodhi tree to grow from a > seed we're holding in our palm, we can nevertheless find a favorable, > sunny and secluded location with the appropriate soil, diligently > clear that soil of any weeds, plant our seed, add fertilizer, and > water our little seed every day without fail, all the while ensuring > we keep our patch of soil cleared of dangerous clinging vines and > creepers and other nasty hindering growths. > > All of this takes quite a bit of will and effort. It involves > sweating and getting our hands dirty. And yet even after all this > work and effort, it is still quite possible that even given all these > favorable conditions, no Bodhi tree will sprout because, perhaps, we > just didn't happen to have a viable seed this time around, or for > some other reason we can't quite make out. But any wise gardener > won't get upset over something like this; we can't force it to > happen, after all, and perhaps all we need is instead to plant a > better seed. At least the effort of clearing out our little patch of > soil will enable us to quickly begin again right where we left off > before. > > No matter what, though, what we CAN be assured of is that if we DON'T > clear the soil of nasty clinging vines and creepers and other weeds, > DON'T ever plant the seed, ignore adding nutrients in the form of > fertilizer, and neglect to water it daily, that there is NO chance AT > ALL we will ever live to see that seed sprout, grow, and thrive, no > matter how much we may wish it to, no matter what gods we pray to, no > matter how much we BELIEVE it will sprout! > > And consequently, all our wishing and thinking about this wonderful > tree that we keep hoping and wishing for will never appear. And the > reason reqwuires very little analysis to understand: it lacked one or > more of the appropriate conditions for its sprouting, growth, and > thriving. An in precisely because it lacked one or more of the > appropriate conditions it is assured we will NEVER, EVER know the > incomparable bliss of the taste of its fruit. 7486 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 9:54pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! Rob. E --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > Dear Jon, > When you say that the citta that experiences nibbana is 'supramundane', > this means > to me that it is a consciousness transcendent to worldy conditions. In > other > words, would supernatural be an equivalent term? Well I'm not aware of the term 'supernatural' being used to describe the citta that experiences nibbana. And it is nibbana, not the citta that experiences it, that is said to be the transcendent reality. The best I can do is give you following from the summarised commentary of the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha (from the Bhikkhu Bodhi/Narada translation). It describes at p. 66 supramundane consciousness (lokuttaracitta) as the consciousness that "pertains to the process of transcending (uttara) the world (loka)". (This doesn't seem to me to be quite the same as saying that the consciousness itself transcends the world.) It also explains (p. 31) that "world" in this context means not the world of beings or the physical universe but rather "the world of formations (sankharaloka), that is, all mundane phenomena included within the five aggregates of clinging". It is because the consciousness directly accomplishes the realisation of nibbana, which itself "transcends the world of conditioned things" that it is called lokkutaracitta, supramundane consciousness. > If the consciousness is beyond earthly conditions, it would certainly > get me > closer to understanding how it could apprehend Nibbana. Well it depends what you mean here by "earthly conditions". It really has nothing to do with this world, except of course to the extent that it arises in a being who inhabits this world. To borrow from another context, in this world but not of it! Jon 7487 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 10:04pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Satipatthana Sutta and the Hindrances Joshua (and Anders) --- Joshua wrote: > > > In the case of the article below, there are several passages which > contain > > statements, inferences or assumptions that are not supported by the > > ancient commentators, > > Could you give some examples? Here is the second example (Anders, the first appears under the subject "Satipatthana Sutta and its commentaries" as post #7429 in the archives). Once again, let me say that I am not questioning the personal views of the author--simply commenting on the article taken at its face value, as any reader might see it. The Hindrances The articles suggests, I think, that it is not possible to develop mindfulness of any useful degree unless and until the Hindrances have been abandoned (which, it is said, is to be achieved by the attainment of jhana) To my reading, the Satipatthana Sutta and its commentary suggest otherwise In the sutta, the hindrances themselves are given as an objects of contemplation Under the section on 'Mental Objects', it says (p. 22) -- "And how does a bhikkhu live contemplating mental objects in mental objects? Here, a bhikkhu lives contemplating the mental objects in the mental objects of the five hindrances. How does a bhikkhu live contemplating mental objects in the mental objects of the five hindrances? Here, when sensuality is present, a bhikkhu knows with understanding: 'I have sensuality' … [and so on for the other hindrances]". Unless the hindrances are arising and appearing as actual lobha or dosa, a person cannot "know with [direct] understanding" that he has sensuality (attachment). It is not a matter of somehow recollecting the hindrances from a previous (pre-abandonment) occasion; awareness can only take as its object a reality that appears at the same moment as the awareness itself. As the commentary explains (p. 129), the hindrances are actually *laid hold of* by awareness: "In this way the bhikkhu lives contemplating the mental objects, by laying hold of the five hindrances amongst the mental objects of his own mind …" This can only occur if the hindrances are present and arising. This idea about the need to suppress the hindrances is often based on the passages from the texts which say that the hindrances have the function of 'weakening insight' or 'concealing reality'. Therefore, it is reasoned, they must be subdued in order for awareness to be developed. While this may sound 'logical', it is not how things are, according to the commentary. The com. explains that the reason the hindrances arise in the first place is *unwise attention to the object* and that, by the same token, at any moment of *wise attention to an object*, the hindrances are not present. Here is what the commentary says on this point with regard to the first hindrance (p. 119)-- "In connection with the hindrances it must be known that the hindrance of sensuality arises because of wrong reflection on an object that is sensuously agreeable … Sense-desire arises when wrong reflection occurs plentifully… Sense-desire is cast out, indeed, with right reflection on a sensuously inauspicious object. … When there is much right reflection on the sensuously inauspicious object, sense-desire is knocked out." A similar explanation is given for each of the other 4 hindrances-- with wrong reflection and right reflection playing the same crucial roles. I think that a careful study of the commentaries can be helpful, and is probably necessary, if one wants to understand the suttas properly, and can be useful when considering others' ideas or teachings. Jon 7488 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 11:22pm Subject: Re: The limits of awareness Dear Herman, Do you not at all accept the possibility that, although something is unproveable to you now, that it is the way it is. I am not talking about faith, but just the acceptance of the possibility that something is there when you haven't experienced it, or even if you *don't* believe in it. I did give you an advanced warning about the immediate *unprovability* of that concept... ;-) I was only relating that this is an accepted Theravadin view. You can prove it of course, by developing arupa jhana, and when you die, you can see if you re-appear in an arupa world... I am curious about something. You mentioned in the past that you are a student of reality, not really a Buddhist who places great faith in the Buddha's words. How else do you expand your learning of realities besides being associated with Buddhists who place great emphasis (or a few of them, anyway) on the Buddha's words? Have you learned anything (in and out of Buddhisms) recently that you would like to share? kom ps: I haven't seen any devas either, although if I see one in this life, I most likely would interpret it as something else except for devas. --- Herman wrote: > Dear Kom, > > The beings in the arupa plane are, of course, also unprovable. And > there is a distinct lack of devas lighting up my grove at night :-) > > The only seeing I am capable of always includes the tip of my nose as > object, though I tend to ignore it. > > Regards > > > Herman 7489 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Aug 16, 2001 11:28pm Subject: Re: looking for good Pali translation Dear Anders, --- "Anders Honoré" > So the Majhimas would be better than the Digha? The digha has very detailed explanation whereas the Majhimas covers a more varieties of topics. Detail is good, and variety is good. Get both! The digha definitely did cover (in details) the topics on Annihilationism, = Eternalism, and other wrong views. ;-) kom 7490 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 1:30am Subject: Undesirable objects Dear Betty, I greatly appreciate your report about the vipaka experienced and your wise consideration of the events. Those are helpful reminders. I also had unpleasant vipaka, there were some unpleasant and blunt words, that can happen. But still this was a reminder for me not to be neglectful as to sati and then we can even be grateful to the person who uttered them. When I read your post I just had a similar experience. Thank you, looking forward for more. Nina. 7491 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 9:47am Subject: Loving kindness to you Hi Erik Please let me know something and John is willing to help me as usual and will send the money with Western Union to get there faster, he is ready to do it anytime. I would have refunded you anyway; I am collecting money selling stuff and rearranging my life. Thank you for your kind intentions even if you couldn't be able to accomplish them. Conditions are impermanent. Thank you for your support when I was in full crisis, it helped to lift up my morale and your affection has been comforting. May all beings be happy. May all live in safety and joy. All living beings, whether weak or strong, tall, stout, medium or short, seen or unseen, near or distant, born or to be born, may they all be happy. Let no one deceive another or despise any being in any state, let none by anger or hatred wish harm to another. As a mother watches over her child, willing to risk her own life to protect her only child, so with boundless heart should one cherish all living beings, suffusing the whole world with unobstructed loving kindness. With sincere love Cybele 7492 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 9:58am Subject: Thousands of excuses to everybody and Erik in particular Dear Erik Dear group I am extremely sorry for my mistake. Mea culpa, I am embarrassed. So sorry. I just sent a personal mail to Erik in the list, I got confused because I took one mail at random to copy his address afterwards and I forgot and clicked before realizing it. Tried to stop but it was too late. Erik forgive my unmindfulness, using outlook now I get confused, I am not familiar with it and could not abort the message on time. Sorry everybody for the misplaced message. I am so ashamed, want to dig a hole and put my head inside. Cybele >From: Jonothan Abbott >Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Bruce's question (Ken) >Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 21:13:29 +0800 (CST) > >Ken > >Thanks for your post and my apologies for being slow in replying. I am >behind on the messages from last week, and am just starting to catch up. > >--- Ken 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!" > >Yes, wouldn't we all! But as Kom's reply to you made clear, it's the same >path for everyone and there's no short cut. We on this list are very >fortunate to have this goal in common and so hopefully can be of support >to each other in this endeavour. > > > 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. > >Thanks for your kind and encouraging words. There is I hope no chance of >ever getting tired of going over the same ground, since if there is one >thing I have come to realise it is that one never gets beyond needing to >be reminded again and again of the same basic truths -- that it is the >reality appearing at the present moment that is to be known, that reality >and nothing else. > >Jon > > 7493 From: Erik Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 11:05am Subject: Re: Undesirable objects and people --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Betty, I greatly appreciate your report about the vipaka experienced > and your wise consideration of the events. Those are helpful reminders. I > also had unpleasant vipaka, there were some unpleasant and blunt words, that > can happen. But still this was a reminder for me not to be neglectful as to > sati and then we can even be grateful to the person who uttered them. When I > read your post I just had a similar experience. Thank you, looking forward I truly appreciate your wisd post, Nina. Whnever I hear unlpeasant or blunt words--particularly related to the Dhamma, I always prefer to reflect on this passage from the Suttas: "Regard him as one who points out treasure, the wise one who seeing your faults rebukes you. Stay with this sort of sage. For the one who stays with a sage of this sort, things get better, not worse." There are even more specicific passages in this vein in Master Shantideva's "Guide to the Bodhisattva's Way of Life in the chapter dealign with the Perfection of Patience. However, of all the teachings in this vein, my favorite of all is the "Eight Verses in Mind Training" composed by the eleventh Century Tibetan Geshe Langri Tangpa: "With a determination to accomplish The highest welfare for all sentient beings Who surpass even a wish-granting jewel I will learn to hold them supremely dear. "Whenever I associate with others I will learn To think of myself as the lowest among all And respectfully hold others to be supreme From the very depths of my heart. "In all actions I will learn to search into my mind And as soon as an afflictive emotion arises Endangering myself and others Will firmly face and avert it. "I will learn to cherish beings of bad nature And those oppressed by strong sins and suffering As if I had found a precious Treasure very difficult to find. "When others out of jealousy treat me badly With abuse, slander, and so on, I will learn to take on all loss, And offer victory to them. "When one whom I have benefitted with great hope Unreasonably hurts me very badly, I will learn to view that person As an excellent spiritual guide. "In short, I will learn to offer to everyone without exception All help and happiness directly and indirectly And respectfully take upon myself All harm and suffering of my mothers. "I will learn to keep all these practices Undefiled by the stains of the eight worldly concerns And by understanding all phenomena are like illusions Be released from the bondage of attachment." *** I am also including a correspondence to a sangha friend back in New Jersey I wrote her yesterday on precisely this matter, relating my story of how my former business partners in a company we co-founded left me with an enormous debt (after raking in tens of millions of dollars for themselves) and treated me with great, or what appeared to me at that time, disregard, derision, even cruelty: As Master Shantideva has said very clearly in the "Guide to the Bodhisattva's Way of Life" in his verses on the Perfection of Patience: "there is no evil equal to anger; and no virtue equal to patience." The illustrious and supremely holy Je Tsongkhapa further noted that "a single moment of anger can destroy an entire lifetime of virtue." When I took Geshe Michael's [Roach] class on Lojong--specifically based on Geshe Langri Tangpa's "Mind Training in Eight Verses" (which can be found in Rinpoche's "The Mahayana Essence of Lojong"), I remember him saying "this practice may sound so very easy on the surface, but I assure you, it is THE hardest practice you will EVER do!" And you know what? Geshe Michael was, as always, 100% on the money on this one! M., I had to meditate on those verses CAREFULLY, over and over again, specifically regarding this situation. Beginning with this all-important verse: "I will learn to cherish beings of bad nature And those oppressed by strong sins and suffering As if I had found a precious Treasure very difficult to find. " I had no choice, M., but to meditate and reflect so very carefully on this, and these versed were SO HARD and yet, I also knew that they are 100% right, no matter how unpleasant they were to consider at that time. Because I have never had any "enemies" in this life so seemingly evil and mean-spirited as the "enemies" who had appeared to me in the guise of my two former business partners. After careful meditation on this verse, I began a long and careful consideration and meditation on the following verse, which is even more important: "When others out of jealousy treat me badly With abuse, slander, and so on, I will learn to take on all loss, And offer victory to them. " And it was the meditation on this verse that made it perfectly clear that if there were ever an opportunity to TRULY put my holy lama's instructions into practice, THIS WAS IT. And by carefully meditating and reflecting on these verses, over and over again (and you must trust me when I say this was THE most difficult practice I've EVER had to do), one night I had a dream. And in that dream, I saw my former business partners not as these vengeful, hateful beings bent on my destruction, but as my holy spiritual guides, my very most precious friends, the very rarest treasures! *** Therre is much more to this story I cannot relate publicly. Suffice it to say that it is ONLY due to the kindness of these holy spiritual guides who appeared in the guise of my enmies that I was able to terminate the worst and coarsest of my afflictions of ill-will, in particular. 7494 From: Victor Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 1:24pm Subject: Re: Satipatthana (was Testing - Erik > > Are you a confluence of continuous conditions > > resulting from a very > > great number of conditions with nearly identical > > 'histories'? Are > > you a kind of dancing image resulting from the > > present manifestations > > of these conditions? > > Yes--as I see it, that's what 'I' always is. "I am a confluence of continuous conditions resulting from a very great number of conditions with nearly identical 'histories'" is a personality view. So is "I am a kind of dancing image resulting from the present manisfestations of these conditions." Metta, Victor 7495 From: Sarah Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 1:41pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Thousands of excuses to everybody and Erik in particular Dear Cybele, --- cybele chiodi wrote: > Dear Erik > Dear group > > I am extremely sorry for my mistake. > Mea culpa, I am embarrassed. So sorry. Don't be too hard on yourself! We all make mistakes and some (read me for one) make more internet mistakes than others;-)) Everyone knows you didn't intend any harm or discomfort. I think it was before you joined dsg that for what seemed quite a while (to me anyway) my server was sending out double messages of everything I wrote. Each time the 'double' appeared, I felt embarrassed too, but occasionally there was a little awareness of the dosa (aversion) at that time as yet another conditioned reality. When we're feeling embarrased, we're just accumulating more dosa..so useless;-)) Sympathizing! Sarah 7496 From: Sarah Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 2:53pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The Jackal suffering from mange... Dear Binh, --- Binh A wrote: Of course there can be discontent with and without wrong > > view, but I like the examples of blaming the companions, moods, > > place, food, weather and this or that for our problems and also > > the story about the Jackal. > > > > Can someone give me a sutta reference for this story? > > > BA: Perhaps it was taken from this story in Samyutta Nikaya: > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn17-8.html > Thanks for the reference and reminders of 'how cruel gains, offerings, & fame are: a harsh, bitter obstacle to the attainment of the unexcelled rest from bondage'. Binh, I'm glad to see you're following here on dsg and appreciate the references you give from time to time. I hope we can encourage you to join the discussions from time to time too! As I've mentioned before, I appreciate the user-friendly style and tremendous work you've put into your website here: BuddhaSasana A Buddhist page by Binh Anson of English books & Suttas http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebidx.htm dsgmods Edit Delete Cut Nina, you may not know that 'Abhidhamma in DL' is on this website too. Thanks, Binh, Sarah 7497 From: Bruce Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 5:04pm Subject: thanks to everyone i just wanted to drop a note of thanks to all of you i met in bkk...sarah, jon, sukin, betty, robert once again, amara, erik, and kevin....everyone was so very kind and so dedicated to understanding what's-really-happening....and my sincerest apologies to several others, for whose names my brain doesn't seem to have dns entry at the moment.... the conversations were lively, though i'd liked to have heard khun sujin speak more at length....really, though, only one thing she said has remained w/me: "but what is being experienced right now?" i spent my last week in bkk at wat mahathat w/my teacher Bhante Vidhuro....meditating!....time well spent: i know now that for me, i need a break -- a very long break -- from reading others' discussions and intellectualizations about, and attempts at teaching and at learning **about** the Dhamma...."what is being experienced right now" seems, to this little worldling, to be more than enough, maybe even precisely just enough.... mettacittena bruce 7498 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 6:00pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Satipatthana Sutta and its commentaries Teng Kee Another of your brief but provocative posts! Sounds interesting, but I'm not sure I follow your meaning. I would like to check out the Com. myself before making any comment. Grateful if you could you please let me know: -- whereabouts in the Com. (and in reference to exactly which section of the sutta) the passage in question appears -- whether the passage is included in Soma Thera's (or some other) English translation--if so, a page reference would be much appreciated. Thanks Jon --- Ong Teng Kee wrote: > Dear Jonothan, > You said any 4 objects can be done for anyone.Please beware that com > said > kaya and vedana for samathayanika /craving people but citta and dhamma > for > sukkhavipassaka /viewing people. > > > >From: Jonothan Abbott > > > >Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Satipatthana Sutta and its > commentaries > >Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 22:30:39 +0800 (CST) > > > >Joshua > > > >--- Joshua wrote: > > > > > In the case of the article below, there are several passages which > > > contain > > > > statements, inferences or assumptions that are not supported by > the > > > > ancient commentators, > > > > > > Could you give some examples? > > > >I will give one or two examples of what I had in mind. With this > >reservation, however: I do not mean to be questioning the personal > views > >of the author. I am simply commenting on the article taken at its face > >value, as any reader might see it. > > > >With that caveat, I will give one example of a difference of detail and > >one of 'doctrine', both of which can be discussed from a reading of the > >Satipatthana Sutta itself or its commentary, as translated by Soma > Thera > >in 'The Way of Mindfulness' (page numbers below are to this book). > > > >Here is the matter of detail. > > > >The description of the 4 Foundations of Mindfulness > >The article describes the four Foundations/Focuses of Mindfulness as > "your > >own body, the pleasure and pain associated with each sense, the mind > >consciousness and the objects of the mind". > > > >In the Satipatthana Sutta, the first Foundation of Mindfulness, usually > >referred to as 'Contemplation of the Body', is not limited to one's own > >body, but include another's body as well. Each of the several aspects > of > >contemplation of the body (breathing, the modes of deportment, the 4 > kinds > >of clear comprehension, repulsiveness of the body, the modes of > >materiality, and the 9 cemetery contemplations) concludes with the > passage > >-- > > > >"Thus he lives contemplating the body in the body internally, or he > lives > >contemplating the body in the body externally, or he lives > contemplating > >the body in the body internally and externally." > > > >The commentary to the section on breathing explains (p.51) that this > >refers to contemplation of the body in one's own 'respiration-body', in > >another's 'respiration-body' or at one time in one's own and at > another > >in another's 'respiration-body'. A similar comment is made after each > of > >the other sections. > > > >There is quite a difference between one's own body as object of > >contemplation and one's own or another's body as object of > contemplation > >(especially when it comes to breath!). The wrong understanding could, > for > >example, lead one to the idea that this contemplation is best > 'practised' > >in solitude, an idea that is not supported by a reading of the sutta as > a > >whole. > > > >In fact, although the section on contemplation on the body in the sutta > >talks in term of different bodily postures, activities, cemetery > >contemplations etc (ie. in terms of conventional situations), the > >underlying meaning according to the commentary is all rupa-dhammas, the > >dhammas that comprise the first khandha. Indeed, the 4 Foundations > >between them refer to all the 5 khandhas (ie all paramattha dhammas > that > >are subject to clinging). The commentary says on this (p. 119) -- > > > >"In the contemplation on the body, the laying hold of the aggregate of > >corporeality or materiality was spoken of by the Master; > >in the contemplation on feeling, the laying hold of the aggregate of > >feeling; > >in the contemplation on mind, the laying hold of the aggregate of > >consciousness; > >and now [ie. in the contemplation on mental objects] … the laying hold > of > >the aggregates of perception and formations, …". > > > >The rupa-kkhandha includes of course not only the rupas that we take > for > >our own body, but all rupas that are experienced through the various > >doorways. Most importantly, it refers to realities that are arising at > >the present moment, not at any other time. > > > >It is not necessary to 'choose' one or other of the 4 Foundations as > the > >focus for contemplation. If there is awareness of any reality > appearing > >at the present moment, that awareness is a moment of the development of > >(one or other of) the 4 Foundations of Mindfulness as taught in the > >Satipatthana Sutta. > > > >I hope this has given some idea of how careful we should be in taking > >parts of suttas at their face value, without reference to the whole > sutta > >and its commentaries. > > > >Jon > > > >PS This post turned out longer than expected! I will mention the > >'doctrinal' issue in a separate post. > > > > 7499 From: Sarah Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 6:22pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] thanks to everyone Dear Bruce, Good to hear from you..I was wondering whether you had returned to Japan.. It must have been quite an 'intense' 3 weeks of dhamma all in all and your teaching and life in Japan will probably seem like a holiday;-)) We really enjoyed meeting you (seems ages ago now!) and your very sincere and keen interest in dhamma....You were really picking up the 'essence' of what Khun Sujin was saying and I'm quite sure it'll be helpful in your ordinary life. I know just what you mean about live discussions or wishing you'd heard more of Khun Sujin.....we get a bit spoilt here in terms of being able to 'focus' on posts we're interested in and zap through others more speedily;-))) I'm glad you had a good week at Wat Mahathat too. I also understand the need for a break from the 'talk'.....I find the same too, which is why I like swimming or yoga or hiking....perhaps my 'alternative meditations' and often times for reflecting or even sati then. Talking of which, I've just finished teaching and it's time for my Tai Chi class.... Keep in touch, Best wishes, Sarah p.s I think it was Ivan, not Kevin --- Bruce wrote: > i just wanted to drop a note of thanks to all of you i met in > bkk...sarah, jon, sukin, betty, robert once again, amara, erik, > and kevin....everyone was so very kind and so dedicated to > understanding what's-really-happening....and my sincerest apologies to > several others, for whose names my brain doesn't seem to have dns > entry at the moment.... > > the conversations were lively, though i'd liked to have heard khun > sujin speak more at length....really, though, only one thing she said > has remained w/me: "but what is being experienced right now?" > > i spent my last week in bkk at wat mahathat w/my teacher Bhante > Vidhuro....meditating!....time well spent: i know now that for me, i > need a break -- a very long break -- from reading others' discussions > and intellectualizations about, and attempts at teaching and at > learning **about** the Dhamma...."what is being experienced right now" > seems, to this little worldling, to be more than enough, maybe even > precisely just enough.... > 7500 From: Anders Honore Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 7:46pm Subject: Re: looking for good Pali translation --- "Derek Cameron" wrote: > --- "Anders Honoré" > wrote: > > Well, I wanted the Samyuttas because they cover such a wide range of > > subjects. > > So the Majhimas would be better than the Digha? > > Hi, Anders, > > I wouldn't say the Majjhima is "better" than the Digha. It just > depends what you want. Certainly the Majjhima has the most > comprehensive coverage of the core teachings. But if you like Zen, > you might appreciate the Sutta Nipata, especially the verses in the > fourth section (A.t.thkavaggo). Thank you, Derek. 7501 From: Anders Honore Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 7:47pm Subject: Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > You are too smart to don't have yet fully realized that here only Tipitaka > is recognized as genuine teachings and reliable source. > Refer to my recent discussion with Jon. They stick to Abhiddhamma in Pali > Canon version therefore obviously they don't regard Mahayana youngish > viking. :-))) Well, that's just a question I would like to see answered, as it would make things a lot easier. > By the way, transferring my mails to Outlook I lost the links you gave me > off list; if you still have the mails, could you resend them to me please or > at least the links. Thank you very much, I have messed up my mails with this > syncronization in Outlook. Damn, I think I lost it myself too. Let me get back to you later this week off-list. 7502 From: Anders Honore Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 7:48pm Subject: Re: Modern masters (was Ajahn Brahms on Satipatthana --- "Derek Cameron" wrote: > --- "Anders Honoré" > wrote: > > Although I am perhaps more fond of Zen than Theravada, I'll grant > Theravada > > one thing: It produced the greatest Buddhist teacher of this > century. No > > modern Zen teachers come even close to Ajahn Chah. > > Well, that may be true, but two contemporary Zen monks I've enjoyed > reading about are Kyudo Roshi (as described in Lawrence Shainberg's > book, "Ambvivalent Zen"), and Ta Tsung (whom I know only from the > article "Keep Sweeping" in Tricycle magazine for Winter 1996). There are certainly some fascinating Zen master out there as well, I'll grant that. But I don't think we'll see much of the brilliance of the old masters of the T'ang dynasty anymore. 7503 From: Anders Honore Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 7:51pm Subject: Re: Satipatthana Sutta and the Hindrances --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Joshua (and Anders) > > --- Erik wrote: > > > > In the case of the article below, there are several passages which > > contain > > > statements, inferences or assumptions that are not supported by the > > > ancient commentators, > > > > Could you give some examples? > > Here is the second example (Anders, the first appears under the subject > "Satipatthana Sutta and its commentaries" as post #7429 in the archives). > Once again, let me say that I am not questioning the personal views of the > author--simply commenting on the article taken at its face value, as any > reader might see it. > > The Hindrances > The articles suggests, I think, that it is not possible to develop > mindfulness of any useful degree unless and until the Hindrances have been > abandoned (which, it is said, is to be achieved by the attainment of > jhana) Hmm, as I read it, it just says that if one wants the guarantee of the Buddha, one needs to do Satipatthana trhough Jhana. > To my reading, the Satipatthana Sutta and its commentary suggest otherwise > In the sutta, the hindrances themselves are given as an objects of > contemplation Under the section on 'Mental Objects', it says (p. 22) -- > > "And how does a bhikkhu live contemplating mental objects in mental > objects? > Here, a bhikkhu lives contemplating the mental objects in the mental > objects of the five hindrances. > How does a bhikkhu live contemplating mental objects in the mental objects > of the five hindrances? > Here, when sensuality is present, a bhikkhu knows with understanding: 'I > have sensuality' … [and so on for the other hindrances]". > > Unless the hindrances are arising and appearing as actual lobha or dosa, a > person cannot "know with [direct] understanding" that he has sensuality > (attachment). It is not a matter of somehow recollecting the hindrances > from a previous (pre-abandonment) occasion; awareness can only take as > its object a reality that appears at the same moment as the awareness > itself. As the commentary explains (p. 129), the hindrances are actually > *laid hold of* by awareness: > > "In this way the bhikkhu lives contemplating the mental objects, by laying > hold of the five hindrances amongst the mental objects of his own mind …" > > This can only occur if the hindrances are present and arising. > > This idea about the need to suppress the hindrances is often based on the > passages from the texts which say that the hindrances have the function of > 'weakening insight' or 'concealing reality'. Therefore, it is reasoned, > they must be subdued in order for awareness to be developed. While this > may sound 'logical', it is not how things are, according to the > commentary. The com. explains that the reason the hindrances arise in the > first place is *unwise attention to the object* and that, by the same > token, at any moment of *wise attention to an object*, the hindrances are > not present. Here is what the commentary says on this point with regard > to the first hindrance (p. 119)-- > > "In connection with the hindrances it must be known that the hindrance of > sensuality arises because of wrong reflection on an object that is > sensuously agreeable … > Sense-desire arises when wrong reflection occurs plentifully… > Sense-desire is cast out, indeed, with right reflection on a sensuously > inauspicious object. … > When there is much right reflection on the sensuously inauspicious object, > sense-desire is knocked out." > > A similar explanation is given for each of the other 4 hindrances-- with > wrong reflection and right reflection playing the same crucial roles. > > I think that a careful study of the commentaries can be helpful, and is > probably necessary, if one wants to understand the suttas properly, and > can be useful when considering others' ideas or teachings. Yes, perhaps. Thank you for your comments. 7504 From: m. nease Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 8:36pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Satipatthana (was Testing - Erik Thanks again, Victor. mike --- Victor wrote: > > > Are you a confluence of continuous conditions > > > resulting from a very > > > great number of conditions with nearly identical > > > 'histories'? Are > > > you a kind of dancing image resulting from the > > > present manifestations > > > of these conditions? > > > > Yes--as I see it, that's what 'I' always is. > > > "I am a confluence of continuous conditions > resulting from a very > great number of conditions with nearly identical > 'histories'" is a > personality view. > > So is "I am a kind of dancing image resulting from > the present > manisfestations of these conditions." > > Metta, > Victor > 7505 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 9:04pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Loving kindness to you dear cybele, much merit to you for giving us the opportunity to 'anumodana' the good deeds done by erik. muditacittena, rgds, gayan ----- Original Message ----- From: "cybele chiodi" Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 9:47 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Loving kindness to you > > Hi Erik > > Please let me know something and John is willing to help me as usual and > will send the money with Western Union to get there faster, he is ready to > do it anytime. > I would have refunded you anyway; I am collecting money selling stuff and > rearranging my life. > > Thank you for your kind intentions even if you couldn't be able to > accomplish them. > Conditions are impermanent. > Thank you for your support when I was in full crisis, it helped to lift up > my morale and your affection has been comforting. > > May all beings be happy. > May all live in safety and joy. > > All living beings, whether weak or strong, tall, stout, medium or short, > seen or unseen, near or distant, born or to be born, may they all be happy. > > Let no one deceive another or despise any being in any state, let none by > anger or hatred wish harm to another. > > As a mother watches over her child, willing to risk her own life to protect > her only child, so with boundless heart should one cherish all living > beings, suffusing the whole world with unobstructed loving kindness. > > With sincere love > > Cybele > 7506 From: frank kuan Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 10:43pm Subject: MN vs. DN, another opinion Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation > > --- "Anders Honoré" > > > wrote: > > > Well, I wanted the Samyuttas because they cover > such a wide range > of > > > subjects. > > > So the Majhimas would be better than the Digha? > > > > Hi, Anders, > > > > I wouldn't say the Majjhima is "better" than the > Digha. Hello Derek and Anders. I would say that the Majjhima is "better" than the Digha. Just my opinion though. Majjhima tends to be concise and to the point, and while I do value some of the longer detailed explanations in the Digha, many of the suttas in the Digha tend to focus (in great detail) on nonessential (or less essential) elements of the dhamma, whereas the MN seems to really hone in on the important core teachings. The SN I think is also definitely worth getting, although some sections are more pertinent to core teachings than others, overall I think the SN adds some insight that you don't get from MN. The MN is the one I reread the most often. I rarely reopen the DN. Metta, -fk 7507 From: Howard Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 7:34pm Subject: More Thoughts Re: Abhidhamma and Cognitive Science Hi again, Robert - In a message dated 8/9/01 10:52:19 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Robert Kirkpatrick writes: > --- Howard wrote: > > > > > > > ============================== > > You mention the following: "According to the Abhidhamma mind > states > > are arising and falling away 17 times faster than rupa." This is > something > > that I've thought about a bit, and I find somewhat perplexing. What > I find > > perplexing is not the possibility that the flow of cittas moves at > a greater > > rate than the corresponding flow of discerned rupas, but, rather > how it is > > possible that that should come to be "known"! Any knowing, as I > understand > > Abhidhamma to assert, occurs momentarily, withing a citta. But the > flow of > > cittas is, by definition, something going beyond any individual > citta. In > > what mind moment can the flow be observed, measured, and compared > with the > > flow of rupas? If all knowing is a momentary affair, I see a > problem here. > > Can you help my understanding with this? > > > > With metta, > > Howard > ____________ > Dear Howard, > I think we have an idea of what panna knows and how it knows. > > Like the recent discussion about the fact that panna knows the > immediately preceeding mind processes: > > This worries us if we assume that citta can only know itself at the > exact moment it arises. In fact as we discussed a moment of citta > with lobha cannot understand itself- but following processes with > panna can understand the lobha. It is all happening fantastically > fast and thus it is still correct to talk about knowing the present > moment. Also at the exact moments of seeing or hearing there is no > understanding - but understanding (can) arise immediately after these. > > The moments of javanna citta with panna arise in a series of seven > cittas that are conditioned by each other. There is an accumualation > of understanding during this time (see the Patthana) and also there > are further conditions by upanissaya paccaya for more insight in > future processes. > If we think of panna as a sort of mind atom that knows only some > cittas (say) then we limit the nature and function of panna. Panna > has the function of understanding and is a dhamma that has no limits. > It can even grow to the degree of understanding all dhammas > perfectly - such as the panna of a sammasamBuddha. > Because it is not a predominant dhamma (except in the truly wise - > the ariya puggala) we tend to have conceptions (some right some > wrong) about its nature. Panna, of a level, is present even now when > we reflect correctly about the deeper aspects of Dhamma; and is > present, at another level, when there is genuine direct insight into > the characteristic of a dhamma: but it is not yet a power (bala) and > so its characteristic may be hard to discern. > I don't know if this helps. > best wishes > robert > ================================ Just a little brainstorming out loud: Except for the possibility of parallel processing, it is to be assumed that there is only one aramana at a time. The duration of that object of discernment marks off "one citta". (Of course, an identical or near-identical version of the same object could be the aramana of subsequent cittas.) Now, assuming that any knowing is within the duration of a citta, and not as some overarching mental state simultaneous with a process of cittas, how is the observation and comparison of the flow of cittas and rupas to occur? It seems to me that this might be viewed as follows: There is an accumulation of "information" passed on from citta to citta, an extremely intricate information structure which is modified and transmitted with each passing citta (like a store & forward technique in a communications network, to give a tech simile); this structure makes essential use of sa~n~na, both in remembering and in comparing. Thus, what can be "packed into" a given citta can be of enormous complexity, because it incorporates an enormous history. I realize that what I write here is neither the description of my direct observation nor is it culled from the tipitaka, and thus is probably filled with errors. However, it is helpful to me to see even *one* means of understanding the claims of Abhidhamma. 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) 7508 From: Howard Date: Fri Aug 17, 2001 9:15pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Diamond Sutra Hi, Anders - In a message dated 8/15/01 4:54:59 PM Eastern Daylight Time, cybele chiodi writes: > "If by form one looks for the Tathàgata > Or by the sound of the voice seeks me, > This person walks the wrong path > And is unable to see the Tathàgata." > > I think someone mentioned that there never really was a Tathagata in the > first place, and that this is only a conventional term for the impermanent > kandhas we know as the Buddha. Yet this passage seems to indicate > otherwise... Any suggestions? > > The other one I would like to quote, is the following, in relation to > Buddhist practises in the Pali Canon: > > "This is why, Subhuti, the Bodhisattva should be free of all images when > engendering the supremely unexcelled bodhicitta. He should not dwell in > forms when giving rise to that mind. He should not dwell in sounds, odors, > tastes, tactile sensations, or ideas when giving rise to that mind. He > should dwell nowhere when giving rise to that mind. If in that mind he has > an abode, then it would be the non-abode." > > How does this practise as explained here, relate to the practises expounded > in the Pali Canon? > > ============================ No answers here; just some thoughts. With regard to the first question, about the tathagata: An arahant is sometimes described as "traceless". Certainly, when "entered into" nibbanic discernment, whether during life or beyond the moment of parinibbana, there is no support for discernment of any objects, there is no subject; there is no is no "being" in ANY sense. But even during the "ordinary" mind of the arahant-in-the-world, there is no sense of self whatsoever, and, moreover, all dhammas are seen through as transparent and empty, and, so, there is no "being" present in the person of the arahant or in any objects discerned by the arahant - there is nothing but emptiness. The second quote reminds me of a sutta, perhaps in the Samyutta Nikaya, where the Buddha warns against being trapped by "the tangle within" and "the tangle without". It seems to speak of detachment. 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) 7509 From: Joshua Date: Sat Aug 18, 2001 4:47am Subject: Re: Diamond Sutra > > How does this practise as explained here, relate to the practises expounded > > in the Pali Canon? Thanissaro better get off his cushion and go translate the Mahaculasunnata Sutta for you. 7510 From: Binh A Date: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:26am Subject: Complete English translation of Majjhima Nikaya (Re: Diamond Sutra) --- Erik wrote: > > > How does this practise as explained here, relate to the practises expounded > > > in the Pali Canon? > > Thanissaro better get off his cushion and go translate the Mahaculasunnata Sutta for you. ---------------------------------------------------------- BA: For your information, a complete set (152 suttas) of the Majjhima Nikaya in English is available at: http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/index.html Metta Binh PS. If the above URL is too long to fit in one line, try this first: http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/ --------------------------- 7511 From: Binh A Date: Sat Aug 18, 2001 8:31am Subject: Misc... Re: The Jackal --- Sarah wrote: > Binh, I'm glad to see you're following here on dsg and appreciate the > references you give from time to time. I hope we can encourage you to join the > discussions from time to time too! ---------------- BA: Thanks for the kind words, Sarah. I think the list is well managed by you and Jon, with active participation by many sincere and knowledgeable Dhamma friends. For me, my time and energy are rather limited. I have been devoting most of my free time to build up the on-line library at the BuddhaSasana website, especially in the Vietnamese section ( I still have over 20 more books in digital format to edit and transform into a web format!). As you may know, Theravada Buddhism in Vietnam is not popular, and it is my wish to see it flourishing there as much as possible. --------------- > As I've mentioned before, I appreciate the user-friendly style and tremendous > work you've put into your website here: > > BuddhaSasana > A Buddhist page by Binh Anson of English books & Suttas > http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebidx.htm ----------------- BA: Thanks for mentioning that site. Much appreciated. I would also appreciate any comments and contributions from Dhamma friends. ----------------- > Nina, you may not know that 'Abhidhamma in DL' is on this website too. ----------------- BA: That is a good introductory book on Abhidhamma (which I read some 20+ years ago, and still like it). It was translated into Vietnamese language and printed in Saigon early this year. I have also uploaded a digital copy to the website. The translator, Bhikkhu Thien-Minh, a young Theravadin monk, is now in the UK, spending the Vassa at Ajahn Sumedho's monastery. Metta, Binh 7512 From: Erik Date: Sat Aug 18, 2001 0:28pm Subject: An Invitation to All Here > As you may know, Theravada Buddhism in Vietnam is not > popular, and it is my wish to see it flourishing there as much as > possible. Bihn, I heartily encourage you in your endeavors of aiding the growth and flourishing of this vital aspect of the holy Ariyan Dhamma in your home country! I have precisely the same feeling with regard with my wish to see the so-called "Mahayana" take root and flourish here in the parts of SE Asia where it is not so popular these days, in the same way that the Theravada in Vietnam, is not popular at this point in time. The reason I feel particularly strongly about this is that we now live in a very new era--with instantaneous worldwide communications, and speedy travel possible in ways never before known in mankind's recorded history (for those not possessed of the abhinnas of the great Mahasiddhas, at any rate :), where the chance of reuniting once again these two beautiful and correct strains of the Ariyan Dharma is possible now, in such a way that has not been true for perhaps even centuries. For the record, one of my primary motivations for coming to Thailand has been to learn and internalize as much of the holy facet of Ariyan Dharma known as Theravada as possible, to bring many of its elements-- some of which have been neglected or even lost from my own tradition (such as the practice of walking meditation, for example)--to help the process of re-assimilating them back into what is presently known as the Tibetan Dharma (which is currently in the process of mutating into the American Dharma, the Australian Dharma, the German Dharma, the Brazilian Dharma, the Italian Dharma, etc., etc.) Also, as many here may know, Theravada is the presently dominant form of Buddhism in Cambodia (whence I just returned), and similar to your wish to see the Theravada flavor of the Dharma flourish in Vietnam, one of my sincerest wishes is to see the re-establishment and flourishing of tantric and so-called "Mahayana" (hopefully no one here will take offense at my using that term; it is not meant at all to imply anything derogatory about Theravada, as some foolish sectarians sometimes do by implying Theravada is "Hinayana," or "lesser vehicle", which is FAR from the truth of things--because it IS the actual Ariyan Dhamma and as such, in perfect accord with ALL the teachings of Lord Buddha) Buddhism in Cambodia--for so many reasons, and in no small part because this is the very form of Buddhism that influenced the design and construction of the magnificent Buddhist temples at Angkor, and as such is integral to Khmer and Cambodian history, a well as being an integral part of my own linage and by extension, practice. At present, Theravada Buddhism only "dominates" (in its very feeble and haphazard way now since the Pol Pot time, where he had all monks, or anyone of learning for that matter, brutally tortured and executed) in Cambodia and elsewhere in SE Asia, including Thailand now due to strong royal patronage (some have said "edict" but I have not heard this confirmed in actual fact) for the Lankavamsa flavor thanks to the influence of the Thai King Ramkamheng, such that before, where the two great streams had coexisted peacefully side-by- side, the Theravada as we now know it began to dominate, perhaps (this is only speculation on my part) due to the unwholesome influence of those who might have mistakenly criticized the Mahayana as being anariyan Dhamma (which is certainly a common activity today among many who call themselves Theravadins--those who still actively promulgate the extremely severe wrong view that the Mahayana doctrine is somehow a "corrupted" version of the Buddha's Dharma--thus leading to the very heavy bad kamma of disparaging the Ariyan Dhamma in any of its extant forms, but I digress). In fact, my most sincere wish of all would be to once again see the side-by-side flourishing of ALL these holy and correct traditions of the Buddha's Dharma (as they did together here in SE Asia and in India centuries ago--even coexisting side-by-side within the same monasteries, where each tradition would "debate" the other in a process leading to the accumulation of greater and greater wisdom for all participants and spectators alike!), and in particular, the re- establishment of this harmonious unity--not a merging of traditions, but a mutual accord and respect--of these two skillful methods taught by Lord Buddha during his appearance in this sasana, which he taught for one reason only: the end of suffering. Expanding a bit on this theme, I find few more inspiring places in this world than the Angkor complex of 180 temples. One reason I find Angkor so inspiring is due to the influence of the Chakravartin (wheel-turning monarch Bodhisattva like the recent Thai King Rama IV and His Holiness XIV Dalai Lama), King Jayavarman VII--who like His Holiness The 14th Dalai Lama, is considered an emanation of Avalokiteshvara (a.k.a. Kwan Yin in China, Kannon in Japan, and Chenresik in Tibet)--who constructed in addition to many other Buddhist temples, the temple/city of Angkor Thom, which is an enormous tantric mandala with the famed temple Bayon at its center, which displays Avalokiteshvara's gently smiling compassionate face radiating metta and karuna out in all directions, for the sole welfare of all sentient beings. Among all the temples commissioned by King Jayavarman VII, however, my favorite among them is the former tantric monastic temple complex of Ta Prohm (it actually served as the "temple" backdrop in the new movie "Tomb Raider" for those who may have seen this movie, and once housed over 2,700 monks, as well as serving as the supply center for all the region's hospitals). Ta Prohm is not only aesthetically beautiful by design. It has also purposefully been left in its unrestored state--meaning that throughout the crumbling stones of this impermanent temple grow enormous fig trees (of the "ficus" genus--the same genus of tree we know as the Bodhi tree under which Lord Buddha achieved his unsurpassed and complete self-awakening), leaving to me, at least, a clear reminder of both the impermanence of all composed phenomena, as well as the fact that this fact of this impermanent nature of all composed thing provides the only fertile soil for the growth and flourishing and fruiting of the enlightened mind, just as the perfect lotus arises from the muck and mud of samsara! And Ta Prohm is my favorite temple of all the temples for another reason: its representation of the beautifully carved "devatas" and "apsaras" (representations of the tantric Buddhist feminine principle of enlightened mind also known by the Sanskrit term "dakini" or the Tibetan word "khadro-ma"--who represent key aspects of tantric sadhana ritual because they symbolize the empty nature of the wisdom aspect of reality)--not to mention the fact that my fiancée was born and raised and has lived her entire life at this very temple! The most significant reason for my love of this temple, though, is that Jayavarman VII built and dedicated it specifically to his "mother," as one can read in any of the innumerable guidebooks on Angkor one may come across should one ever decide to visit this holiest of holy places on this planet earth (it certainly has to rank up there with the Four Great Sites of traditional Buddhist pilgrimage in India, in my opinion--if for no other reason than its sheer majestic scope and unparalleled execution and stunning architecture representing the Buddhist cosmos in its entirety). What the authors of few of these guidebooks ever note, though, is that while it is technically correct King Jayavarman VII dedicated Ta Prohm to his mother, the "mother" in question was not the King's birth-mother, but in actuality, to the "Mother of the Buddhas"-- "Prajnaparamita" (Perfection of Wisdom), which also happens to be THE central wisdom-teaching of ALL sects of "Mahayana" Buddhism, and is recited in Chinese, Japanese, and Tibetan, by every sincere practitioner--often daily--as a reminder of the truth that "form is only emptiness; emptiness no other than form," thus underscoring vividly the ultimate nature that all dhammas are empty of self- nature, and all composed phenomena are impermanent and dependently arisen, and the fact that it is only due to the grasping nature of the defiled mind, that they appear to us as dukkha. Furthermore, the temple Ta Prohm's West entrance (where my fiancée and I met last January in what can only be called a MOST auspicious meeting, but nowhere near as auspicious as our meeting this time around, especially when she placed the krama--the traditional Khmer scarf--around the back of my neck after presenting her a small gift I had brought along just to give to her this time around! :) :) :)) is associated with the Buddha Amitabha of the Five Buddha Families as taught in "Mahayana" Buddhism. From the little card given to me by a nun at Wat Mahatat, Section 5 (from my visit there recently), with Amitabha's picture and his prayer, which I find unbelievably inspiring. "I vow that when my life approaches its end; All obstructions will be swept away; I will see Amitabha Buddha, And be born in his land of Ultimate Bliss and Peace. "When reborn in the Western land, I will perfectly and completely fulfill Without exception these Great Vows, To the delight and benefit of all sentient beings." NAMO AMITABHA! Incidentally, the Buddha Amitabha's ("boundless light", whose primary symbolic function is to transform the passions and craving into discerning wisdom) main associated Bodhisattva is none other than Avalokiteshvara, whose gently smiling face is graces the West entrance of the gateway into the center of the mandala.of temple of Ta Prohm. It should be noted that the Bodhisattva of Compassion, Avalokiteshvara, In the "Mahayana" school's teachings, represents specifically the compassion aspect (the active principle) of full enlightenment. And it is taught that only through this compassionate activity (that arises with no thought of giver or recipient--it merely acts spontaneously to fulfill the ultimate needs of sentient beings in the triple-realm, which is why images of Avalokiteshvara are often depicted with eleven heads which look out in all directions and into all the various realms of suffering beings, in addition to his having a thousand arms, which serve the purpose of spontaneously reaching out to suffering sentient beings to help remove their suffering) conjoined with the feminine wisdom aspect realizing emptiness (represented by the "Divine Mother," the dakini Prajnaparamita, who represents the empty wisdom aspect of ultimate reality), that all the steps to Buddhahood are fulfilled, which is called the perfection of union of the method and wisdom. (By the way, this is often graphically depicted in tantric imagery as the "yab- yum" (lit. "father-mother") mudra of the two aspects inseparably joined in sexual embrace, which in the Tibetan is also ultimately symbolized by the "dorje" (or "vajra"), which means "diamond" and also "thunderbolt"--as it represents the flash of intuitive wisdom that arises instantaneously upon realizing the ultimate nature of reality. OM GATE GATE PARAGATE PARASAMGATE BODHI SVAHA! It is said that only through the union of these two essential aspects, the aspect of method (brought about by accumulating wholesome karma) conjoined with wisdom (the wisdom that realizes emptiness), that full and complete enlightenment is brought about. In other words, what this specifically says is that the wisdom aspect alone is insufficient, that we must in addition accumulate deeds of great merit, just as Lord Buddha himself did over many kalpas, to bring to fruition the unsurpassed and complete enlightenment enjoyed by the Buddha. For example, there was one famous debate held on this very point--the most famous and important debate in Tibet's history--as a means of establishing the correct Dharma for all Tibetans to study and practice which exists up to this very day in the Land of Snows, which was held in Lhasa during the years 792-4, between the Chinese monk "Hvashang Mohoyan," who made the claim that enlightenment was "sudden" and there was no need to do anything. His main challenger in this debate was the renowned Master Kamalasila, the great Indian sage and disciple of Santarakshita (a contemporary of the legendary Padmasambhava, a.k.a. Guru Rinpoche), who was instrumental in helping bring the Buddhist Dharma into Tibet from India during the first period of the Dharma's propagation in the "rooftop of the world." The particular debate was overseen by the Tibetan King Trisong Detsen (himself considered to be an emanation of Manjushri), and it was through this long, epistolary debate, spanning two years, that it was finally made clear and decisively indicated by King Trisong Detsen to from then on reject the teachings of the Chinese monk Hvashan'g interpretation of the Dharma--specifically that one need do "nothing at all," that enlightenment just happens spontaneously, as a corrupted version of the Dharma; and to instead take up Santaraksita's (and Kamalasila's) linage teachings on gradual cultivation (with the understanding that insight-wisdom yet arises in a flash after much diligent effort at cultivation). This Great Debate led to the establishment of the Dharma we now know by the name Tibetan Buddhism. (a scholarly essay on this critical debate can be found here, for example: http://sino-sv3.sino.uni-/ heidelberg.de/FULLTEXT/JR-JOCP/gregory.htm). By the way, it is Kamalasila's teachings on the nine stages of meditation (Bhavana Krama) I was trained in by my lama, beginning with following the breath, and it is Kamalasila's instructions on meditation, based on the Buddha's exact teachings of the same, which is taught as THE central form of cultivating Right Mindfulness and Right Concentration in the Geluk lineage--the lineage of the Dalai Lamas. Anyway, in keeping with the overall theme of this little missive, I would like to formally offer my most heartfelt invitation to any members of our little sangha here in the Dhamma Study Group, who happen to be reading this message, and who might feel it beneficial to make a Buddhist pilgrimage to this holiest of holy Buddhist sites-- Angkor--to be present for this wedding--which, barring unforeseen circumstances (anatta being non-controlling after all--and who knows what vipaka this very next moment will bring, any one of us could die this very next moment!), is presently planned to be held sometime around the end of November. By the way, this is the very best time of year to visit SE Asia for those not in this part of the world (and the time to see Angkor is now, rather than later, as the number of tourists visiting has been doubling each year since the surrender of the Khmer Rouge three years ago), and it is now safe to travel (and very inexpensive by Western standards) in and around Angkor. Plus, this would afford the opportunity of having an incomparable Khmer-speaking (and fluent English-speaking as well) tour-guide, my fiancée Aert, who, as I mentioned, was born in and has lived her entire life among the temples of Angkor! Angkor, is a way similar to the Four Great Sites in India, is truly not a place to be missed by anyone who seriously considers himself or herself a Buddhist, and who has both the leisure and fortune to visit this holy place--as the entire complex of temples serves as nothing if not a supreme opportunity to meditate on all the qualities so heavily praised by Lord Buddha: those of the union of wisdom and compassion (method). 7513 From: Joshua Date: Sat Aug 18, 2001 1:29pm Subject: Complete English translation of Majjhima Nikaya (Re: Diamond Sutra) --- <> wrote: > --- Erik wrote: > > > > How does this practise as explained here, relate to the > practises expounded > > > > in the Pali Canon? > > > > Thanissaro better get off his cushion and go translate the > Mahaculasunnata Sutta for you. > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > BA: For your information, a complete set (152 suttas) of the Majjhima > Nikaya in English is available at: > > http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/index.html > > Metta > Binh > > PS. If the above URL is too long to fit in one line, try this first: > > http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/ > > --------------------------- Ah, Anders has no excuse to buy it now. Maybe he ought to buy the Samyutta after all. 7514 From: Joshua Date: Sat Aug 18, 2001 1:56pm Subject: Re: An Invitation to All Here (hopefully no one > here will take offense at my using that term; it is not meant at all > to imply anything derogatory about Theravada, as some foolish > sectarians sometimes do by implying Theravada is "Hinayana," > or "lesser vehicle", which is FAR from the truth of things--because > it IS the actual Ariyan Dhamma and as such, in perfect accord with > ALL the teachings of Lord Buddha) See, I've read a small deal of the Pali Canon and am amazedhow much 'Zen' stuff is in it. Why do you think they even wrote different Sutras (The Mahayana)? > (this is only speculation on my part) due to the unwholesome > influence of those who might have mistakenly criticized the Mahayana > as being anariyan Dhamma (which is certainly a common activity today > among many who call themselves Theravadins--those who still actively > promulgate the extremely severe wrong view that the Mahayana doctrine > is somehow a "corrupted" version of the Buddha's Dharma--thus leading > to the very heavy bad kamma of disparaging the Ariyan Dhamma in any > of its extant forms, but I digress). > What happens when you disparage the hell out of something and then stop disparaging it? Still go to hell? > For example, there was one famous debate held on this very point--the > most famous and important debate in Tibet's history--as a means of > establishing the correct Dharma for all Tibetans to study and > practice which exists up to this very day in the Land of Snows, which > was held in Lhasa during the years 792-4, between the Chinese > monk "Hvashang Mohoyan," who made the claim that enlightenment > was "sudden" and there was no need to do anything. His main > challenger in this debate was the renowned Master Kamalasila, the > great Indian sage and disciple of Santarakshita (a contemporary of > the legendary Padmasambhava, a.k.a. Guru Rinpoche), who was > instrumental in helping bring the Buddhist Dharma into Tibet from > India during the first period of the Dharma's propagation in > the "rooftop of the world." > > The particular debate was overseen by the Tibetan King Trisong Detsen > (himself considered to be an emanation of Manjushri), and it was > through this long, epistolary debate, spanning two years, that it was > finally made clear and decisively indicated by King Trisong Detsen to > from then on reject the teachings of the Chinese monk Hvashan'g > interpretation of the Dharma--specifically that one need do "nothing > at all," that enlightenment just happens spontaneously, as a > corrupted version of the Dharma; and to instead take up > Santaraksita's (and Kamalasila's) linage teachings on gradual > cultivation (with the understanding that insight-wisdom yet arises in > a flash after much diligent effort at cultivation). > Would that make Sudden Enlightenment Ch'an Buddhism corrupt, or just corrupt for Tibetans? And did they really say, "Just sit around and BOOM!" or more that they emphasized undirected awareness instead of the progressive meditations? Maybe I ought to read the article.... In dharma Joshua 2001 7515 From: Erik Date: Sat Aug 18, 2001 4:21pm Subject: Re: An Invitation to All Here --- Erik wrote: > What happens when you disparage the hell out of something and then stop disparaging it? Still go to hell? Fortunately, even the heaviest misdeeds can be purified in this lifetime by diligently applying Right Effort: abandoning what is unskillful and taking up what is skillful! :) :) :) And es[pecially, to diligently attempt to straighten one's views through carefuly reflection and dispassionate analysis of all points of Dhamma under discussion--not through a "mere agreement on views," for example, but through coming to direct understanding by following the prescription the Buddha gave the Kalamas, for example. > Would that make Sudden Enlightenment Ch'an Buddhism corrupt, or just corrupt for Tibetans? There was NO suggestion "Ch'an" as a system is corrupt, just to be perfectly clear! Not even close! It was one famous monk's particular INTERPRETATION of Ch'an doctrines which disparaged actual meditation practice which emphasized non-thinking and just experiencing (for example, among other things--and please forgiev me if I mix up a few details, as I have admittedly faulty recollection of all the underlying issue of the debate) that was challenged by Master Kamalasila. To begin the process of separating the wheat from the chaff, I'd perfer to use the Buddha's own guidelines from the Suttas here: "Gotami, the qualities of which you may know, 'These qualities lead to passion, not to dispassion; to being fettered, not to being unfettered; to accumulating, not to shedding; to self-aggrandizement, not to modesty; to discontent, not to contentment; to entanglement, not to seclusion; to laziness, not to aroused persistence; to being burdensome, not to being unburdensome': You may definitely hold, 'This is not the Dhamma, this is not the Vinaya, this is not the Teacher's instruction.' "As for the qualities of which you may know, 'These qualities lead to dispassion, not to passion; to being unfettered, not to being fettered; to shedding, not to accumulating; to modesty, not to self- aggrandizement; to contentment, not to discontent; to seclusion, not to entanglement; ****to aroused persistence, not to laziness****; to being unburdensome, not to being burdensome': You may definitely hold, 'This is the Dhamma, this is the Vinaya, this is the Teacher's instruction.'" > And did they really say, "Just sit around and BOOM!" or more that they emphasized undirected awareness instead of the progressive meditations? That is my general (and admittedly faulty recolletion) of an important general point of the debate--or at least a very near variation on this general theme, and it may not have even involved so much as even sitting with no thoughts in the mind, but rather, doing nothing at all, not even bothering to sit! > Maybe I ought to read the article.... Please do. There are MANY subtle point to this debate, and many variations on it, and also many definitions of "sudden" vs. "gradual" as well, and the point you raise here is another angle on this sort of thing, yet another debate, which may have actually been a part of this very debate at Samye, but I can't recall right now all the details. For the record, I have no quibbles with "sudden"--if interperted in the sense that enlightenment, after gradual cultivation of mundane factors, happens in a single instant, and then is gradually deepened, and is aagin interspersed with "sudden" flashes of insight which arise to terminate more fetters, all the way to arahat or Buddhahood. That idea is also fully supported by the Abhidhamma and all the teachings of my school, for example. And just to add another point. There ARE skill-in-means teachings that emphasize the wisdom aspect of insatntaneously recognizing our true, undefiled nature, such as found in Zen and even moresoe, in practices like Dzogchen. However, does Ch'an/Zen (or even Dzogchen) as we know it discourage the practice of meditation, for example? To the contrary! The very NAMES of these great and correct traditions of the Ariyan Dharma derive from the Sanskrit "dhyana" (Pali "jhana"), and emphasize sitting ameditation beginning with following the breath, as well as walking meditation (kinhin), as INTEGRAL aspects of bhavana--in fact, as THE MAIN aspects of these paticular paths! On the other hand, if it is ever suggested that a view is Right View and that view discourages the directed and diligent practice of meditation, for example, Right Mindfulness as taught in the Maha- Satipatthana Sutta, or denies the importance of Right Concentration, or especially, discourages the forerunner of these two, Right Effort, then that would not at all be in accord with the Buddha's Dharma. Again, if there is the suggestion, by anyone preaching the Dhamma, that ANY ONE OF THESE EIGHT LIMBS IS OPTIONAL, then that would be at DIRECT variance with the Buddha's Dhamma as expounded repeatedly in his Discourse on Right View, and THAT view would NOT be in accord with the teacher's instruction, if one goes by the Buddha's own definition of cleaving Dhamma from adhamma, as he says in the passage above (from AN VIII.53). The gist of all of this is that one cannot abandon any of the limbs of the Noble Eightfold Path and be said to have Right View. By the Buddha's own definition, Right View includes the understanding of suffering, its origin, its cessation, AND the PATH LEADING TO ITS CESSATION, which is none other than the Noble Eightfold Path (of which Right View is of course the forerunner). Please refer to the Sammaditthi Sutta where in EVERY instance of how one is possessed of Right View the Buddha never fails to include, as a condition of Right View, that one FULLY know: "The way leading to the cessation of ignorance is just this Noble Eightfold Path; that is, Right view, Right Resolve, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood, ***Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, and Right Concentration.***" And as I understand it, while there were many points debated this particular debate at Samye Ling (Tibet's first monastery, bhy the way) from the aforementioned paper: "An examination of the content of these debates reveals that the putative issue-the sudden/gradual controversy-included a whole complex of issues which can be grouped into various sets of polarities (e.g., insight vs. concentration, activity vs. rest, developed vs. innate Buddhahood, the obligatory nature of moral practices vs. their natural unfolding, etc.)....The sudden/gradual controversy thus does not divide along any single polarity. Nor does there seem to be any way to predict the specific doctrinal positions of a proponent of one side or the other in the debates. Nevertheless, there is considerable overlap in the way clusters of positions group together in the actual debates. Sudden and gradual therefore do not form a simple and static polarity, but represent more, two opposing modes of thought which can best be translated into the basic, and very general, dichotomy of intuition and effort." So from this, one can hopefully see that at least one important component of this debate related to practices such as cultivating Right Effort, as well as the other limbs like Right Mindfulness and Right Concentration. And again, to reiterate, nothing about this debate was in any way a condemnation of Ch'an, nor was there any implication in the slightest way that Ch'an or Zen (or Theravada!) are corruptions of the Dhamma! This was rather rather a challenge on a consetallation of points of Dharma, which after lengthy epistolary debate spanning at least two years, these issues were hashed back and forth in great detail, and after lengthy and careful consideration, that the views propounded by "Hvashang Mohoyan" were determined to be subtle distortions of the Buddha's Dharma, thus leading to the establishment of the Indian flavor of the Dharma in Tibet as propounded by Santaksita and his chief disciple Master Kamalasila (keep in mind the Tibetans used this ruthless winnowing process throughout the propagation of the Dharma there, and ONLY after long and careful consideration were there any decisions made). Some more relevant citations on this specific debate from the web: "Over a two-year period (792-794) a debate was held between Kamalashila, the Indian pandit, and Hoshang, a renowned Chinese Buddhist monk. The debate was held at Samye and was presided over by Trisong Detsen. The Chinese Hoshang school maintained that enlightenment was an instantaneous realization that could be attained only through complete mental and physical inactivity. The Indian school maintained that enlightenment was a slow process, requiring an individual's gradual mental and moral development. At the end of the debate the Tibetan king declared Kamalashila the winner and issued a proclamation establishing Buddhism as the state religion of Tibet." And another one: "My feeling is that if Santarakshita built a separate wing in the Samye temple for the residence of the Chinese Chan masters, he must have welcomed that tradition and recognized it as an important element of Buddhism in Tibet. However, it seems that during the time of his disciple, Kamalashila, certain followers of Chan in Tibet perhaps promoted a slightly different version of the original doctrine. They placed tremendous emphasis on rejecting all forms of thought, not just in the context of a specific practice, but almost as a philosophical position. This is what Kamalashila attacked. Therefore, it seems to me, there were two different versions of Chan that came to Tibet." The Buddha himself spoke clearly on the "Five Future Dangers" leading to the corruption of his teachings: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an05-077.html For example, Lord Buddha spoke quite clearly on this: "There will be in the course of the future monks undeveloped in bodily conduct... virtue... mind... discernment. They -- being undeveloped in bodily conduct... virtue... mind... discernment -- will become elders living in luxury, lethargic, foremost in falling back, shirking the duties of solitude. ******They will not make an effort for the attaining of the as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the as-yet-unreached, the realization of the as-yet-unrealized. They will become an example for later generations, who will become luxurious in their living, lethargic, foremost in falling back, shirking the duties of solitude, and who will not make an effort for the attaining of the as-yet-unattained, the reaching of the as-yet- unreached, the realization of the as-yet-unrealized******. Thus from corrupt Dhamma comes corrupt discipline; from corrupt discipline, corrupt Dhamma. This, monks, is the fifth future danger, unarisen at present, that will arise in the future. Be alert to it and, being alert, work to get rid of it." The reason such debates sometime seem so fierce is because, to quote Robert (if I may, and Sadhu! Sadhu! Sadhu! Robert for this important point): "It is the monks who keep strict sila and who study the abhidhamma BUT who, in very subtle ways, distort the practice who seem most dangerous. This is counterfeit Dhamma that is very hard to detect - hence it tricks many people, even those who teach it. It is hard to detect because it mixes right and wrong and thus benefits in some ways while hurting in others." I hope this help to put this LIFE AND DEATH issue into clearer perspective. :) 7516 From: Sarah Date: Sat Aug 18, 2001 4:33pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation - Anders & Sarah Dear Anders, These were really interesting sutta extracts you quoted which encouraged me to consider and research further, thankyou. I also checked some of the Pali (with help from Jim). --- Anders Honoré wrote: > > > There's a sutta which says: > > > "Luminous, monks, is the mind, and it is defiled by incoming > defilements. > > > "Luminous, monks, is the mind, and it is free'd from incoming > defilements." > > > > > > That seems to be a mind pretty much unconditioned conditioned factors, > as it > > > retains its luminousity in spite of conditioned circumstances > > Sarah: > > Anders, whenever the mind is referred to, I understand that cittas ( > > conditioned moments of consciousness) are being referred to and indeed the > > Buddha made it clear there are only 5 khandhas, not 5 khandhas and a mind. > Anders:> Five Kandhas and Nibbana? -------------------------------------- No Nibbana while there are defilements- just the 5 khandhas of grasping. Mind is translated from citta. The sutta explains a little later that 'the learned, noble disciple (ariyasaavakassa) has developed the mind (cittabhaavanaa)' in the sense of understanding it as it really is (yathaabhuuta.m pajaanaati). All realities and mind-states, including the defilements (upakilesas) have to be known as stressed here. I understand the 'pure or luminous mind-states' to refer to bhavanga cittas before objects impinge on the 6 door-ways giving rise to the defilements. Anders, this is not an easy sutta at all and I gave more detail last time. This deep consideration and reflection may seem unnecessary, but just to quote from one of the lines following yours above, 'for the ordinary person (puthujjanassa) who has not listened (assutavato), there is no mental development (cittabhaavanaa). " Anders: > > >(and this > > > pretty much accords with the Tathagatagarbha doctrine: That Nirvana is > > > always present in us, Regardless of it is realised or not). Sarah: > > Not according to the Tipitaka as we understand it. Anders: > Well, then I would like your opinion on this: Do you regard the Mahayana > Canon as being contradictory to the Buddha's true teachings? An answer to > this, would make the discussion a whole lot clearer. ---------------------------------- Those of you who've studied the Mahayana teachings in depth will be able to answer that bettter;-)) If you understand it to say that Nirvana/Nibbana 'is always present in us' it sounds contradictory to me! ************************************************************** With regard to the MN 49 (24-26) passage you quoted: Sarah: >> B.Bodhi translates the passage as: > > 'the consciousness that makes no showing, > > And in becoming about to disbecome, > > Not claiming being with respect to all: > > that is not partaken of by the earthness of earth etc Maj NIk, 49, The Invitation of a Brahma,24-26 -------------------------------- The word 'consciousness' is translated from 'vi~n~naa.na.m' to be understood as 'cognizable' (vijaanitabba.m) and not consciousness according to the com. as explained to me. As I mentioned, BB also added in his notes (513). , Sarah: >>"MA takes > >the subject of the sentence to be Nibbana, called 'consciousness' in the > >sense that "it can be cognized" '. ----------------------------------- Perhaps another translation of the first line could be: 'Cognizable (vi~n~naa.na.m), invisible (anidassana.m), shininig in all directions (ananta.m sabbatopabha)' Anders: > Hmm, well, we enter the realm of speculation as regards to the definition of > "consciousness" in this case. -------------------------------------- I think we all agree it refers to Nibbana. Sarah > >, but I fail to see why this description of nibbana has anything to > do > > with the idea of Nivana being present in us..... --------------------------------------- I hope that clarifies and thanks for raising these tricky lines! ******************************************************** Anders:> > > But as I said, I'm not the first to say something like this. Quote Ajahn > > > Chah: > > Sarah: > > I think I'll leave comments on his writings as I may misunderstand him. > Anders: > And Mun? Pls re-quote a relevant paragraph for either if you particularly think my comments may be of any interest! (Sorry, I don't have the original anymore). I admit I prefer discussing Tipitaka suttas or the understanding of members like yourself! ********************************************************* ------------------------------------- Finally, you quoted from Ang Nik, bk of Tens, 81, Bahuna (Pali, Text V, 151-2) Sarah: > > I find the 'unrestricted awareness' to be misleading ------------------------------ Now I find the Pali in the last line (vimariyaadikatena cetasaa viharatii ti) means literally ' with a mind made without boundary. The com. mentions 'having severed the boundary of the defilements' (kilesamariyaada.m bhinditva . . .)which is much closer to the translation and my comment below I think. Sarah: > > Here (PTS translation) it says (with my notes after S.): > > 'The Wayfarer dwells free, detached and released from physical body, > > feeling,perception, mental factors and consciousness detached > > and released in the sense of no clinging to the 5 khandhas>....from > rebirth, > > decay and death ....from the passions, > Bahuna, > > the Wayfarer is free, detached and released, and dwells with a mind whose > > barriers are broken down' > kilesa eradicated, so no more akusala cittas> Anders: > "The Wayfarer" as with Tathagata is of course a conventional image, but do > we find support in the Sutta pitaka for the view that this conventional > image does not point to an actuality (Nibbana-mind - Buddha-nature)? ---------------------------------------- There is no suggestion of a Buddha nature here.....As you suggest, Wayfarer (not my favourite term!) or Tathagata or merely conventional terms: '....So, When the khandhas are present, 'A being is said in common usage' (KS 1, 135) ********************************************** Anders: > Hmm, I don't know what to make of the Abhidhamma myself, so I am uncertain > as to its validity. I was told just today by someone that Buddhasasa once > commented that the Abidhamma could easily be canned without much lost, and > many other famous teachers have actually joined in this view (Ajahn Chah, I > think, too). Yes, well as others have pointed out, there will be a day when the whole Tiptitaka is canned because no one can understand it or see its relevance:-)) I believe many modern famous teachers would benefit a lot from a greater appreciation and understanding of abhidhamma, but I know this is controversial;-)) Anders: > Well, I must say I find this discussion fascinating. I am sorry for being so > late to reply to all messages, but I have been quite busy recently. School > started just this week, so my interaction on this forum might be somewhat > limited in the near future. ------------------------------------------------- Anders, please don't ever be sorry for replying late...there are no time limits at all here.I hope Shool is going well and please look in from time to time. We all appreciate your dhamma contributions here! This has been quite challenging for me, but I've really appreciated the chance to look at the suttas and the pali. Btw, I had another look at your site the other day (sorry the link isn't handy) and I was very impressed. (Just surprised dsg wasn't mentioned amongst your many discussion groups and hadn't received its 'gold cup' yet;-)) ) One of these days, Jon and I are going to turn up in Elsinore to go on a long walk in your woods discussing dhamma with you! In the meantime, we look forward to more rewarding chats with you here! Thanks Anders, Sarah ********************************************************** 7517 From: Herman Date: Sat Aug 18, 2001 4:37pm Subject: Re: The limits of awareness Dear Kom, Comments follow interspersed with yours. --- "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > Dear Herman, > > Do you not at all accept the possibility that, although something is > unproveable to you now, that it is the way it is. I am not talking about > faith, but just the acceptance of the possibility that something is there > when you haven't experienced it, or even if you *don't* believe in it. Yes, I certainly accept the limits of my own awareness, and that other people and beings have abilities far different to my own. > > I did give you an advanced warning about the immediate *unprovability* > of that concept... ;-) I was only relating that this is an accepted > Theravadin view. You can prove it of course, by developing arupa jhana, > and when you die, you can see if you re-appear in an arupa world... What would seeing be like in an arupa world? I hope I am not being to picky :-) I am trying to keep an open mind. > > I am curious about something. You mentioned in the past that you are a > student of reality, not really a Buddhist who places great faith in the > Buddha's words. How else do you expand your learning of realities > besides being associated with Buddhists who place great emphasis (or a > few of them, anyway) on the Buddha's words? Being the proud father of a number of boys I have come to accept that you cannot teach anyone anything. You can be the unknowing trigger to activating things that are potentially already there, and if those potentials are not there, one is wasting one's time trying to trigger anything. The capacity for learning is built into most babies, and over time those babies learn to speak Chinese, Dutch or Swahili. They also learn to walk, tie shoe laces, and other imitations of cultural practises in their milieu. Some become devout Catholics, others Buddhists, Jews , atheists etc. Then over time, while matching experience against what one has been taught, some people learn to accept that what they have accepted to be true as a child or young person, is not a useful model for further categorisation of experience. I used to be the minister of a Christian church. I quit when I could no longer maintain a belief in the things I was supposed to be teaching other people. So what I have learnt over time is to ruminate, redigest, chew over again and again the things that were spoonfed to me. I may yet end up in the Christian version of hell, and if I do I'll have a few things to say to the administrators there, don't you worry :-) Have you learned anything > (in and out of Buddhisms) recently that you would like to share? > I realised the other day that I had driven all the way to work without being aware of anything else except for thoughts about your post. I take this to suggest that the body sees, hears, feels a multitude of things all the time, and that awareness is not really an essential component of the machinations of daily life. > kom > > ps: I haven't seen any devas either, although if I see one in this life, I > most likely would interpret it as something else except for devas. Yes , same here. Regards Herman > > > --- Herman wrote: > > Dear Kom, > > > > The beings in the arupa plane are, of course, also unprovable. And > > there is a distinct lack of devas lighting up my grove at night :- ) > > > > The only seeing I am capable of always includes the tip of my nose as > > object, though I tend to ignore it. > > > > Regards > > > > > > Herman 7518 From: Sarah Date: Sat Aug 18, 2001 4:45pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Eightfold path - Mundane and not so mundane... Hi Anders, Anders Honoré wrote: > Hi, all. > > I think everybody here knows what constitutes the Mundane Eightfold Path. > But I was wondering if anyone here might want to try and give a definition > of the supramundane eightfold path for me? Thanks. I was going to reply to this as well, but all my brain cells have been used up on the last post, so may I suggest you read posts under Eightfold Path in 'Useful Posts' and come back with questions or comments? What is your particular interest here? Sarah http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts Anders Honoré wrote: > Hi, all. > > I think everybody here knows what constitutes the Mundane Eightfold Path. > But I was wondering if anyone here might want to try and give a definition > of the supramundane eightfold path for me? Thanks. 7519 From: Sarah Date: Sat Aug 18, 2001 5:00pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drugs and the Dharma Dear Gayan, This was interesting and I've been meaning to write a 'quickie'! --- Asterix 7 wrote: > > I made a vow to myself that I will stop all 'majjapamadatthana' > (intoxicants) and meat eating for a while. > So I spent two years of drug-abstinence and pure-vegetarianism > (vegetarianism was just for the fun of it, trying to see that whether > I can live without the meat eating I love so much - Obelix was my > childhood hero), that 2 years expired on last week (27th july). > > So now, I again started breaking the precepts, impermanence of > the 'happiness' is evident again, > I confess that I was looking forward to the 'day' ( not during the > whole 2 years :o) , only in the last week, ) > fantasizing about all the beverages I can drink, all the substances > that I can use to get stoned, ( all the dishes that I can eat). > {ridiculous, I agree} Firstly, I don't read anywhere that the Buddha advocated vegitarianism and there are examples in the Tipitaka to the contrary. Personally, I eat very little meat, but that's a health choice rather than an act of sila..... When I first travelled with Khun Sujin in Sri Lanka, I was strictly vegitarian at the time and was being very fussy about what I could and couldn't eat....She'd say to me: "Khun Sarah, have just a little of this and a little of that to please the hostess...kusala cittas are more important" or something very similar...I can still hear her saying it so sweetly more than 25yrs ago. (Nina probably remembers too!) With regard to the precepts and vows, we can see how these can be followed for a very long time, but sooner or later when there are the right conditions they will be broken if enough wisdom has not been accumulated. I've known monks who've kept excellent vinaya for long periods, but when they disrobe, the same accumulations and tendencies are there. Even if one remains a monk for the rest of this life, what about next life? > > And of course when the experience is finally realised , it lost its > appeal, good old unsatisfactoriness came to me again. Good;-)) Let us know how it goes! Thanks Gayan for sharing your experiences....I always enjoy hearing from you! Sarah 7520 From: Sarah Date: Sat Aug 18, 2001 5:13pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Jhanas Are Within Our Reach Dear Suan, Thanks for all your contributions here..it's always good to hear from you. I must say I have a lot of reservations about your post below however: > " is it important to know that one is in the first or second (or > whatever) Jhana and if so why?" > > Reason? A simple reason is that one thing leads to another. As you > might have read this phenomenon in Visuddhimagga, when we become > quite skillful in a practice, we kind of get bored! We want to try > out something slightly different and difficult, don't we? > > Mental cultivation practices are very addictive (the only case of > good addiction?) because they are our very minds in progress, > literally. Once you are hooked, you want to go further and further. > So if you ever get to the stage of pre-jhanic concentration (upaca > samadhi), you won't stop at there. You would go for the First Jhana > in due course. And you know what you don't like at the present level, > and you would make every effort to get rid of it or them. As a > result, you would end up at the next higher level of jhana. Suan, it all sounds very easy as af anyone can just decide to go for levels of jhana without any understanding of the development of samatha and without clearly understand how a particular object calms the mind or the difference between kusala and akusala cittas (wholesome and unwholesome mental states) at this moment. I know that many teachers encourage these views, but I find them quite disturbing. > > You also wrote: > > "Having asked that let me also add that I do not think (perhaps hope) > that Jhana practice is not out of reach for anyone with diligent > persistence and a very good teacher as guide. What do you think?" > > I agree with you. The most important keyword to remember to make > jhana within our reach is the phrase ".. only by keeping away from > sensuous preoccupations (kamesu vivicceva)". Once you understand this > keyword and like the idea of it, you are on your way to jhana. What about as soon as we open our eyes or hear a sound? Sensuous preoccupations immediately! No self that can stop or control clinging at these times. > Nothing can stop you. Jhana is within reach of anyone who could turn > their back on sensuous preoccupations. As simple as that (in theory, > of course)! In theory! I'm not sure how far this discussion will go, but I'd like to encourage you (and others) to consider a little more! Sarah 7521 From: Sarah Date: Sat Aug 18, 2001 8:34pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation - Robert E Dear Rob E. Thanks for your many skilful and interesting posts to Kom and others. In one you mentioned that you 'sometimes step off a limb on this list', using your 'own logic and my knowledge of Buddhism...'. I'd just like to encourage you to 'step off a limb' as much as you'd like and I hope you're finding the discussions rewarding. --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > Do I really exist? When I've tried to look into the 'non-existence of self' > personally, in the past I was just confused. But lately when I've tried to > investigate this, there has been more of a conviction that there is no "I" as > a > kind of internal entity, but that "Robert E." is a habitual convention of > thought, > feeling and belief. If I accept the fact that Robert E. does not really > exist as > such, there is a feeling of loneliness that arises. It is as if this system, > this > bodymind, is very sad without the thought of an ego inhabiting it. When it > cognizes its own existence as nothing but a series of arisings with no > inhabitant > to experience them, there is a feeling of sadness, almost of despair. > There are many wise words here and you seem to be appreciating the core of the Buddha's Teachings. it seems for many people that when understanding begins to develop there are these times of despair, sadness or loneliness arising at times. I think it's thinking with aversion (dosa) and of course it doesn't last. Of course as we know, clinging (whether to a self or anything else) brings aversion and sadness in its wake. Of course loneliness and living alone are very different. The first is a kind of aversion but living alone at a moment of seeing or hearing without the bondage of craving , whether we are in the city or forest is what the Buddha encouraged us to do: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn35-063.html I've always found this particular sutta to be really inspiring. Instead of being depressing or lonely, being aware of these realities as not self is liberating and uplifting I think. Rob E, ....let me just encourage you to keep posting and sharing your experiences. Sarah 7522 From: m. nease Date: Sat Aug 18, 2001 8:49pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation - Robert E Dear Sarah and Robert E., --- Sarah wrote: --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > When it > > cognizes its own existence as nothing but a series > of arisings with no > > inhabitant > > to experience them, there is a feeling of sadness, > almost of despair. I've been thinking about Robert's post too. I had the same thought as Sarah re. grief (my interpretation) as aversion. But I was reminded of this: "'Grief is of two sorts, I tell you: to be pursued & not to be pursued.' Thus was it said. And in reference to what was it said? When one knows of a feeling of grief, 'As I pursue this grief, unskillful mental qualities increase, and skillful mental qualities decline,' that sort of grief is not to be pursued. When one knows of a feeling of grief, 'As I pursue this grief, unskillful mental qualities decline, and skillful mental qualities increase,' that sort of grief is to be pursued. And this sort of grief may be accompanied by directed thought & evaluation or free of directed thought & evaluation. Of the two, the latter is the more refined. 'Grief is of two sorts, I tell you: to be pursued & not to be pursued.' Thus was it said. And in reference to this was it said. Digha Nikaya 21 Sakka-pañha Sutta Sakka's Questions http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/dn21.html Since I'm confident that the Buddha never suggested any kind of akusala was to be pursued, this seems to me to suggest there's a kind of grief that isn't aversion? This doesn't make much sense to me however. One of Ajahn Chah's students often said that there's the dukkha leading to more dukkha and the dukkha leading out of dukkha. This seems more to the point but unfortunately I can't cite it from the Dhammavinaya. mike 7523 From: Sarah Date: Sat Aug 18, 2001 10:01pm Subject: Good Grief! Dear Mike (and Rob E), Funny, I nearly dropped you a line a short while ago when I had trouble locating the Migajala Sutta (I'm just hopeless at remembering the names and locations!) but Jon came to my rescue for once;-)) --- "m. nease" wrote: > I've been thinking about Robert's post too. Right, some first-hand experience...;-)) I had the > same thought as Sarah re. grief (my interpretation) as > aversion. Yes a bit too much aversion in my post...thanks for another word! But I was reminded of this: > > "'Grief is of two sorts, I tell you: to be pursued & > not to be pursued.' Thus was it said. And in reference > to what was it said? When one knows of a feeling of > grief, 'As I pursue this grief, unskillful mental > qualities increase, and skillful mental qualities > decline,' that sort of grief is not to be pursued. > When one knows of a feeling of grief, 'As I pursue > this grief, unskillful mental qualities decline, and > skillful mental qualities increase,' that sort of > grief is to be pursued. And this sort of grief may be > accompanied by directed thought & evaluation or free > of directed thought & evaluation. Of the two, the > latter is the more refined. 'Grief is of two sorts, I > tell you: to be pursued & not to be pursued.' Thus was > it said. And in reference to this was it said. > > Digha Nikaya 21 > Sakka-pañha Sutta > Sakka's Questions > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/dn21.html > > Since I'm confident that the Buddha never suggested > any kind of akusala was to be pursued, this seems to > me to suggest there's a kind of grief that isn't > aversion? This is a very quick stab as I look at my BB translation without reading the full sutta: I think the sentence before this verse (actually the preceding 2 paragraphs) which says: 'Well, sir, what prctice has the monk undertaken, who has reached the right way which is needful and leading to the cessation of the tendency to proliferation?" In other words, I think we should read the verse in the light of seeing the danger/overcoming our old dsg 'friends', the papanca (proliferations). It would be interesting to consider the Pali here, but I wonder if the meaning isn't related to pursuing or not pursuing the papanca with regard to pleasant feeling, unpleasant feeling and neutral feeling, (somanasa, domanassa and upekkha). As it said in the preceding paragraph 'When the mind thinks about something, desire arises; when the mind thinks about nothing, desire does not arise.......Thinking...arises from the tendency to proliferation (papanca). This doesn't make much sense to me however. > One of Ajahn Chah's students often said that there's > the dukkha leading to more dukkha and the dukkha > leading out of dukkha. This seems more to the point > but unfortunately I can't cite it from the > Dhammavinaya. I've no idea what he means, but one could say that as all conditioned realities are dukkha, some (i.e all akusala cittas and even those kusala cittas which are adding bricks to samsara) lead to more dukkha and others (5fold and 8fold path factors) are leading out of dukkha.... I won't buy the good anger/grief/aversion theory, but others may! Look forward to more, Mike......sleep-time for me! Sarah P.s. I hope you approve of the new subject heading as we're no longer in Parinibbana mode her..... 7524 From: Joshua Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 0:39am Subject: Re: Drugs and the Dharma > Firstly, I don't read anywhere that the Buddha advocated vegitarianism and > there are examples in the Tipitaka to the contrary. Jivaka Sutta, Majjhima Nikaya 55 I read that Roshi Philip Kapleau said that the Hinayana monks fabricated the Sutta because they liked eating meat. Thank Heavens they didn't like visiting brothels! 7525 From: m. nease Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 0:43am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Good Grief! Dear Sarah, --- Sarah wrote: > I think the sentence before this verse (actually the > preceding 2 paragraphs) > which says: > > 'Well, sir, what prctice has the monk undertaken, > who has reached the right way > which is needful and leading to the cessation of the > tendency to > proliferation?" > > In other words, I think we should read the verse in > the light of seeing the > danger/overcoming our old dsg 'friends', the papanca > (proliferations). It > would be interesting to consider the Pali here, but > I wonder if the meaning > isn't related to pursuing or not pursuing the > papanca with regard to pleasant > feeling, unpleasant feeling and neutral feeling, > (somanasa, domanassa and > upekkha). As it said in the preceding paragraph > 'When the mind thinks about > something, desire arises; when the mind thinks about > nothing, desire does not > arise.......Thinking...arises from the tendency to > proliferation (papanca). This is an interesting analysis. The context you added does make more sense of it, it particularly the reference to papañca and to thought. It doesn't seem reasonable to me that 'pursuit or non-pursuit of papañca' is meant, as papañca is alway akusala. Still the reference papañca is obviously significant. So is the reference to thought. Since he is referring to something to be pursued, it may be skilful thought (e.g. of beneveolence, non-harming and renunciation, as these thoughts are extolled elsewhere in the suttas and the vinaya). Though even kusala thoughts do, as you said, 'add bricks', and are no doubt inferior to satipatthana, they are certainly superior to akusala thoughts, as the Buddha often pointed out (ditto of course for words and deeds). As you said it would be good to know the Paali. And it would be good to know what the commentaries have to say. > This doesn't make much sense to me however. > > One of Ajahn Chah's students often said that > there's > > the dukkha leading to more dukkha and the dukkha > > leading out of dukkha. This seems more to the > point > > but unfortunately I can't cite it from the > > Dhammavinaya. > > I've no idea what he means, but one could say that > as all conditioned realities > are dukkha, some (i.e all akusala cittas and even > those kusala cittas which are > adding bricks to samsara) lead to more dukkha and > others (5fold and 8fold path > factors) are leading out of dukkha.... I think this is correct except that certain kusala cittas do lead to the Path even though they aren't the Path (if I understand what you mean by 'kusala cittas'). In other words (and for example), kusala in general (theoretically) leads to rebirth in (or of) conditions favorable to hearing and understanding the Dhamma. Maybe this is why the Buddha didn't just say, 'practice satipatthaana' and drop it there. > I won't buy the good anger/grief/aversion theory, > but others may! I don't either. This reminds me of hiri and ottapa (shame and fear) which also sound like aversion but are considered kusala. mike 7526 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 1:01am Subject: undesirable objects Dear Eric, thank you for the verses by Geshe Langri Tangpa and Shantideva, on patience, especially with regard to the eight worldly conditions, we can never have enough reminders. I also appreciate it that you speak about your remarkable personal experiences when you were in trouble. We meet people who behave like enemies but now they can be our teachers, I like that very much. Nina. 7527 From: Num Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 10:08am Subject: Re: Drugs and the Dharma Hi Sarah and o0ss12345, Sorry, o0ss12345, for not addressing your name properly. I am kind of lost after got back from vacation, DSG is pretty busy and very popular with a lot of messages. BTW my name is Num. > > Firstly, I don't read anywhere that the Buddha advocated vegitarianism and > > there are examples in the Tipitaka to the contrary. > > Jivaka Sutta, Majjhima Nikaya 55 > > I read that Roshi Philip Kapleau said that the Hinayana monks fabricated the Sutta because they liked eating meat. Thank Heavens they didn't like visiting brothels! From what I remembered from my hi-school class, the Buddha mentioned 10 different kinds of meat that improper to eat. I kind of remember there is a sutta about a group of Brahmins looked down on the Buddha that he still ate meat, and how said that how could he say that he live a holy, higher life. And he explained them that purity comes from one's deed not from what one ate, as well as the mind can be impure even one does not eat meat b/c he is not free from lobha/dosa and moha. Pra-Dhevadhatta ( the Buddha's Cousin) also asked the Buddha to lay down the precept that the monk should completely abstain from meat-eating but the Buddha did not grant that, anyway a big group of monks agreed with Pra Devathatta and followed his idea. And I think the Buddha did not say that vegetarianism is wrong, some of his great disciples were vegetarian. Sorry, I could not come up with the referenece. I could not open my Thai tipitaka CD, something wrong with it. I did look upon accesstoinsight, Jivaka sutta there is under Anguttara nikaya and it is not about vegetarianism. Some of my friends are vegetarian and they are kind of surprised that I am a Buddist and still eat meat. They say eventhough I not kill the animal but if I still eat meat, someone else needs to them for me anyway. Num 7528 From: Joshua Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 1:47pm Subject: Re: Drugs and the Dharma > From what I remembered from my hi-school class, > the Buddha mentioned 10 different kinds of meat > that improper to eat. Well, I think he said not to eat dogs, but there was a more cultural than kammic reason for this, I believe. I wouldn't fault anyone for eating a dog or an elephant. > I could not open my Thai tipitaka CD, something > wrong with it. I did look upon accesstoinsight, > Jivaka sutta there is under Anguttara nikaya and it > is not about vegetarianism. Ah, check the Majjhima Nikaya. I don't know if it's on access to insight or not, but thanks to Binh Anson no one has to shell out 50 bucks to get the full Majjhima. Accesstoinsight, understandably, leaves out some of the more shocking suttas, like the one where an Arahant kills himself (not out of mental pain, mind you). > Some of my friends are vegetarian and they are kind > of surprised that I am a Buddist and still eat meat. > They say eventhough I not kill the animal but if I > still eat meat, someone else needs to them for me > anyway. What attracted me to Buddhism in the first place was it was a vegetarian (or so I thought) religion without Bhagwhans in Mansions. I figured it must be good if it accorded with my ignorant, self-aggrandizing views. But then, in the course of time, I ate a beef burrito, and never looked back... 7529 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 1:57pm Subject: Re: Drugs and the Dharma Hi Num, and All, Monks are forbidden to eat the flesh of humans, elephants, horses, dogs, snakes, lions, tigers, leopards, bears, hyenas, and panthers. Also, raw fish or meat; or any fish or meat that he sees, hears or suspects was killed specifically for him. These rules do not imply that a monk must not eat meat - only that a monk must be careful as to which kinds of meat he does eat. Also, there are six articles on Buddhism and Vegetarianism on: http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebidx.htm 1. On Vegetarianism - compiled by Binh Anson 2. What the Buddha said about eating meat - Ajahn Bramavamso 3. Buddhism and Vegetarianism - Ajahn Jagaro 4. Buddhism and Vegetarianism: The Rationale for the Buddhas' views on the consumption of meat - V.A. Gunasekara 5. Are you a 'herbivore' or 'carnivore'? - Jan Sanjivaputta 6. Vegetarianism - Ven. K. S. Dhammananda metta, Christine > Hi Sarah and o0ss12345, > > Sorry, o0ss12345, for not addressing your name > properly. I am kind of lost after got back from > vacation, DSG is pretty busy and very popular with > a lot of messages. BTW my name is Num. > > > > Firstly, I don't read anywhere that the Buddha > advocated vegitarianism and > > > there are examples in the Tipitaka to the > contrary. > > > > Jivaka Sutta, Majjhima Nikaya 55 > > > > I read that Roshi Philip Kapleau said that the > Hinayana monks fabricated the Sutta because they > liked eating meat. Thank Heavens they didn't like > visiting brothels! > > From what I remembered from my hi-school class, > the Buddha mentioned 10 different kinds of meat > that improper to eat. I kind of remember there is a > sutta about a group of Brahmins looked down on > the Buddha that he still ate meat, and how said that > how could he say that he live a holy, higher life. > And he explained them that purity comes from one's > deed not from what one ate, as well as the mind can > be impure even one does not eat meat b/c he is not > free from lobha/dosa and moha. > > Pra-Dhevadhatta ( the Buddha's Cousin) also asked > the Buddha to lay down the precept that the monk > should completely abstain from meat-eating but the > Buddha did not grant that, anyway a big group of > monks agreed with Pra Devathatta and followed his > idea. And I think the Buddha did not say that > vegetarianism is wrong, some of his great disciples > were vegetarian. Sorry, I could not come up with the > referenece. > > I could not open my Thai tipitaka CD, something > wrong with it. I did look upon accesstoinsight, > Jivaka sutta there is under Anguttara nikaya and it > is not about vegetarianism. > > Some of my friends are vegetarian and they are kind > of surprised that I am a Buddist and still eat meat. > They say eventhough I not kill the animal but if I > still eat meat, someone else needs to them for me > anyway. > > Num 7530 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 3:46pm Subject: Re: The limits of awareness Dear Herman, --- Herman wrote: > > I did give you an advanced warning about the immediate > *unprovability* > > of that concept... ;-) I was only relating that this is an > accepted > > Theravadin view. You can prove it of course, by developing arupa > jhana, > > and when you die, you can see if you re-appear in an arupa world... > > What would seeing be like in an arupa world? I hope I am not being to > picky :-) I am trying to keep an open mind. According to the story I have heard, the beings in the arupa plane don't have the 5-sense doors, and therefore, they cannot see, hear, taste, smell, etc (which is why the Buddha couldn't teach his meditation teachers). They exist purely as mental phenomenon which is refined, free of aversion, and very long. > Being the proud father of a number of boys I have come to accept that > you cannot teach anyone anything. You can be the unknowing trigger to > activating things that are potentially already there, and if those > potentials are not there, one is wasting one's time trying to trigger > anything. I think we can relate this to the Buddha as well. Despite his unparalleled teaching ability, he cannot bring wisdom to those who were not ready. We can also see how the interactions in DSG go. We can at best suggest to people that this is how things could plausibly work. It totally depends on the person's accumulation (including reading and considering other people's posts) how the person would take a message. > The capacity for learning is built into most babies, and over time > those babies learn to speak Chinese, Dutch or Swahili. They also > learn to walk, tie shoe laces, and other imitations of cultural > practises in their milieu. Some become devout Catholics, others > Buddhists, Jews , atheists etc. Yes, I notice that animals also (particularly evident for the larger animals) learn. I am pretty sure my roommates' cats learned how to manipulate my behaviors by knowing me for sometimes. > Then over time, while matching experience against what one has been > taught, some people learn to accept that what they have accepted to > be true as a child or young person, is not a useful model for further > categorisation of experience. Thank you for this opportunity to reflect on the wisdom and kindness of the Buddha. Without his teachings, I wouldn't have found a teaching that seems to fit so well to the situations and to my inclination. > So what I have learnt over time is to ruminate, redigest, chew over > again and again the things that were spoonfed to me. I may yet end up > in the Christian version of hell, and if I do I'll have a few things > to say to the administrators there, don't you worry :-) At least you will have us as companions, which should make your eternal stay perhaps seem bearable or even more eternal.... ;-) > I realised the other day that I had driven all the way to work > without being aware of anything else except for thoughts about your > post. I take this to suggest that the body sees, hears, feels a > multitude of things all the time, and that awareness is not really an > essential component of the machinations of daily life. Yes, by the Buddha teachings, awareness or mindfullness only rises with kusala mental states. Do you think our daily life's activities are kusala or akusala? Thank you for sharing the experiences; I enjoyed it. I wouldn't have been able to draw the same conclusion about learning as I don't have any kids! kom 7531 From: Joshua Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 4:06pm Subject: Re: Drugs and the Dharma > Well, I think he said not to eat dogs, but there was a more cultural than kammic reason for this, I believe. I wouldn't fault anyone for eating a dog or an elephant. > > Another example of very, very wrong speech. I suspect they're already drawing straws to see who can cut my tongue out first in hell. 7532 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 4:10pm Subject: Re: Good Grief! Dear Sarah and Mike, I have a fussy explanation about this phenomenon, so please read it at your own risk! If you notice, domanassa vedana is counted as a Jhana Pacaya. This has always puzzled me for a long time, until I recently read from one of the suttas (sorry, can't remember the reference) how the rupa jhana level progresses. Apparently, the piti and somanassa vedana in Jhana is very refined and highly suitable for attachment that when the Jhana mental states stop, the person feels aversion of losing it. This theory is losely collaborated by some sutta that mention that to reach the 5th rupa jhana (where there is no more somanassa, and piti), one must leave both Domanassa and Somanassa. Besides Satipatthana, the Buddha appeared to encourage attaining more and more refined Jhana (perhaps because the kusala is higher, and because the latent tendencies for the 5-sensualities are not being accumulated?). Besides the Arahat, apparently, the aversion toward losing the Jhana is part of attaining higher level of jhana. I hope you have noticed the disclaimer above. This question needs to be discussed some more. kom 7533 From: Sarah Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 4:47pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Good Grief! Dear Mike, --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Sarah, > > --- Sarah wrote: > > > I think the sentence before this verse (actually the > > preceding 2 paragraphs) > > which says: > > > > 'Well, sir, what prctice has the monk undertaken, > > who has reached the right way > > which is needful and leading to the cessation of the > > tendency to > > proliferation?" > > > > In other words, I think we should read the verse in > > the light of seeing the > > danger/overcoming our old dsg 'friends', the papanca > > (proliferations). It > > would be interesting to consider the Pali here, but > > I wonder if the meaning > > isn't related to pursuing or not pursuing the > > papanca with regard to pleasant > > feeling, unpleasant feeling and neutral feeling, > > (somanasa, domanassa and > > upekkha). As it said in the preceding paragraph > > 'When the mind thinks about > > something, desire arises; when the mind thinks about > > nothing, desire does not > > arise.......Thinking...arises from the tendency to > > proliferation (papanca). > > This is an interesting analysis. The context you > added does make more sense of it, it particularly the > reference to papañca and to thought. It doesn't seem > reasonable to me that 'pursuit or non-pursuit of > papañca' is meant, as papañca is alway akusala. I think I didn't make myself quite clear above.. What I was suggesting was that it is related to pursuing the papanca in relation to the vedana (feelings), which as you say are always akusala, or not pursuing the papanca, i.e. no akusalabcittas, wholesome restraint or 'guarding of the senses' instead which is being discussed. Still > the reference papañca is obviously significant. So is > the reference to thought. Since he is referring to > something to be pursued, it may be skilful thought > (e.g. of beneveolence, non-harming and renunciation, > as these thoughts are extolled elsewhere in the suttas > and the vinaya). Though even kusala thoughts do, as > you said, 'add bricks', and are no doubt inferior to > satipatthana, they are certainly superior to akusala > thoughts, as the Buddha often pointed out (ditto of > course for words and deeds). As you said it would be > good to know the Paali. And it would be good to know > what the commentaries have to say. I understand 'pursued' to refer to being aware of feeling without thinking, though as you rightly point out, thinking can be skilful. I have a question about these lines in BB's translation: 'Now, of such happiness as is accompanied by thinking and pondering, <611> and of that which is not so accompanied, the latter is the more excellent. The same applies to unhappiness, and to equanimity.' At his footnote to <611> he writes '(vitakka-vicara>. This refers to the second jhana.' I'm unclear if this is correct (not a MA note), and if so whether the whole paragraph should be read in this light. As I said, i've only looked quickly at it without reading the sutta carefully to look at the entire context. One other point here with regard to 'grief' as translation. It's clear that they are the vedana (feelings) being discussed and as such I would find pleasant feeling, unpleasant feeling and neutral feeling a lot less confusing. When one reads about grief, one assumes it is dosa being discussed, don't you think? To summarise in reverse order, I understand the Buddha to be saying that on account of feelings(somanassa, domanassa, upekkha) , arise the tendency to proliferation (papanca). On account of this, thinking (vitakka) arises which leads to desire (chanda, equated by DA with tanha). On account of desire, like and dislike (piya-appiya, 'dear and not-dear') arise. These lead to jealousy and avarice (issa-macchariya) wihich 'bind beings' so that although 'they wish to live without hate, harming, hostility or malignity, and in peace, they yet live in hate, harming one another, hostile and malign.' > > I think this is correct except that certain kusala > cittas do lead to the Path even though they aren't the > Path (if I understand what you mean by 'kusala > cittas'). In other words (and for example), kusala in > general (theoretically) leads to rebirth in (or of) > conditions favorable to hearing and understanding the > Dhamma. Maybe this is why the Buddha didn't just say, > 'practice satipatthaana' and drop it there. I agree that all kinds of kusala are encouraged....and are a support, but kusala that isn't satipatthana, including jhana, still add bricks as I understand....remember the Atthasalini passage which Rob quoted? > > > I won't buy the good anger/grief/aversion theory, > > but others may! > > I don't either. This reminds me of hiri and ottapa > (shame and fear) which also sound like aversion but > are considered kusala. Many examples here of how just a very little understanding of abhidhamma helps..... Hopefully we'll be able to pursue this a little further... thanks, Sarah 7534 From: Sarah Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 4:51pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Good Grief! Dear Kom, Just sent my note before looking at your post here which I'll read with interest.....I'm glad you've raised the jhana link. I wonder if you have any Thai com notes too? S. --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Sarah and Mike, > > I have a fussy explanation about this phenomenon, so please read it at > your own risk! > > If you notice, domanassa vedana is counted as a Jhana Pacaya. This has > always puzzled me for a long time, until I recently read from one of the > suttas (sorry, can't remember the reference) how the rupa jhana level > progresses. Apparently, the piti and somanassa vedana in Jhana is very > refined and highly suitable for attachment that when the Jhana mental > states stop, the person feels aversion of losing it. This theory is losely > collaborated by some sutta that mention that to reach the 5th rupa jhana > (where there is no more somanassa, and piti), one must leave both > Domanassa and Somanassa. > > Besides Satipatthana, the Buddha appeared to encourage attaining more > and more refined Jhana (perhaps because the kusala is higher, and > because the latent tendencies for the 5-sensualities are not being > accumulated?). Besides the Arahat, apparently, the aversion toward > losing the Jhana is part of attaining higher level of jhana. > > I hope you have noticed the disclaimer above. This question needs to be > discussed some more. > > kom 7535 From: Sarah Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 4:55pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drugs and the Dharma Dear Num, Good to see you back...we've missed your insights and maybe Nina has missed your good questions! --- Num wrote: > Hi Sarah and o0ss12345, > > Sorry, o0ss12345, for not addressing your name > properly. I am kind of lost after got back from > vacation, DSG is pretty busy and very popular with > a lot of messages. BTW my name is Num. You'll have noted by now that this is Joshua. A few new members while you were away. Hope you had a good trip and I can see others like Christine have replied far more helpfully than I could have on the meat-eating issue! Speak soon, Jon's turn for the computer! Sarah 7536 From: cybele chiodi Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 5:36pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The limits of awareness Dear Kom >I think we can relate this to the Buddha as well. Despite his unparalleled >teaching ability, he cannot bring wisdom to those who were not ready. >We can also see how the interactions in DSG go. We can at best suggest >to people that this is how things could plausibly work. It totally depends >on the person's accumulation (including reading and considering other >people's posts) how the person would take a message. According with my limited understanding capacity and my past accumulations plus my present conditionings and actual moment of awareness and mood condition (how many factors indeed...) I agree that wisdom cannot be imposed but assimilated if the 'conditions' are ripe. BUT dear Kom when you candidly declare that we can observe it in the interactions in DSG affirming 'we can at best suggest to people this is how things could plausibly work' I cannot but perceive a [patronizing] taste like one of a person who doesn't discuss to share and with an openmind to consider the various aspects of a subject but as somebody who has already 'made up his mind' and listen to others in a 'paternalistic mood' like 'oh never mind he doesn't has the right accumulations to understand yet, we must be patient'. Why Kom do you really think that you got it right in your Dhamma studies and others are deluded? read carefully how you wrote it and tell me with an openmind and no aversion because is not a mere provocation but I am inviting all of us to observe this strategies of our mind and how it 'slips' not deliberately unmasking our tendencies.ù Most evident I am including myself in the remark. Love Cybele 7537 From: Sarah Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 6:17pm Subject: Re: MN vs. DN, another opinion Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation Dear Frank, I like hearing which parts of the suttanta people turn to most. These are good comments below which I pretty much agree with, though this list takes me all over the Tipitaka! Frank, on another note, I think you slipped in quietly here..I don't think you've posted on dsg before? (If this is all repetition, just ignore it!) Anyway, glad you've found us and looking forward to more useful words from you! Let us know a little about your interest in dhamma, where you live and anything else if it's not too much of a bore to do so;-) Hope you find dsg useful. Sarah --- frank kuan wrote: > Hello Derek and Anders. I would say that the > Majjhima is "better" than the Digha. Just my opinion > though. Majjhima tends to be concise and to the point, > and while I do value some of the longer detailed > explanations in the Digha, many of the suttas in the > Digha tend to focus (in great detail) on nonessential > (or less essential) elements of the dhamma, whereas > the MN seems to really hone in on the important core > teachings. > The SN I think is also definitely worth getting, > although some sections are more pertinent to core > teachings than others, overall I think the SN adds > some insight that you don't get from MN. > The MN is the one I reread the most often. I rarely > reopen the DN. > > Metta, > -fk 7538 From: Anders Honore Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 8:42pm Subject: Complete English translation of Majjhima Nikaya (Re: Diamond Sutra) --- <> wrote: > --- Erik wrote: > > > > How does this practise as explained here, relate to the > practises expounded > > > > in the Pali Canon? > > > > Thanissaro better get off his cushion and go translate the > Mahaculasunnata Sutta for you. > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > BA: For your information, a complete set (152 suttas) of the Majjhima > Nikaya in English is available at: > > http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima- Nikaya/index.html Wow! Thanks, Binh! I have visited this site before, but it was pretty incomplete back then. I have since forgot about it. Thank you very much. I'll defnitely be exploring this one. That's the second time you've provided a great link like that! Sadhu! Anders Honore ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* 7539 From: Anders Honore Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 8:45pm Subject: Complete English translation of Majjhima Nikaya (Re: Diamond Sutra) --- Erik wrote: > --- <> wrote: > > --- Erik wrote: > > > > > How does this practise as explained here, relate to the > > practises expounded > > > > > in the Pali Canon? > > > > > > Thanissaro better get off his cushion and go translate the > > Mahaculasunnata Sutta for you. > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > > BA: For your information, a complete set (152 suttas) of the Majjhima > > Nikaya in English is available at: > > > > http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima- Nikaya/index.html > > > > Metta > > Binh > > > > PS. If the above URL is too long to fit in one line, try this first: > > > > http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/ > > > > --------------------------- > > Ah, Anders has no excuse to buy it now. Maybe he ought to buy the Samyutta after all. Haha, it looks like it! I'll buy the Samyutta once I have 150 dollars to spare. Right now, those money are earmarked for a unforseen trip to Rome in September. 7540 From: Anders Honore Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 8:49pm Subject: Re: Diamond Sutra --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Anders - > > In a message dated 8/15/01 4:54:59 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > Anders: > > > > "If by form one looks for the Tathàgata > > Or by the sound of the voice seeks me, > > This person walks the wrong path > > And is unable to see the Tathàgata." > > > > I think someone mentioned that there never really was a Tathagata in the > > first place, and that this is only a conventional term for the impermanent > > kandhas we know as the Buddha. Yet this passage seems to indicate > > otherwise... Any suggestions? > > > > The other one I would like to quote, is the following, in relation to > > Buddhist practises in the Pali Canon: > > > > "This is why, Subhuti, the Bodhisattva should be free of all images when > > engendering the supremely unexcelled bodhicitta. He should not dwell in > > forms when giving rise to that mind. He should not dwell in sounds, odors, > > tastes, tactile sensations, or ideas when giving rise to that mind. He > > should dwell nowhere when giving rise to that mind. If in that mind he has > > an abode, then it would be the non-abode." > > > > How does this practise as explained here, relate to the practises expounded > > in the Pali Canon? > > > > > ============================ > No answers here; just some thoughts. > With regard to the first question, about the tathagata: An arahant is > sometimes described as "traceless". Certainly, when "entered into" nibbanic > discernment, whether during life or beyond the moment of parinibbana, there > is no support for discernment of any objects, there is no subject; there is > no is no "being" in ANY sense. But even during the "ordinary" mind of the > arahant-in-the-world, there is no sense of self whatsoever, and, moreover, > all dhammas are seen through as transparent and empty, and, so, there is no > "being" present in the person of the arahant or in any objects discerned by > the arahant - there is nothing but emptiness. I agree about the whole thing, excepot no Being (except in the sense of being=Samsara), as I would still say that Nibbana is. > The second quote reminds me of a sutta, perhaps in the Samyutta > Nikaya, where the Buddha warns against being trapped by "the tangle within" > and "the tangle without". It seems to speak of detachment. Yeah, when I read that sutta, I thought of the Diamond Sutra as well. 7541 From: Anders Honore Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 9:04pm Subject: Re: An Invitation to All Here --- Erik wrote: > Please do. There are MANY subtle point to this debate, and many > variations on it, and also many definitions of "sudden" vs. "gradual" > as well, and the point you raise here is another angle on this sort > of thing, yet another debate, which may have actually been a part of > this very debate at Samye, but I can't recall right now all the > details. I'm not really interested in getting into the "Sudden vs. Gradual" debate, as I don't think this is leading anywhere, so I'll just skip that. Overall, I think the word "Sudden" is misleading. "Direct" would be a more accurate term. To use Dogen's definition of it: In Zen, the practise and realisation is not different. > However, does Ch'an/Zen (or even Dzogchen) as we know it discourage > the practice of meditation, for example? To the contrary! The very > NAMES of these great and correct traditions of the Ariyan Dharma > derive from the Sanskrit "dhyana" (Pali "jhana"), and emphasize > sitting ameditation beginning with following the breath, as well as > walking meditation (kinhin), as INTEGRAL aspects of bhavana--in fact, > as THE MAIN aspects of these paticular paths! I would tend to agree. It is true that this is usually the routine in Zen today, but the masters of the T'ang dynasty, those who founded the various schools, such as Huineng, Linji, Mazu, Huangpo, Yunmen, Tungshan and others all *de-emphasised* subject-object meditation. Huineng, who must be considered the greatest authority on Sudden Zen, in fact didn't teach seated meditation at all! Have you ever read his Platform Sutra? My favourite one. 7542 From: Anders Honore Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 9:12pm Subject: Re: Eightfold path - Mundane and not so mundane... --- Sarah wrote: > Hi Anders, > > Anders Honoré wrote: > Hi, all. > > > > I think everybody here knows what constitutes the Mundane Eightfold Path. > > But I was wondering if anyone here might want to try and give a definition > > of the supramundane eightfold path for me? Thanks. > > I was going to reply to this as well, but all my brain cells have been used up > on the last post, so may I suggest you read posts under Eightfold Path in > 'Useful Posts' and come back with questions or comments? What is your > particular interest here? Someone mentioned a supramundane eightfold path (Ithink it also mentioned supramundane Jhanas) which begins after stream-entry or something like that. I was curious because I have never heard of such a thing, and I was interested to see what others thought of it. 7543 From: Anders Honore Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 9:19pm Subject: Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation - Robert E --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Sarah and Robert E., > > --- Sarah wrote: > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > When it > > > cognizes its own existence as nothing but a series > > of arisings with no > > > inhabitant > > > to experience them, there is a feeling of sadness, > > almost of despair. > > I've been thinking about Robert's post too. I had the > same thought as Sarah re. grief (my interpretation) as > aversion. But I was reminded of this: > > "'Grief is of two sorts, I tell you: to be pursued & > not to be pursued.' Thus was it said. And in reference > to what was it said? When one knows of a feeling of > grief, 'As I pursue this grief, unskillful mental > qualities increase, and skillful mental qualities > decline,' that sort of grief is not to be pursued. > When one knows of a feeling of grief, 'As I pursue > this grief, unskillful mental qualities decline, and > skillful mental qualities increase,' that sort of > grief is to be pursued. And this sort of grief may be > accompanied by directed thought & evaluation or free > of directed thought & evaluation. Of the two, the > latter is the more refined. 'Grief is of two sorts, I > tell you: to be pursued & not to be pursued.' Thus was > it said. And in reference to this was it said. > > Digha Nikaya 21 > Sakka-pañha Sutta > Sakka's Questions > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/dn21.html > > Since I'm confident that the Buddha never suggested > any kind of akusala was to be pursued, this seems to > me to suggest there's a kind of grief that isn't > aversion? This doesn't make much sense to me however. > One of Ajahn Chah's students often said that there's > the dukkha leading to more dukkha and the dukkha > leading out of dukkha. This seems more to the point > but unfortunately I can't cite it from the > Dhammavinaya. I can pretty much relate to that sutta from personal experience. At one point, I was feeling pretty down and depressed by the whole thing. It didn't matter what I did. It was all futile and Samsaric. But it didn't really bother me, because I knew that this was a good thing, that I was becoming more dispassionate about the world. I figured, I'd either be succesful on the path or hit rock bottom. And rock bottom wasn't really such a poor alternative. After all, Who is hitting rock bottom ;-) 7544 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 9:26pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The traditional teachings Hi, Cybele --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > hi Jon > Considering that all traditional buddhist schools agree on meditation > being > the asset of the practice and in your approach is not considered > fundamental > I would dare to say that also you don't embrace fully the traditional > teachings. There is one thing I'm sure we can agree on, Cybele--it is what the Buddha said on the subject that is the 'traditional teaching'. And I think we can also agree that the best source of information on what the Buddha said is the suttas and the vinaya, read in the light of the abhidhamma, and as elucidated by the commentaries. On my reading of these texts, the Buddha taught exclusively about understanding the reality of the present moment, and nothing he said should be read as otherwise. Let's consider for a moment mindfulness of breathing. We all breathe all day long, but breath is usually not an object of our attention. However, when it is, is there any reason why it should not be possible to experience the hardness or softness, heat or cold, appearing through the body door, that we normally take for breath? A moment of cognising one of the realities that we normally take for 'breath' is surely a moment of satipatthana with 'breath' as object. This would not seem to require a special time, place or posture. In a recent post you mentioned the passage from the Satipatthana Sutta on mindfulness of breathing. (This is an extremely difficult sutta to understand, but we need not go into that here.) To my understanding, that particular passage is an instruction specially directed to those who were already adept at samatha of a high level with breath as object. In the words of the commentary (p. 54 of Soma Thera's translation), "This is the portal to emancipation of the bhikkhu devoted to meditation on breathing". So when it talks about having gone to a quiet place, adopting a classic 'meditation' posture, long and short in-breaths and out-breaths etc it is describing the established practice of the very audience to whom it was primarily directed. Why did the Buddha see the need to address this particular audience on satipatthana with breath as object? Perhaps because when the development of samatha has already progressed to the level that the object of samatha has been replaced by an 'image' (nimitta) of that object, moments of satipatthana are not possible during absorption on the image, since the object of the moment of consciousness is a concept rather than a reality. If this interpretation is correct, then this part of the sutta should not be regarded as requiring us, or even as advising us, as relative beginners at samatha/vipassana, to undertake a particular kind of 'meditation practice' in order to develop mindfulness of breathing. So to return to your comment, I am very much interested the traditional teachings. But I do not necessarily accept the modern-day interpretation of them. However, I am always happy to discuss any views that are reasonably open on the texts. Jon 7545 From: Anders Honore Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 10:07pm Subject: Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation - Anders & Sarah --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Anders, > > These were really interesting sutta extracts you quoted which encouraged me to > consider and research further, thankyou. I also checked some of the Pali (with > help from Jim). Great. This will probably be a pretty long post with more quotes, but what else is new? :-) > This deep consideration and reflection may seem unnecessary, but just to quote > from one of the lines following yours above, 'for the ordinary person > (puthujjanassa) who has not listened (assutavato), there is no > mental development (cittabhaavanaa). " Yes. I think it can be interpreted both ways though, so it's a hard one to reach any definitive answer to. > Anders: > Well, then I would like your opinion on this: Do you regard the > Mahayana > > Canon as being contradictory to the Buddha's true teachings? An answer to > > this, would make the discussion a whole lot clearer. > ---------------------------------- > Those of you who've studied the Mahayana teachings in depth will be able to > answer that bettter;-)) Well, I have. As I read the Pali Canon, they are not contradictory, but it seems your reading differs markedly from mine ;-) > If you understand it to say that Nirvana/Nibbana 'is > always present in us' it sounds contradictory to me! I could give you many quotes from all sorts of canon sources on this, but I'm too lazy. Instead, I will turn to my own favourite, Huineng, who writes in one of his gathas (I've inluded some non-relevant parts here too, simply because I think they're great): Erroneous views keep us in defilement While right views remove us from it, But when we are in a position to discard both of them We are then absolutely pure. Bodhi is immanent in our Essence of Mind, An attempt to look for it elsewhere is erroneous. Within our impure mind the pure one is to be found, And once our mind is set right, we are free from the three kinds of beclouding (hatred, lust and illusion). If we are treading the Path of Enlightenment We need not be worried by stumbling-blocks. Provided we keep a constant eye on our own faults We cannot go astray from the right path. Since every species of life has its own way of salvation They will not interfere with or be antagonistic to one another. But if we leave our own path and seek some other way of salvation We shall not find it, And though we plod on till death overtakes us We shall find only penitence in the end. If you wish to find the true way Right action will lead you to it directly; But if you do not strive for Buddhahood You will grope in the dark and never find it. He who treads the Path in earnest Sees not the mistakes of the world; If we find fault with others We ourselves are also in the wrong. When other people are in the wrong, we should ignore it, For it is wrong for us to find fault. By getting rid of the habit of fault-finding We cut off a source of defilement. When neither hatred nor love disturb our mind Serenely we sleep. Those who intend to be the teachers of others Should themselves be skilled in the various expedients which lead others to enlightenment. When the disciple is free from all doubts It indicates that his Essence of Mind has been found. The Kingdom of Buddha is in this world, Within which enlightenment is to be sought. To seek enlightenment by separating from this world Is as absurd as to search for a rabbit's horn. Right views are called 'transcendental'; Erroneous views are called 'worldly'. When all views, right or erroneous, are discarded Then the essence of Bodhi appears. NB. "Essence of Mind" is another Mahayana term for Nibbana. Sarah, if you ever have the time to do so, you should try and read Huineng's Platform Sutra (It's at my website under 'Sutras' in the Zen/Ch'an Writings section). He is considered one of the three greatest Zen masters ever, and is just about the most canon source of Zen you''ll find. If you read this, you'll know more about Zen than most Zennists! Seriously though, it's some 28 A4 pages, so it's should be easily read, and I'd really love to see what a Theravadin like you can make of a text like that. To me, it's brilliant (even Ajahn Chah has praised it as true and highly profound), but if you have time (and willingness) to read it, I'd love to hear your thoughts on it. > ************************************************************** > > With regard to the MN 49 (24-26) passage you quoted: > > Sarah: >> B.Bodhi translates the passage as: > > > 'the consciousness that makes no showing, > > > And in becoming about to disbecome, > > > Not claiming being with respect to all: > > > that is not partaken of by the earthness of earth etc > Maj NIk, 49, The Invitation of a Brahma,24-26 > -------------------------------- > The word 'consciousness' is translated from 'vi~n~naa.na.m' to be understood as > 'cognizable' (vijaanitabba.m) and not consciousness according to the com. as > explained to me. As I mentioned, BB also added in his notes (513). , > > Sarah: >>"MA takes > > >the subject of the sentence to be Nibbana, called 'consciousness' in the > > >sense that "it can be cognized" '. > ----------------------------------- > Perhaps another translation of the first line could be: > 'Cognizable (vi~n~naa.na.m), invisible (anidassana.m), shininig in all > directions (ananta.m sabbatopabha)' > > Anders: > Hmm, well, we enter the realm of speculation as regards to the > definition of > > "consciousness" in this case. > -------------------------------------- > I think we all agree it refers to Nibbana. I'm not sure what you mean here. do you mean it refers refers to the consciousness *as* Nibbana, or as consciousmess *of* Nibbana? That's what I meant when I said the realm of speculation. > --------------------------------------- > I hope that clarifies and thanks for raising these tricky lines! > > ******************************************************** Haha, always happy to help :-) > Anders: > And Mun? > > Pls re-quote a relevant paragraph for either if you particularly think my > comments may be of any interest! (Sorry, I don't have the original anymore). I > admit I prefer discussing Tipitaka suttas or the understanding of members like > yourself! > > ********************************************************* I quote people like Chah and Mun to "stretch" the boundaries of understanding "Theravada." These people are 100% Theravada (not mention some of the most acclaimed teachers of this century), yet they present a different view of Theravada than you (I feel tempted to say: "Than your abidhammic school). I'll birefly requote a small passage by Mun: All that remains is the primal mind, true & unchanging. > ------------------------------------- > Finally, you quoted from Ang Nik, bk of Tens, 81, Bahuna (Pali, Text V, 151-2) > > Sarah: > > I find the 'unrestricted awareness' to be misleading > ------------------------------ > Now I find the Pali in the last line (vimariyaadikatena cetasaa viharatii ti) > means literally ' with a mind made without boundary. The com. mentions 'having > severed the boundary of the defilements' (kilesamariyaada.m bhinditva . . > .)which is much closer to the translation and my comment below I think. Hmm, I think the commentaries should be taken with a grain of salt in this case. Personally, the literal translation is much closer to what I am trying to say (haha, and hence I discard all else! bad formuluation on my part, but you know what I mean :-)). Teachers like Chah and Mun are really just commentators too, and they present a different commentary. > Anders: > "The Wayfarer" as with Tathagata is of course a conventional image, > but do > > we find support in the Sutta pitaka for the view that this conventional > > image does not point to an actuality (Nibbana-mind - Buddha- nature)? > ---------------------------------------- > There is no suggestion of a Buddha nature here.....As you suggest, Wayfarer > (not my favourite term!) or Tathagata or merely conventional terms: > > '....So, When the khandhas are present, > 'A being is said in common usage' (KS 1, 135) Could you post a larger quote, so the context can be seen? I don't think this quote here necessarily opposes what I am trying to say, since this Nibbana-mind/Buddha-nature (assuming, just for a second, that it is real) is traceless, unconditioned, non-dwelling and without any sign and hence can hardly be termed a 'being' (in the sense of Samsaric existence). > ********************************************** > Anders: > Hmm, I don't know what to make of the Abhidhamma myself, so I am > uncertain > > as to its validity. I was told just today by someone that Buddhasasa once > > commented that the Abidhamma could easily be canned without much lost, and > > many other famous teachers have actually joined in this view (Ajahn Chah, I > > think, too). > > Yes, well as others have pointed out, there will be a day when the whole > Tiptitaka is canned because no one can understand it or see its relevance:-)) I > believe many modern famous teachers would benefit a lot from a greater > appreciation and understanding of abhidhamma, but I know this is > controversial;-)) Well, I think we could argue for years there without reaching a definitive conclusion. :-) > ------------------------------------------------- > Anders, please don't ever be sorry for replying late...there are no time limits > at all here.I hope Shool is going well and please look in from time to time. It's going quite well! I am a lot more motivated than last year (the second year is always the hard one), and I am kinda sorry to see that this year will be my last. > We > all appreciate your dhamma contributions here! This has been quite challenging > for me, but I've really appreciated the chance to look at the suttas and the > pali. I am glad that my contributions aren't entirely in vain :-) > Btw, I had another look at your site the other day (sorry the link isn't handy) I know. But I refuse to pay money to keep it up, and am even more resistant to banners and pop-ups, so unless I can find a generous (and modest/discrete) sponsor, I don't think I'll find a domain name that's easier to remember anytime soon. > and I was very impressed. (Just surprised dsg wasn't mentioned amongst your > many discussion groups and hadn't received its 'gold cup' yet;-)) ) Haha, I need to update my links page soon. I have tons of links that I need to add and revise. I just haven't got around to it yet. Dsg will be mentioned the next time I revise the links page ;-) > One of these days, Jon and I are going to turn up in Elsinore to go on a long > walk in your woods discussing dhamma with you! In the meantime, we look forward > to more rewarding chats with you here! I will certainly be looking forward to it. Both the chats and the visit :-) Sincere regards Anders 7546 From: Anders Honore Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 10:16pm Subject: Re: Drugs and the Dharma --- Erik wrote: > > > Firstly, I don't read anywhere that the Buddha advocated vegitarianism and > > there are examples in the Tipitaka to the contrary. > > Jivaka Sutta, Majjhima Nikaya 55 > > I read that Roshi Philip Kapleau said that the Hinayana monks fabricated the Sutta because they liked eating meat. Thank Heavens they didn't like visiting brothels! Haha, that's true. I am curious though. Does this sutta condole that a Bikkhu should kill his own food (say, if he's caught in a polar region with no vegetation, and this seel is hooping about)? 7547 From: Erik Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 10:33pm Subject: Re: An Invitation to All Here --- "Anders Honore" wrote: > I'm not really interested in getting into the "Sudden vs. Gradual" > debate, as I don't think this is leading anywhere, so I'll just skip > that. You're of course welcome to skip it if it's of no use to you, just as I discard ways of presenting the Dhamma I know for sure are not helpful to my own practice--the moment I become aware they are no longer of ultimate benefit (i.e. connected with the goal). > Overall, I think the word "Sudden" is misleading. "Direct" would be a > more accurate term. To use Dogen's definition of it: In Zen, the > practise and realisation is not different. Ha ha! It appears you don't seem so inclined to skip it after all! Perhaps it IS leading somewhere! :) :) :) I'm glad there's finally a new "defender" willing to rise to the occasion in this "subitist" vs. "gradualist" debate here! :) :) :) So Anders, let me put the question to you: is just the ACT of sitting (or whatever practice we're talking about) the same thing as the enlightenment of a Tathagata? Is a hen sitting on her egg the same as a Buddha? (no Tathagatagharba stuff here for a minute) > I would tend to agree. It is true that this is usually the routine in > Zen today, but the masters of the T'ang dynasty, those who founded > the various schools, such as Huineng, Linji, Mazu, Huangpo, Yunmen, > Tungshan and others all *de-emphasised* subject-object meditation. So did Nagarjuna, whose Root Verses of the Middle Way should nuke any sort of subject/object views if meditated on properly. So should correctly-taught vipassana meditation--insight into whatever's arising at the moment, simply noting its characteristics, which also teaches not to force the mind on to a particular object but to note things as they are actually occurring. But that is not what is being driven at here. It is quite possible to carry ANY teaching to an unhealthy extreme, to the point of neglecting the other aspects of the Buddha's teachings. ANY teaching, even if right, when taken too far, becomes wrong. For example, the Dhamma is not to ONLY study scriptures, but to actually apply the teachings here and now--to eat the fruit rather than just look at it, in other words. That is why the Buddha enjoined his disciples to extert themselves, to endeavour, to arouse persistence and diligence in abandoning unskillful qualities and taking up skillful qualities. The Buddha NEVER said that we're just a collection of dependently arising, impermanent parts arising and passing away, and therefore we have no volitional control (conventionally) over our actions, for example. That is taking the doctrine of anatta to an unhealthy (even fatal) extreme. At core, the Dhamma is none other than the Middle Way between the extremes. For example, wisdom (insight) alone is insufficient to bring abuot the end of suffering; merit is also necessary--a prerequisite, in fact, as I was reminded by one of the kind instructors today at Wat Mahatat, when I asked him SPECIFICALLY about vipassana/insight, if there were any prerequisites for insight to arise. He said that there are definitely prerequisites. For example, one must have first given up taking life, taking what is not given, lying, sexual misconduct, and taking intoxicants that cause heedlessness. He further noted that insight won't arise without these factors being present (the Buddha said the same thing, as a matter of fact). (And I can also vouch for this in my own experience, because I began with "wisdom" teachings of Zen but was still violating panca-sila by drinking, for example, and consequently made VERY SLOW progress in inreasing mindfulness and concentration, for example--to the point that YEARS of effort were expended in a direction I mistakenly believed was correct, that, after abandoning those unskillful activities and being instructed on Right View from a far more conventioanl perspective, positive changes came so quickly I could barely process them! Much like the difference between swimming from Copenhagen to Bornholm vs. taking a hydrofoil!). Again, the Buddha usually taught in the most conventional terms of cause-and-effect. Why? Because cause-and-effect are irrelevant to our understanding of how to terminate suffering? The Buddha taught dana, sila, and bhavana, WHY? The Buddha taught Right Effort, WHY? Read the Simsapa Sutta to find out why the Buddha taught what he did, the WAY he did! :) :) :) This is ALL about skill-in-means--strategic pedagogy, in other words. Whatever works. Whatever will get us to give up the unskillful and uwholesome, and to take up the skillful and wholesome. Whatever will get us disenchanted with the torments of cyclic existence, help us disentangle ourselves from our thickets of views, lead us out of our wilderness of views, straighten our contortion of views, pacify our writhing of views, unchain us from our fetter of views. The point is for each of us to find the "sweet spot," the place between the Scylla and Charybdis of the extremes: especially extreme views and practices. The Middle Way is not difficult at all. It's that most of us make it MUCH more difficult than it need be. > Huineng, who must be considered the greatest authority on Sudden Zen, > in fact didn't teach seated meditation at all! Have you ever read his > Platform Sutra? My favourite one. I have not read the Platform Sutra. I lost interest in Zen some years ago since I found everything I need in the Tibetan teachings expressed in the qway I find most helpful for these accumulations, though I did begin my Dharma practice this go-round with Zen. Anyway, emptiness is subtle, difficult to see, to-be-experienced-by- the-wise, and for MOST people (with the rare exception of the Hui Nengs of the world and other spiritual savants who ended the effluents on simply hearing a single sutta by the Buddha), REALISTICALLY, in terms of sentient beings who are suffering RIGHT NOW, to believe that just hearing a few stanzas or believing there is no need for development (bhavana)--which includes directed effort and persistence (as taught all over the place by Lord Buddha in the Suttas) of any sort--that just THINKING about "seeing things as they arise" will liberate us instantly, appears to me to be putting the cart way before the horse! What about all the requisite nutriment conditions for true insight- wisdom to arise? This is true for ALL practitioners, even the Hui Nengs. It's just that some have already developed this to such a high degree that a single stanza will liberate them. But the requisite nutriment conditions (sila, etc.) are still present in them all the same. I would be curious to know, in terms of percentages, just how many of those who have awakened to the Deathless have done so without a degree of serious applied bhavana (development) as a part of that. There's Hui Neng. There's the arahat Bahiya. These practitioners are RARE EXCEPTIONS. So Lord Buddha, out of compassion for suffering beings, mostly teaches at the conventional level, where most people are RIGHT NOW. And again, what is the point of all of this Dharma business anyway? If we go by the Buddha's own words (Simsapa Sutta), the SOLE point of this Dharma is to help sentient beings terminate their suffering. How to do that? Start where we are NOW, not where we wish we are. And what does that mean, for most of us? Mundane, boring, WORK, that serves to generate lots of bitching and moaning for most of us but is nonetheless indispensible. Stuff like training in generosity and keeping morality--at least to the degree of panca-sila. Then purification practices to wear away at the coarsest of our negativities (dhutanga/Tibetan ngondro). And THEN, things like applied mindfulness meditation, taking specific objects, like the body, the feelings, the mind, and mental qualities, which serves as the basis for concentration to arise, which when combined with insight-wisdom, in a flash terminates the fetters binding us to the wheel of samsara. This follows that, in other words. When this arises, that arises. When this ceases, that ceases. Basic cause-and-effect stuff, just like the Buddha said: "Now, I tell you, clear knowing & release have their nutriment. They are not without nutriment. And what is their nutriment? The seven factors of awakening... And what is the nutriment for the seven factors of awakening? The four frames of reference... And what is the nutriment for the four frames of reference? The three forms of right conduct... And what is the nutriment for the three forms of right conduct? Restraint of the senses... And what is the nutriment for restraint of the senses? Mindfulness & alertness... And what is the nutriment for mindfulness & alertness? Appropriate attention... And what is the nutriment for appropriate attention? Conviction... And what is the nutriment for conviction? Hearing the true Dhamma... And what is the nutriment for hearing the true Dhamma? Associating with people who are truly good..." Anyway, I'm greatly enjoying this debate! (and I suspect you are too!). If you like, you can continue to play the subitist, I'll continue to play gradualist (until we tired of it, and then perhaps we can switch sides)? :) Hva tror du? :) 7548 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 10:38pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Good Grief! op 19-08-2001 10:10 schreef Kom Tukovinit op Kom Tukovinit: > Dear Sarah and Mike, > > I have a fussy explanation about this phenomenon, so please read it at > your own risk! > > If you notice, domanassa vedana is counted as a Jhana Pacaya. This has > always puzzled me for a long time, until I recently read from one of the > suttas (sorry, can't remember the reference) how the rupa jhana level > progresses. > > Dear Kom, as I explained in "Conditions", Ch 14, jhana-factors can be taken in a wide sense and then, according to the Patthana, akusala jhana-factors are related to the associated aggregates by jhana-condition. See also Dhammasangani, in the Summary, where jhana-factors are mentioned arising with kusala citta which is unaccompanied by panna and also with akusala citta (§147, and § 397 a) Without the jhana-factors good or evil deeds cannot be performed. A similar case we find under Path-condition, where akusala path-factors are taken into account. Nina. 7549 From: Erik Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 10:46pm Subject: Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation - Anders & Sarah --- "Anders Honore" wrote: > --- Sarah wrote: > > Anders: > Well, then I would like your opinion on this: Do you > regard the > > Mahayana > > > Canon as being contradictory to the Buddha's true teachings? An > answer to > > > this, would make the discussion a whole lot clearer. > > ---------------------------------- > > Those of you who've studied the Mahayana teachings in depth will be > able to > > answer that bettter;-)) > > Well, I have. As I read the Pali Canon, they are not contradictory, > but it seems your reading differs markedly from mine ;-) You know, I have yet to find any contradiction between the Mahayana and the Pali Canon either. In fact, the more I study, the more one simply serves to confirm the other. 7550 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 11:08pm Subject: Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach Dear Sarah How have you been? How is your stay in Hong Kong? I am glad to hear from you, too. You wrote: "Suan, it all sounds very easy as af anyone can just decide to go for levels of jhana without any understanding of the development of samatha and without clearly understand how a particular object calms the mind or the difference between kusala and akusala cittas (wholesome and unwholesome mental states) at this moment." I agree with you. It is a very difficult path for us just to reach the stage of pre-jhanic concentration (upaca samadhi). That is why I wrote: "So if you ever get to the stage of pre-jhanic concentration (upaca samadhi), you won't stop at there." Please notice the adverb "ever" in the above statement. I was merely following the flow of Sakula's questions, so I had to start with the assumption that a hypothetical woman sush as Sakula had already attained pre-jhanic concentration. Once you got there, though, you would aim at higher levels. You also wrote: "I know that many teachers encourage these views, but I find them quite disturbing." You must forgive me, Sarah, I do not understand the above statement. What do "these views" refer to? Are there any views in my message that you find disturbing? If so, please help me identify them so that I could properly address them to your satisfaction. But, I do stand by my following statements: "The most important keyword to remember to make jhana within our reach is the phrase ".. only by keeping away from sensuous preoccupations (kamesu vivicceva)". Once you understand this keyword and like the idea of it, you are on your way to jhana. Nothing can stop you. Jhana is within reach of anyone who could turn their back on sensuous preoccupations. As simple as that (in theory, of course)!" Please kindly read (kamesu vivicceva, my spelling error) as vivicceva kamehi. You also asked: "What about as soon as we open our eyes or hear a sound? Sensuous preoccupations immediately! No self that can stop or control clinging at these times." Not necessarily so, Sarah, I am afraid. You sounded somewhat Freudian here. But, whatever we see or hear do not necessarily bring about the mental events with clinging or greed (lobhamula cittani) responsible for sensuous pre-occupations. If they were true as you adviced, you would have contradicted yourself because you wrote the following: " any understanding of the development of samatha and without clearly understand how a particular object calms the mind or the difference between kusala and akusala cittas (wholesome and unwholesome mental states) at this moment." Your statement above clearly shows that there are certain other types of people whose preoccupatins are other than sensuous ones. With regards, Suan http://www.bodhiology.org/ 7551 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 0:06am Subject: Re: The limits of awareness Dear Cybele, --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > Dear Kom > > > >I think we can relate this to the Buddha as well. Despite his unparalleled > >teaching ability, he cannot bring wisdom to those who were not ready. > >We can also see how the interactions in DSG go. We can at best suggest > >to people that this is how things could plausibly work. It totally depends > >on the person's accumulation (including reading and considering other > >people's posts) how the person would take a message. > > According with my limited understanding capacity and my past accumulations > plus my present conditionings and actual moment of awareness and mood > condition (how many factors indeed...) I agree that wisdom cannot be imposed > but assimilated if the 'conditions' are ripe. > BUT dear Kom when you candidly declare that we can observe it in the > interactions in DSG affirming 'we can at best suggest to people this is how > things could plausibly work' I cannot but perceive a [patronizing] taste > like one of a person who doesn't discuss to share and with an openmind to I certainly didn't mean it to be patronizing. The person included in the list of "suggested but not taken" includes myself. Do you remember how many times you suggested to the list that sitting down meditation is a must, but yet I have never (or not yet, never say never) taken it? kom 7552 From: frank kuan Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 0:18am Subject: Hi, my name is Frank, and I'm a dhammaholic. Re: MN vs. DN, another opinion Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation Hi Sarah, You're right, I did kind of slip in quietly and try to avoid the common courtesy of introducing myself, but since you called me on it, I suppose I must :-) More in context below. --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Frank, > > I like hearing which parts of the suttanta people > turn to most. These are good > comments below which I pretty much agree with, > though this list takes me all > over the Tipitaka! The six sets of six is my favorite sutta of all time (mn 148? one forty something anyways). Sometimes when talking about 5 aggregates it can seem abstract and disconnected from our normal moment to moment experience, but when the Buddha goes through the six sense organs, the sense objects, contact, craving associated through each of the six doors, etc, and show that they are impermanent, that if a abiding soul were to exist they would also arise and pass away continuously, which would be an untenable position, it really seems so clear when explained this way. It's just such a practical and clear way that outlines the whole buddhist path. When I was young, my mother forced me to memorize and regularly recite the heart of prajnaparamita sutra in Chinese. I hated it. It made no sense, and after I read over 10 commentaries on it, it still made no sense. Well, I was young then. Now when I read the heart sutra, I have a new appreciation for it, but I still think it's completely pointless to force young kids to memorize it. That's not the way to get people to learn. If I were to memorize anything, memorizing the six sets of six would have made much more sense. But even that, I object to forcing young kids to memorize it for their own good. People have to want to learn on their own initiative. But I digress. Many other suttas in the MN I am very fond of, but I am short an time and will have to talk about them another time. > > Frank, on another note, I think you slipped in > quietly here..I don't think > you've posted on dsg before? (If this is all > repetition, just ignore it!) Some of you on this list already know me from dhamma-list, which I am sometimes pretty active on. Quick info about me: I'm 32, but I often feel like I'm 32,000 years old. Even when I was 16. Sometimes, when I wake up I get this indescribably intense feeling that is wordless and very momentary, maybe just 2 seconds, but it takes me many paragraphs to describe what the feeling is. In short, that feeling is, "Surely, an end to this whole mass of suffering can be found." It's a sense of urgency to practice dhamma more diligently. Already I have wasted too much of my precious life doing meaningless things. I've resolved to retire from the rat race next year, about 5 years short of my original timetable to devote full time to dhamma practice. I may ordain in the future, I may not. I may live in a dhamma community somwehre in the world with other serious cultivators, or maybe I'll live secluded in a forest for 20 years with only animals as my company walking around naked subsisting on nuts, seeds, mangos, young coconuts. I don't know yet. Most likely, I'll probably alternate between those two options every few years. I'm not fluent in Pali, and I don't know if I'll ever be. But I am going to learn a bit of it. I tend to prefer quiet and solitude, but in the company of cultivators and dhamma practitioners I have moments resembling a normal functioning human with decent communication skills. I love animals. I work with computers. I used to love computers, video games, hi-tech toys, now I just want to drop it all and return to nature. I'm heavily into yoga (taoist, indian, tibetan), health, nutrition. I'm a big fan of Taoism, Zen, but I really don't discuss it much. I prefer to stick to the pragamtic Theravada tradition as the optimal form of transimitting dhamma to the public at large. I don't watch t.v., and although I still love classical music and jazz, I decided it was time to let it go. I don't listen to music cd's anymore, and I miss it, but it's a feeble craving, not the kind where I am tormented by my decision to let it go. Long ago I learned that renunciation won't work until you're ready for it, so I let things go only when I'm good and ready. You can set goals, but you have to relax into it, can't force it or repress if you want stable long term results. About a year and a half ago, I had a major insight, one of those "a-ha", lightbulbs turn on, devas are singing kind of moments where a simple truth that has been intellectually obvious for my whole lifetime suddenly crystalizes and becomes part of my moment to moment awareness. If I were to ask anyone, if you had a choice, would you abide in a pleasant state or unpleasant state? Without question, everyone would answer "a pleasant state." It doesn't matter what kind of twist I throw in, I could stipulate, what if you're asleep, what if you're in a different country, what if I wave my hands in front of your face and try to distract you, everyone would pick (a) and never (b) (unpleasant state). So if that's the case, why would anyone ever choose to be angry? That was my light bulb moment, and anger really loosened and became easy to let go of after that. What else about me? Let's see. I like to rock climb, surf, hike, bike, I spend lots of time walking/jogging on the beach. I hardly ever socialize. I'm voluntarily celibate (strict - to the point where I don't tolerate lustful thoughts for more than a few seconds). My idea of a good time is spending friday or saturday night reading the MN or SN or visudhimagga, and discussing insights in dhamma with other serious cultivators. That's me in a nutshell, probably more than most of you wanted to know :-) And when I'm in a hurry, I just type in my message in one pass without editing or checking for errors or removing things I wrote that I might regret later. I'll probably be lurking on this list most of the time, but occasionally I'll pop in with some left field comment that just makes everyone wonder what planet I'm from. Loving kindness, -fk 7553 From: Anders Honore Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 0:26am Subject: Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation - Anders & Sarah --- Erik wrote: > --- "Anders Honore" > wrote: > > --- Sarah wrote: > > > > Anders: > Well, then I would like your opinion on this: Do you > > regard the > > > Mahayana > > > > Canon as being contradictory to the Buddha's true teachings? An > > answer to > > > > this, would make the discussion a whole lot clearer. > > > ---------------------------------- > > > Those of you who've studied the Mahayana teachings in depth will > be > > able to > > > answer that bettter;-)) > > > > Well, I have. As I read the Pali Canon, they are not contradictory, > > but it seems your reading differs markedly from mine ;-) > > You know, I have yet to find any contradiction between the Mahayana > and the Pali Canon either. In fact, the more I study, the more one > simply serves to confirm the other. Yes, I feel the same way. Of course there are great differences in expression, and some differences in the practises too, but the only real difference I've found is the Bodhisattva doctrine (which, as I've mentioned before, might not be a difference after all!). 7554 From: Anders Honore Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 0:53am Subject: Re: An Invitation to All Here --- Erik wrote: > --- "Anders Honore" > wrote: > > Overall, I think the word "Sudden" is misleading. "Direct" would be > a > > more accurate term. To use Dogen's definition of it: In Zen, the > > practise and realisation is not different. > > Ha ha! It appears you don't seem so inclined to skip it after all! > Perhaps it IS leading somewhere! :) :) :) I'm glad there's finally a > new "defender" willing to rise to the occasion in this "subitist" > vs. "gradualist" debate here! :) :) :) > > So Anders, let me put the question to you: is just the ACT of sitting > (or whatever practice we're talking about) the same thing as the > enlightenment of a Tathagata? Is a hen sitting on her egg the same as > a Buddha? (no Tathagatagharba stuff here for a minute) See, this is exactly why I don't wish to enage in the debate. I could explain all about the different levels at which this would have to be understood and all, but it wouldn't have any relevance to your practise, would it? As Derek skilfully pointed out at one point: Initially, Buddhism was just a practise, but at one point in history, it somehow switched to become a philosophical endeavour. > The Buddha NEVER said that we're just a > collection of dependently arising, impermanent parts arising and > passing away, and therefore we have no volitional control > (conventionally) over our actions, for example. That is taking the > doctrine of anatta to an unhealthy (even fatal) extreme. That's what I've been trying to say too, but it's seems there isn't much support for this though. I disagree about the volition part, btw. > (And I can also vouch for this in my own experience, because I began > with "wisdom" teachings of Zen but was still violating panca-sila by > drinking, for example, and consequently made VERY SLOW progress in > inreasing mindfulness and concentration, for example--to the point > that YEARS of effort were expended in a direction I mistakenly > believed was correct, that, after abandoning those unskillful > activities and being instructed on Right View from a far more > conventioanl perspective, positive changes came so quickly I could > barely process them! Much like the difference between swimming from > Copenhagen to Bornholm vs. taking a hydrofoil!). Yeah, it's the same for me. That's also one of the main reasons why I am attracted to Theravada (and the reason why I'll probably ordain in a Theravada monastery over a Zen one), because they emphasise Samadhi and (especially) Sila more. My Prajna is still much sronger than my Samadhi and Sila, and my Sila is still stronger than my Samadhi (not necessarily one-pointed concentration under this definition). And hence I need to develop those. I still hold Zen in high esteem, but I think one of the flaws of Zen, is that it doesn't include the establishment of a solid base to a proper degree before developing that Prajna (it's least not nowadays. It was probably different before). > This is ALL about skill-in-means--strategic pedagogy, in other words. > Whatever works. Whatever will get us to give up the unskillful and > uwholesome, and to take up the skillful and wholesome. Whatever will > get us disenchanted with the torments of cyclic existence, help us > disentangle ourselves from our thickets of views, lead us out of our > wilderness of views, straighten our contortion of views, pacify our > writhing of views, unchain us from our fetter of views. Yes. That's also why I think it odd that one should think that it is *only* within Buddhism that liberation is found. Btw, did you find the sutta we talked about? > The point is for each of us to find the "sweet spot," the place > between the Scylla and Charybdis of the extremes: especially extreme > views and practices. The Middle Way is not difficult at all. It's > that most of us make it MUCH more difficult than it need be. Yeah, I love what Foyan (a brilliant Zen teacher) said about this: "All that is necessary is that there be no perceiver or perceived when you perceive [no separation of perceiver and perceived], no thinker or thought when you think [no separation of thinker and thought]. Buddhism is very easy. Just let go, then step back and look....." "Buddhism is extremely easy and saves the most energy. It's just that you yourself waste energy and cause yourself trouble. The ancients saw people helpless, and told them to try meditating quietly. This was good advice, but later people didn't understand what the ancients meant, and closed their eyes, suppressed body and mind, and sat like lumps waiting for enlightenment. How foolish!" That's the direct path, if you ask me (and that's all I'll say about it ;-)) > I have not read the Platform Sutra. I lost interest in Zen some years > ago since I found everything I need in the Tibetan teachings > expressed in the qway I find most helpful for these accumulations, > though I did begin my Dharma practice this go-round with Zen. Yes, Dzogchen is based on the same (direct) principles, although it is usually more clear and approachable than Zen. The strength of Dzogchen is that it is easily approachable. The strength of Zen is that it defies conceptual thought, and forces the student to go beyond it. I've got the First Treasury of Longchenpa (Precious Treasury of the Dharmadatu) on my computer, which I'll be reading eventually. Great stuff, from what little I've read so far. You should read the Platform Sutra anyway (it's at my site). I think you'll appreciate his directness. And again, what is the point of all of this Dharma business anyway? > If we go by the Buddha's own words (Simsapa Sutta), the SOLE point of > this Dharma is to help sentient beings terminate their suffering. > > How to do that? Start where we are NOW, not where we wish we are. > > And what does that mean, for most of us? > > Mundane, boring, WORK, that serves to generate lots of bitching and > moaning for most of us but is nonetheless indispensible. Stuff like > training in generosity and keeping morality--at least to the degree > of panca-sila. Then purification practices to wear away at the > coarsest of our negativities (dhutanga/Tibetan ngondro). And THEN, > things like applied mindfulness meditation, taking specific objects, > like the body, the feelings, the mind, and mental qualities, which > serves as the basis for concentration to arise, which when combined > with insight-wisdom, in a flash terminates the fetters binding us to > the wheel of samsara. > > This follows that, in other words. When this arises, that arises. > When this ceases, that ceases. Basic cause-and-effect stuff, just > like the Buddha said: > > "Now, I tell you, clear knowing & release have their nutriment. They > are not without nutriment. And what is their nutriment? The seven > factors of awakening... And what is the nutriment for the seven > factors of awakening? The four frames of reference... And what is the > nutriment for the four frames of reference? The three forms of right > conduct... And what is the nutriment for the three forms of right > conduct? Restraint of the senses... And what is the nutriment for > restraint of the senses? Mindfulness & alertness... And what is the > nutriment for mindfulness & alertness? Appropriate attention... And > what is the nutriment for appropriate attention? Conviction... And > what is the nutriment for conviction? Hearing the true Dhamma... And > what is the nutriment for hearing the true Dhamma? Associating with > people who are truly good..." Yes, that is true. I think they link up at various levels beyond what is described here. Nonetheless, this is pretty much the basic scheme. > Anyway, I'm greatly enjoying this debate! (and I suspect you are > too!). Growl, I'll be hard pressed to admit it! ;-) > If you like, you can continue to play the subitist, I'll continue to > play gradualist (until we tired of it, and then perhaps we can switch > sides)? :) > > Hva tror du? :) Haha, jeg vil hellere være ikke-positionalist! 7555 From: Howard Date: Sun Aug 19, 2001 9:19pm Subject: Going on Vacation Hi, all - My wife and I are leaving tomorrow (Monday 8/20, our anniversary) for vacation, then to return home on Saturday 8/25. I am just letting the posts pile up! ;-)) If any are directed to me, I'll try to respond to them when we return. Be well, 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) 7556 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 2:04am Subject: Re: Good Grief! Dear Nina, --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > If you notice, domanassa vedana is counted as a Jhana Pacaya. This has > > always puzzled me for a long time, until I recently read from one of the > > suttas (sorry, can't remember the reference) how the rupa jhana level > > progresses. > > > > Dear Kom, as I explained in "Conditions", Ch 14, jhana-factors can be taken in > a wide sense and then, according to the Patthana, akusala jhana- factors are > related to the associated aggregates by jhana-condition. See also > Dhammasangani, in the Summary, where jhana-factors are mentioned arising > with kusala citta which is unaccompanied by panna and also with akusala > citta (§147, and § 397 a) Without the jhana-factors good or evil deeds > cannot be performed. A similar case we find under Path-condition, where > akusala path-factors are taken into account. > Nina. Thank you, Maa'm, for pointing this out. My mistake is in the case of paying attention to the words more than the meanings. Do you by any chance have further explanation about why Domanassa would assist the citta to be fixed on the object (but not anger, for example)? I think I can understand about how the rest of the factors assist the citta in being fixed on the object, but I still don't see how domanasa does this. kom 7557 From: Num Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 0:29am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Good Grief! Hi Kom and Nina, Hope you guys don't mind I try to get in the discussion about paccaya. It's hard for me reading about paccaya. Again, please do correct me and I always appreciate every input. This is only my opinion. From your writing (Nina's) about conditions and from other sources I have read and listened, Jhana paccaya included both miccha-samadhi and samma-samadhi. Also from your books and some discussion with Kom, all 7 Jhana( esp ekaggata) factors can arise in both kusula or akusula citta. In Dosa based samadhi, only domanassa can be a vedana along with other Jhana factors, viakka, vicara as well as ekaggata. In Lobha based samadhi vitakka, vicara, piti, somanassa(sukha), ekaggata and I think even upekkha can be a Jhanna factors here b/c at time lobha-mula-citta can accompany by upekkha as well, not only in last stage of Jhana in both four and five level. But if samadhi is samma-samadhi, which means it's accompanied by panna, Jhana cannot be akusala in nature. So panna distinguishs Jhana into kusala and akulasa. Also in Magga paccaya, miccha-ditthi has been included as a factor, but ditthi and panna(samma-ditthi) cannot arise together. If magga paccaya at that moment has samma-ditthi(panna), all other magga factors also have been entitled as samma- ….., if it's not a right path (with miccha-ditthi) whatever magga factors which coarise at that moment all become part of miccha-magga. Num 7558 From: cybele chiodi Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 6:22am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The limits of awareness Dear Kom > >I certainly didn't mean it to be patronizing. The person included in >the list of "suggested but not taken" includes myself. Do you >remember how many times you suggested to the list that sitting down >meditation is a must, but yet I have never (or not yet, never say >never) taken it? > >kom Indeed Kom but for example as I am openminded and openhearted I took your suggestion and from others list members of studying Abhidhamma that I use to postpone because of the complexities, reading from original texts while I used to read the commentaries because the language were much more palatable to me and improving my knowledge of pali to deepen my knowledge of Dhamma what I had previously neglected. Even if I have various divergences with your approach (I mean the dsg approach) mostly regarding meditation and a certain self assurance clan like about your practice and your devotion to Khun Sujin this doesn't prevents me of appreciating and taking in consideration the valuable sharings and your keeness on Dhamma. I am not prejudiced or 'dogmatic' and I don't cling to anything 'a priori': the proof of the pudding... :-) Metta and a hug Cybele 7559 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 8:20am Subject: Re: Good Grief! Dear Sarah, I am looking at the commentaries for the particular sutta that Mike mentioned (MN 21). The commentaries in Thai is as challenging as the sutta itself. I think you really should look at an English translation or look at it in Pali. The commentary mentioned that domanassa that should not be pursued includes domanassa that is connected to the 5 sensualities. The domanassa that should be pursued includes domanassa resulting from wanting to attain the lokutarra phala but doesn't attain adaquate amount of vipassana in a certain period of time, the wanting of the same kind of ayatana as the ariyans. As a result of the want, the domanassa arises. "To be pursued" domannassaa includes: domanassa resulting from leaving the 5 sensualities, from vipassana, from being mindful - being aware, from the 1st Jhana, etc. It was then explained in detail how a Bikhu can have domanassa resulted from wanting to have the result but has not attained. kom --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Kom, > > Just sent my note before looking at your post here which I'll read with > interest.....I'm glad you've raised the jhana link. > > I wonder if you have any Thai com notes too? > > S. > 7560 From: Erik Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 0:06pm Subject: Re: An Invitation to All Here --- "Anders Honore" wrote: > > So Anders, let me put the question to you: is just the ACT of > sitting > > (or whatever practice we're talking about) the same thing as the > > enlightenment of a Tathagata? Is a hen sitting on her egg the same > as > > a Buddha? (no Tathagatagharba stuff here for a minute) > > See, this is exactly why I don't wish to engage in the debate. I could > explain all about the different levels at which this would have to be > understood and all, but it wouldn't have any relevance to your > practice, would it? I dunno, would it? Just yesterday I recall the Theravadin professor (another teacher I was brought to by one of my Theravadin teachers there) said the most curious thing to us--including the several Theravadin monks in attendance: that we were all Buddhas! :) :) :) And my lamas have trained me to endeavor to see all sentient beings as Buddhas as well. And that has really, truly helped my practice in so many ways, to the point there have been times I have seen things that might have otherwise appeared to be quite ordinary appear in the most miraculous ways to these eyes. > As Derek skillfully pointed out at one point: > Initially, Buddhism was just a practice, but at one point in history, > it somehow switched to become a philosophical endeavor. Yes, and that was yet ANOTHER point emphasized by my teacher yesterday in our little classroom at Wat Mahatat. One, I should add, I could not agree more heartily about with both you and he. Which is why my teacher was emphatic that we must "taste the fruit" by our practice of the Dhamma, rather than merely intellectualize it away with more layers of abstractions; that we must directly come to know it in our own lives through the mindful application of Right Effort. He particularly emphasized the uselessness of mere study for its own sake, and that such an endeavour leads not to the fruits of the Noble Path, but to further entanglement in views, and directly blocks the very wisdom we are seeking, the very wisdom that arises to terminate once and for all the sufferings of cyclic existence. And I recall so clearly on hearing these words, sitting in that room feeling so at ease and comfortable (I believe the Thai and Khmer word for this feeling is so much nicer that any words we have for it in English: "sabai"), in the exactly same way I feel so "sabai" in my lama's gompa (instruction and meditation hall). This was in addition to the great happiness I was feeling at seeing my dear friend Noppan and her friend Yu (whose original name was "viriya," believe it or not!) sitting beside me, having come for their first time for formal instruction in the Buddha's Dhamma after having lived their entire lives here in Bangkok as Buddhists, without ever having undertaken formal instruction in the Buddha's Dhamma (I had met Noppan some months ago via the Internet because I had been seeking someone to help me pick up a little Thai and act as a guide on my planned move to this City of Angels). > > The Buddha NEVER said that we're just a > > collection of dependently arising, impermanent parts arising and > > passing away, and therefore we have no volitional control > > (conventionally) over our actions, for example. That is taking the > > doctrine of anatta to an unhealthy (even fatal) extreme. > > That's what I've been trying to say too, but it's seems there isn't > much support for this though. By "much support," where do you mean? Here in DSG? Or in the words of the Buddha? If it's support in terms of what the Buddha actually taught, if you read the Pali Suttas, you will find support for this everywhere! That view you will find no support for in the Buddha's teachings: the idea that because all phenomena are empty and ultimately beyond control, that there is no conventional possibility of choices, such as choosing to train in sila, or "generating desire, arousing persistence, endeavouring, upholding and exerting our intent" for the abandoning of unskillful/unwholesome qualities and the taking up of skillful/wholesome qualities. > Yeah, it's the same for me. That's also one of the main reasons why I > am attracted to Theravada (and the reason why I'll probably ordain in > a Theravada monastery over a Zen one), because they emphasise Samadhi > and (especially) Sila more. My Prajna is still much stronger than my > Samadhi and Sila, and my Sila is still stronger than my Samadhi (not > necessarily one-pointed concentration under this definition). And > hence I need to develop those. Yeah, I have a much practice yet to do in terms of the samadhi part as well (and I still have to perfect my patience and efforts at present to make this midstream more fertile soil for the perfection of samadhi and wisdom). Which is why I shall be attending a three-day meditation retreat August 24-26 at the invitation of one of the meditation masters present in yesterday's class--which my present level of development will provide me with better conditions for the practices of sati and samadhi taught to me so far at Wat Mahatat. Not that we technically need any special places for meditation, as my teacher there emphasized: we can be aware of all of these realities RIGHT NOW in the midst of our daily activities--indeed we MUST! And yet, practically speaking, for myself, I have found it of immense benefit to follow the Buddha's advice in the Satipatthana Sutta in terms of seeking out solitude and favorable conditions for cultivating this all the same. For a more average practitioner like me, I have found it to be an enormous help to be freed from the distractions of daily life for a little while, because I have found that this really, REALLY helps get my mind unscattered and focused in just the right place, such that when I return to daily life my mindfulness and concentration are that much more developed and stable. But that's just this beginner on the path. I am sure there are some great beings whose mindfulness and concentration are so well-developed that this sort of effort and practice in things like solitude and retreat is merely gilding on the lotus. > I still hold Zen in high esteem, but I > think one of the flaws of Zen, is that it doesn't include the > establishment of a solid base to a proper degree before developing > that Prajna (it's least not nowadays. It was probably different > before). Like you, I still hold Zen in great esteem, but, like you, have found myself drawn to the Tibetan Dharma for the very reasons you mentioned you find the Theravada appealing to you: that it emphasizes the more mundane, foundational aspects, such as sila, which I found in my own life were lacking to where I was unable to take any real slightest advantage of the deep and sublime wisdom-aspect teachings I had learned about therein (which as I noted, resulted in VERY LITTLE progress for me on the path). > > The Middle Way is not difficult at all. It's > > that most of us make it MUCH more difficult than it need be. > > Yeah, I love what Foyan (a brilliant Zen teacher) said about this: > "All that is necessary is that there be no perceiver or perceived > when you perceive [no separation of perceiver and perceived], no > thinker or thought when you think [no separation of thinker and > thought]. Buddhism is very easy. Just let go, then step back and > look....." > "Buddhism is extremely easy and saves the most energy. It's just that > you yourself waste energy and cause yourself trouble. The ancients > saw people helpless, and told them to try meditating quietly. This > was good advice, but later people didn't understand what the ancients > meant, and closed their eyes, suppressed body and mind, and sat like > lumps waiting for enlightenment. How foolish!" To add to that, in the Tibetan teachings there are "Four Faults" to recognizing our Buddha-nature, when we fail to recognize that the nature of mind is: 1) too near 2) too easy 3) too subtle 4) too excellent > Yes, Dzogchen is based on the same (direct) principles, although it > is usually more clear and approachable than Zen. The strength of > Dzogchen is that it is easily approachable. The strength of Zen is > that it defies conceptual thought, and forces the student to go > beyond it. Indeed! Like all correct Dhamma its purpose it to terminate our clinging views. > I've got the First Treasury of Longchenpa (Precious Treasury of the > Dharmadhatu) on my computer, which I'll be reading eventually. Great > stuff, from what little I've read so far. Excellent choice, my friend! Dzogchen is quiet the practice (not mine, as in the Geluk and Kagyu schools we have the equivalent, Mahamudra, the Great Seal). > You should read the Platform Sutra anyway (it's at my site). I think > you'll appreciate his directness. I have already taken your advice and began reading last night. I particularly enjoy this passage: "Learned Audience, those who recite the word 'Prajna' the whole day long do not seem to know that Prajna is inherent in their own nature. But mere talking on food will not appease hunger, and this is exactly the case with these people. We might talk on Sunyata (Emptiness) for myriads of kalpas, but talking alone will not enable us to realize the Essence of Mind, and it serves no purpose in the end. "The word 'Mahaprajnaparamita' is Sanskrit, and means 'great wisdom to reach the opposite shore' (of the sea of existence). What we have to do is to put it into practice with our mind; whether we recite it or not does not matter. Mere reciting it without mental practice may be likened to a phantasm, a magical delusion, a flash of lightning or a dewdrop. On the other hand, if we do both, then our mind will be in accord with what we repeat orally." I look forward to much, much more reading of this excellent Sutra! Many deep bows of thanks pointing this out to me, Anders! > > If you like, you can continue to play the subitist, I'll continue > to > > play gradualist (until we tired of it, and then perhaps we can > switch > > sides)? :) > > > > Hva tror du? :) > > Haha, jeg vil hellere være ikke-positionalist! You appear to be in perfect agreement here with both Nagarjuna: "emptiness is beyond taking any position," and Master Chandrakirti: "any position breeds a counter-position, and neither is valid in itself," both of whom are considered the key proponents of the true Middle Way as expounded in my own Geluk school's "Madhyamika- Prasangika" system of tenets. This has been wonderfully articulated by the true Master Acharya Professor Richard Hayes (the "baddest of the bad cops" for me and a true master of the Buddha's Dharma who there mere though of causes tears of gratitude to well up in me): http://www.kaihan.com/library/RH-Nagarjuna.htm As always, Anders, it's been a pleasure! 7561 From: Sarah Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 2:43pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Undesirable objects - Betty Dear Betty, Well I got to see an extract of the film on CNN this morning - quite stopped my yoga practice in its stride! Looks set to be another 'Crouching Tiger' with wonderful sets, costumes, elephants and the rest..... There was also an interview with your cousin (or husband's cousin), Prince C? Yugala, and he came across very well. I learned that 5oo yrs ago in Thailand, the monks kept their eyebrows which they don't today. I appreiciate the examples given by you, Nina and Erik with regard to being grateful to those who speak harsh words or who act as a condition for us to receive unpleasant vipaka......not easy at all. Like you suggested, mana really blinds us! Thankyou . Sarah p.s We seldom get to movies these days even though the best cinema in town is 2mins walk from home, but when there's a 'personal connection' it gives us a good excuse (which is how I justify the Jacky Chan films too - I had a few years trying to teach his wild son). We'll be giving you full credit for the English dialogue and ignore any mistakes! --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Betty, I greatly appreciate your report about the vipaka experienced > and your wise consideration of the events. Those are helpful reminders. I > also had unpleasant vipaka, there were some unpleasant and blunt words, that > can happen. But still this was a reminder for me not to be neglectful as to > sati and then we can even be grateful to the person who uttered them. 7562 From: Erik Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 3:11pm Subject: Re: Undesirable objects - Betty --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Betty, > > Well I got to see an extract of the film on CNN this morning - quite stopped my > yoga practice in its stride! Looks set to be another 'Crouching Tiger' with > wonderful sets, costumes, elephants and the rest..... Oh jeez, great, another reminder to quit my slacking and take up my former practice of yoga (which I have been shirking since arriving in Thailand and getting so heavily involved in all these other wonderful aspects of the Dhamma to the point of neglecting the only possible vehicle for awakening to these truths at all--this fathom-long body! :) :) :) Look forward to seeing you and Jon again soon! All my love, Erik 7563 From: Sarah Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 3:47pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation - Anders & Sarah Hi Anders, --- Anders Honore wrote: > > Well, I have. As I read the Pali Canon, they are not contradictory, > but it seems your reading differs markedly from mine ;-) > > > If you understand it to say that Nirvana/Nibbana 'is > > always present in us' it sounds contradictory to me! > > I could give you many quotes from all sorts of canon sources on this, > but I'm too lazy. Anders, I'm really not making any comments about Mahyana texts. My comment above is in regard to any comment on the Theravada Tipitaka interpreted in this way. Originally we were discussing Tipitaka suttas mentioned by you, and I'd prefer to stick to this, partly because I have no knowledge of Mahayana texts, but mainly because this is a forum for the study of dhamma according to the Theravada texts and ancient commentaries:-)) I'm sure you have several other forums for discussing Zen and other Mahayana teachings.... > Sarah, if you ever have the time to do so, you should try and read > Huineng's Platform Sutra (It's at my website under 'Sutras' in the > Zen/Ch'an Writings section). He is considered one of the three > greatest Zen masters ever, and is just about the most canon source of > Zen you''ll find. If you read this, you'll know more about Zen than > most Zennists! Thanks, Anders... I'll keep your requests in mind.....I appreciate your interest in my comments which I'm sure would not do this or the other Sutras justice! > > > ************************************************************** > > > > With regard to the MN 49 (24-26) passage you quoted: > I'm not sure what you mean here. do you mean it refers refers to the > consciousness *as* Nibbana, or as consciousmess *of* Nibbana? That's > what I meant when I said the realm of speculation. Sorry. What I understand is Nibbana as cognizable, i.e knowable or realizable.....(in other words realizable by magga and phala cittas) > > ******************************************************** > > Haha, always happy to help :-) > > > Anders: > And Mun? > > ********************************************************* > I quote people like Chah and Mun to "stretch" the boundaries of > understanding "Theravada." These people are 100% Theravada (not > mention some of the most acclaimed teachers of this century), yet > they present a different view of Theravada than you (I feel tempted > to say: "Than your abidhammic school). I'll birefly requote a small > passage by Mun: I'm not sure what it means to be 100%Theravada (but that's another 'debate') > > All that remains is the primal mind, > true & unchanging. Sorry, it doesn't make any sense to me.... > > > ------------------------------------- > > Finally, you quoted from Ang Nik, bk of Tens, 81, Bahuna (Pali, > Text V, 151-2) > > Now I find the Pali in the last line (vimariyaadikatena cetasaa > viharatii ti) > > means literally ' with a mind made without boundary. The com. > mentions 'having > > severed the boundary of the defilements' (kilesamariyaada.m > bhinditva . . > > .)which is much closer to the translation and my comment below I > think. > > Hmm, I think the commentaries should be taken with a grain of salt in > this case. Personally, the literal translation is much closer to what > I am trying to say (haha, and hence I discard all else! bad > formuluation on my part, but you know what I mean :-)). Actually I don't know. Are you saying that if the commentaries written by the arahats who helped preserve the Tipitaka don't support your interpretation that they should be taken with a 'pinch of salt'?? May I also remind you that the way I understood the literal translation (before having looked at the Pali or commentary notes) was a little different from yours...... >Teachers like > Chah and Mun are really just commentators too, and they present a > different commentary. That's true....just as your commentary is a little different from mine;-)) > > > '....So, When the khandhas are present, > > 'A being is said in common usage' (KS 1, 135) > OK, that was just the part I could remember quickly. Vis XV111, 25: 'After defining mentyality-materiality thus according to its true nature, then in order to abandon this worldly dsignation of 'a being' and 'a person' more thoroughly, to sumount confusion about beings and to establish his mind on the plane of non-confusion, he makes sure that the meanng defined, namely, 'This is mere mentality-materiality, there is no being, no person' is confirmed by a number of suttas. For this has been said: 'As with the assembly of parts The word 'chariot' is countenanced, So, when the aggregates are present, "A being" is said in common usage' (S.i,135) > Could you post a larger quote, so the context can be seen? Just done > I don't think this quote here necessarily opposes what I am trying to > say, since this Nibbana-mind/Buddha-nature (assuming, just for a > second, that it is real) is traceless, unconditioned, non-dwelling > and without any sign and hence can hardly be termed a 'being' (in the > sense of Samsaric existence). May I be a 'tad strong' to coin a Howard expression here? I think the 'problem' is when people like yourself have read a lot of Mahayana teachings and then try to make it all 'fit' into the 'original' Tipitaka.....It reminds me a little when I first came to study abhidhamma having trained as a psychologist....it took a while before I could read and consider what was in front of me as a new 'subject' or explanation of realities without trying to make it all fit together with my ealrlier studies. Anders, just a 'tad strong' view for your consideration only;-)) ********************************************** > > It's going quite well! I am a lot more motivated than last year (the > second year is always the hard one), and I am kinda sorry to see that > this year will be my last. Glad to hear this....keep up your school studies.....maybe a Professor of Religions would suit you better than being a doctor - either way, keep working hard! > > I will certainly be looking forward to it. Both the chats and the > visit :-) Us too... Thanks for considering my comments so carefully and in real appreciation of your fine interest in dhamma. This post is a little rushed as I'm expecting a group of giggling girls at my door any moment! Sarah 7564 From: Erik Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 4:09pm Subject: Re: Undesirable objects - Betty --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Betty, > > Well I got to see an extract of the film on CNN this morning - quite stopped my > yoga practice in its stride! Looks set to be another 'Crouching Tiger' with > wonderful sets, costumes, elephants and the rest..... > > There was also an interview with your cousin (or husband's cousin), Prince C? > Yugala, and he came across very well. I learned that 5oo yrs ago in Thailand, > the monks kept their eyebrows which they don't today. I was going to aqdd some more to the post earlier, but your inspiration led me straight to do a short yoga sadhana--which as I've mentioned I've been neglecting for some time now. Anyway, in the course of my brief (not straining too hard getting back into it now after all), I couldn't help but reflect on Six Yugalas since your letter as addressed to Betty and all, and BTW every time I think of Betty I can't help but recall these important factors from the Abhidhamma), and anyway, was recalling, at this point directly in my asanas, how this simple practice of yoga has done so much for me to engender these "six yugalas" (pairs, from I presume to be the same Sanskritic origin of "yuj" shared by the word "yoga"--which means to "to yoke," and I suspect is also a part of samYOJana--though those actually learned in the Pali or Sanskrit languages may feel free to correct me if I am mistaken here, since I have not been trained in nor do I speak either language). So my best guess here is that "yugala" refers to the union of mind and body, which from my faulty recollection from the Abhidhamma are broken out as the pair (yugala) of "citta" and "kaya." From my faulty recollection the six are: tranquility, agility, pliancy, workableness, steadfastness, and uprightness (and again, I cannot vouch for the accuracy of my recollection here of these six factors here and I left my "Abhidhamma Studies" book back in NYC, so I have no reference to back me up, and anyone please correct me if I have gotten these six mixed up here). So regarding yoga, I have found yoga to be an excellent support condition for both citta and kaya passadhi (tranquility), for example. (And passadhi being one of the seven enlightenment factors, this is no trivial thing! Especially for someone as typically restless as me! :) Also, I have found yoga to engender this and all the other five yugalas to a very high degree. I have found physical pliancy has helped engender mental pliancy, workableness, uprightness, etc. etc., in both mind and body, not to mention I have found yoga to serve as an excellent support condition for yet another enlightenment factor, piti (joy), and as such, is a practice that has greatly assisted my own development of samatha and jhana meditation--since with piti, even that which is normally difficult to endure becomes easy to endure--for example normally dificult-to-endure practices like finding a secluded place and sitting cross-legged, with the intention to mindfully note that when breathing in long, there is breathing in long; when breathing out long, there is breathing out long; when breathing in short, there is breathing in short; and when breathing out short, there is breathing out short. Yoga has in addition to this served as a support condition for yet more enlightenment factors. Including viriya (yoga energizes the mind and body, after all), passadhi (one o the yugalas), samadhi, and upekkha! This is just by way of personal experience, of course. Others' experiences may vary. As an aside, I have fond that that the practice of yoga, because of serving as nutriment conditions for these six yugalas as wll as the enlightenment factors in my own practice, has also had the side- effect of being a support condition for pacifying the five hindrances! Again, it has helped me to grow calmer by helping reduce bodily tension, and by extension hindrances like restlessness and worry; and furthermore, by energizing my body and mind, has also served as a support condition for the sort of aroused and energetic persistence needed to remain seated on my cushion, at ease, such that I have found it far easier for the mind to be free from the disturbances that normally hinder the concentration and unification of the mind to the point of absorption, and of course, that absorption when naturally (and unforcedly) arisen from these previous conditions has served as the basis for the union of both calm abiding and insight, the conjoined pair (yuganaddah) said by Lord Buddha to be the indispensible pair of "swift messengers" needed to waken to the Deathless, Nibbana! So Sarah, I once again thank you by demonstrating, via your example (thus inspiring me straightaway to restart this wonderful practice I have found so helpful), such that my body and mind are at far greater ease and peace than they were just thirty minutes ago, and that my progfress on the path has been re-enrgized and my persisetnce aroused to the point I will vow to work steadfastly to maintain a consistent practice of yoga once again! So many deep bows and thank-yous to you for your most inspiring example, Sarah! :) :) :) > p.s We seldom get to movies these days even though the best cinema in town is > 2mins walk from home, but when there's a 'personal connection' it gives us a > good excuse (which is how I justify the Jacky Chan films too - I had a few > years trying to teach his wild son). I think my favorite movie of this summer for the "personal connection" reason would have to be Tomb Raider, given many of the scenes in that move were shot at the temple at Angkor Ta Prohm (dedicated to the "Mother Goddess" Prajnaparamita--aka "Perfection of Wisdom," by King Jayavarman VII) where my fiancee and I met, and where she was born and has lived her entire life (and NO "Cradle Raider" jokes either about my seventeen-year-old bride-to-be from anyone here, either!!! :) :) :) 7565 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 4:43pm Subject: Re: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Rob E > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > I think I understand what you are saying: that development of the path > > involves > > expansion of awareness and knowledge of what is really there in the > > moment, and > > that this is not a way of working out unwholesome tendencies, but a > > separate > > endeavor. > > Yes, if I understand you correctly. One is the development of the path. > 'Working out' unwholesome tendencies is not the development of the path; > it is usually driven by an idea of 'self'. > > > But what I have not gotten from this response is how you deal with the > > akusula. > > You say that you would like to have less, as a person, of lust or greed, > > whatever > > the akusula may be. Is this something that you work out, and if so how? > > Like you said, we deal with akusala with more akusala. Unless there's any > kusala (don't reckon there is, though, in my case, except occasionally > some useful reflection later). > > > Since we > > agree that this is part of the foundation of the path, and that neither > > suppression nor satisfaction of desire lessens the pull of desire, which > > I would > > think we would agree would tend to pull us from the path, what is the > > proper way > > of dealing with akusula to lessen its presence and its pull? > > Here we differ, perhaps. It is my understanding of the teachings that > there is no need to deal with one's akusala in order to begin the > development of the path. > > > I think that mindfulness of the experience of the akusula lessens its > > pull. You > > are saying that these are and should be separate issues. So what is > > your answer > > to attachment and desire? > > I can't do better that re-post here something that Mike wrote recently. > He said -- > > "Tendencies and accumulations (what I think of as > sankharakhanda) are fertile ground for mindfulness > (dhammanusati(sp?)). Unfortunately they are the > continuous results of incomprehensibly vast numbers of > unimaginably complex conditions from the past--since we > can't change the past, we also can't change the > present manifestations of its conditions. > > "Fortunately, on the other hand, tendencies and > accumulations CAN be understood as not-self--at that > moment, 'personality' can be seen for the > insignificant thing that it is. Having a rather > rotten personality myself, I find this reflection > quite liberating. (This isn't to say that kusala can't > or shouldn't be cultivated despite personality--it can > and should)." > > The accumulated akusala are so strong and entrenched that nothing we can > 'do' can have any real effect. The only fix in the long run is the > development of panna which can gradually attenuate and eventually > eradicate completely and finally all traces of akusala. > > As Mike also pointed out in a lsubsequent post, when kusala has been > developed to a certain level (power?), it can have the effect of subduing > akusala -- > > "Another thought: The Buddha also taught, right > through the discourses and the discipline, the > (temporary) subduing of the defilements by various > skilful reflections. > > This again is only a temporary fix. But we should not think that it is > simply a matter of 'thinking kusala'. As I understand it, this refers to > a high level of development of kusala. > > I hope this clarifies what I have been trying to say. > > Jon Thanks, Jon, yes it does clarify what you are trying to say. I tend to think that particularly for Theravada, that purification of the vehicle would be part of the path. I am interested to see that you feel strongly that it is not, and that rather than trying to make the vehicle more receptive, one simply sees it as not-self and focusses on the matter of what there is to be mindful of. This actually makes sense to me. I assume, however, that you would try to resist acting on impure tendencies, such as being promiscuous, etc., which would create further obscurations? Robert E. 7566 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 4:50pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Satipatthana (was Testing - Erik --- Victor wrote: > [snip] > There is no Robert; > [snip] > > > > robert > > Hi Robert, > > You wrote "There is no Robert". Could you explain who you were > referring to by the name "Robert"? > > Metta, > Victor He could have been just referring to the name, and saying that it doesn't reference anyone. Certainly there is a body that is recognizeable that is referred to by that name, and there are speech acts and physical acts associated with that body and name, but what I think he is saying is that the name refers only to that and not to anyone that could be referenced as an actual entity beyond that. Robert E. [the other Robert, who also existeth not....... ] 7567 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 4:56pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The limits of awareness --- Herman wrote: > Hi all, > > Cognitive science teaches that awareness is just a bubble of froth on > the ocean of reality. It is a Johny-come-lately in the evolution of > matter. Awareness is a by-product of matter coalesced in a particular > sequence. I disagree, but have no scientific basis for doing so. Perhaps this is because I believe that science can never prove anything other than what it already establishes as a given. And thus sheds no light on the truth of human experience, which is beyond presuppositions. Robert =============== > Rupas arise without nama. Nama does not arise without rupa. Nama is > effect, not cause. > > Time for dinner. It smells good. Wish you were here :-) > > > Herman > > > > > > ===== 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" 7568 From: Herman Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 5:41pm Subject: Re: The limits of awareness Dear Kom, --- "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: Herman: > > I realised the other day that I had driven all the way to work > > without being aware of anything else except for thoughts about your > > post. I take this to suggest that the body sees, hears, feels a > > multitude of things all the time, and that awareness is not really an > > essential component of the machinations of daily life. > Kom: > Yes, by the Buddha teachings, awareness or mindfullness only rises with > kusala mental states. Do you think our daily life's activities are kusala or > akusala? > kom Would that mean that if I was aware of anger, that this would be a kusala moment? I had come to understand that kusala meant "leading to wholesome moments". And honestly, attempting to pick the causes of each moment would be impossible to me. I have some doubts about the usefulness of dividing all experience between wholesome and unwholesome. First of all because I can only guess at the consequences of anything thought or done, whether in the next minute or millenium, and secondly because wholesomeness is such a subjective concept (unless I misunderstand it). There is the saying, one man's meat is another man's poison. Is kusala/akusla considered absolute eg is all anger akusala, is all dana kusala? Kind regards Herman 7569 From: Herman Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 6:08pm Subject: Re: The limits of awareness Dear Robert, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > --- Herman wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Cognitive science teaches that awareness is just a bubble of froth on > > the ocean of reality. It is a Johny-come-lately in the evolution of > > matter. Awareness is a by-product of matter coalesced in a particular > > sequence. > > I disagree, but have no scientific basis for doing so. Perhaps this is because I > believe that science can never prove anything other than what it already > establishes as a given. And thus sheds no light on the truth of human experience, > which is beyond presuppositions. > > Robert > Did you read about the woman who recently gave birth naturally to a baby after having been in a vegetative state since the first week of pregnancy? I do not propose to project some truth of human experience onto this woman, because I know nothing about her experience. But to have human experience as the starting point for any truth statement sounds to me like an invitation for a self to arise. Awareness identified with is self. Solipsism if you will. The laws of physics and kamma would still be working if there were no bodies to experience their effects. Kind Regards Herman 7570 From: Herman Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 7:06pm Subject: Complete English translation of Majjhima Nikaya (Re: Diamond Sutra) Dear Anders, --- "Anders Honore" > > Haha, it looks like it! I'll buy the Samyutta once I have 150 dollars > to spare. Right now, those money are earmarked for a unforseen trip > to Rome in September. I have a sneaking suspicion that you are about to change the course of history. For the sake of the inhabitants of Abenraa and Halsingor, please buy the Samyutta and leave Rome to the Romans :-) Herman 7571 From: Herman Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 7:34pm Subject: Re: The traditional teachings Dear John, --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Hi, Cybele > > --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > > hi Jon > > > Considering that all traditional buddhist schools agree on meditation > > being > > the asset of the practice and in your approach is not considered > > fundamental > > I would dare to say that also you don't embrace fully the traditional > > teachings. > > There is one thing I'm sure we can agree on, Cybele--it is what the Buddha > said on the subject that is the 'traditional teaching'. > > And I think we can also agree that the best source of information on what > the Buddha said is the suttas and the vinaya, read in the light of the > abhidhamma, and as elucidated by the commentaries. I agree the suttas, vinaya, abhidhamma and commentaries are there for us to read. But the cetasikas that accompanied the writing of this material are gone forever. As a simile, in the seventies/eighties there was a movement that attempted to recreate how Baroque music must have sounded in it's day. Instruments were made according to baroque specifications, performance techniques of the day were researched to the hilt, the settings in which the music was originally played were recreated etc etc. All good and well, there was only one thing missing, the mindstates of the composer and his/her original audience. Do you accept the importance of this component ie the mindstate of the author and projected audience in determining meaning ,and it's irretrievably lost state in the case of the Dhamma? Regards Herman 7572 From: ranil gunawardena Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 7:55pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] An Invitation to All Here Dear Dhamma friends, Therawada - Mahayana - I dont know the difference. What if simply "Buddha Dhamma"? ~mettha Ranil >From: Erik >Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] An Invitation to All Here >Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 04:28:17 -0000 > >--- Bihn A wrote: > > > As you may know, Theravada Buddhism in Vietnam is not > > popular, and it is my wish to see it flourishing there as much as > > possible. > >Bihn, I heartily encourage you in your endeavors of aiding the growth >and flourishing of this vital aspect of the holy Ariyan Dhamma in >your home country! I have precisely the same feeling with regard with >my wish to see the so-called "Mahayana" take root and flourish here >in the parts of SE Asia where it is not so popular these days, in the >same way that the Theravada in Vietnam, is not popular at this point >in time. The reason I feel particularly strongly about this is that >we now live in a very new era--with instantaneous worldwide >communications, and speedy travel possible in ways never before known >in mankind's recorded history (for those not possessed of the >abhinnas of the great Mahasiddhas, at any rate :), where the chance >of reuniting once again these two beautiful and correct strains of >the Ariyan Dharma is possible now, in such a way that has not been >true for perhaps even centuries. > >For the record, one of my primary motivations for coming to Thailand >has been to learn and internalize as much of the holy facet of Ariyan >Dharma known as Theravada as possible, to bring many of its elements-- >some of which have been neglected or even lost from my own tradition >(such as the practice of walking meditation, for example)--to help >the process of re-assimilating them back into what is presently known >as the Tibetan Dharma (which is currently in the process of mutating >into the American Dharma, the Australian Dharma, the German Dharma, >the Brazilian Dharma, the Italian Dharma, etc., etc.) > >Also, as many here may know, Theravada is the presently dominant form >of Buddhism in Cambodia (whence I just returned), and similar to your >wish to see the Theravada flavor of the Dharma flourish in Vietnam, >one of my sincerest wishes is to see the re-establishment and >flourishing of tantric and so-called "Mahayana" (hopefully no one >here will take offense at my using that term; it is not meant at all >to imply anything derogatory about Theravada, as some foolish >sectarians sometimes do by implying Theravada is "Hinayana," >or "lesser vehicle", which is FAR from the truth of things--because >it IS the actual Ariyan Dhamma and as such, in perfect accord with >ALL the teachings of Lord Buddha) Buddhism in Cambodia--for so many >reasons, and in no small part because this is the very form of >Buddhism that influenced the design and construction of the >magnificent Buddhist temples at Angkor, and as such is integral to >Khmer and Cambodian history, a well as being an integral part of my >own linage and by extension, practice. > >At present, Theravada Buddhism only "dominates" (in its very feeble >and haphazard way now since the Pol Pot time, where he had all monks, >or anyone of learning for that matter, brutally tortured and >executed) in Cambodia and elsewhere in SE Asia, including Thailand >now due to strong royal patronage (some have said "edict" but I have >not heard this confirmed in actual fact) for the Lankavamsa flavor >thanks to the influence of the Thai King Ramkamheng, such that >before, where the two great streams had coexisted peacefully side-by- >side, the Theravada as we now know it began to dominate, perhaps >(this is only speculation on my part) due to the unwholesome >influence of those who might have mistakenly criticized the Mahayana >as being anariyan Dhamma (which is certainly a common activity today >among many who call themselves Theravadins--those who still actively >promulgate the extremely severe wrong view that the Mahayana doctrine >is somehow a "corrupted" version of the Buddha's Dharma--thus leading >to the very heavy bad kamma of disparaging the Ariyan Dhamma in any >of its extant forms, but I digress). > >In fact, my most sincere wish of all would be to once again see the >side-by-side flourishing of ALL these holy and correct traditions of >the Buddha's Dharma (as they did together here in SE Asia and in >India centuries ago--even coexisting side-by-side within the same >monasteries, where each tradition would "debate" the other in a >process leading to the accumulation of greater and greater wisdom for >all participants and spectators alike!), and in particular, the re- >establishment of this harmonious unity--not a merging of traditions, >but a mutual accord and respect--of these two skillful methods taught >by Lord Buddha during his appearance in this sasana, which he taught >for one reason only: the end of suffering. > >Expanding a bit on this theme, I find few more inspiring places in >this world than the Angkor complex of 180 temples. One reason I find >Angkor so inspiring is due to the influence of the Chakravartin >(wheel-turning monarch Bodhisattva like the recent Thai King Rama IV >and His Holiness XIV Dalai Lama), King Jayavarman VII--who like His >Holiness The 14th Dalai Lama, is considered an emanation of >Avalokiteshvara (a.k.a. Kwan Yin in China, Kannon in Japan, and >Chenresik in Tibet)--who constructed in addition to many other >Buddhist temples, the temple/city of Angkor Thom, which is an >enormous tantric mandala with the famed temple Bayon at its center, >which displays Avalokiteshvara's gently smiling compassionate face >radiating metta and karuna out in all directions, for the sole >welfare of all sentient beings. > >Among all the temples commissioned by King Jayavarman VII, however, >my favorite among them is the former tantric monastic temple complex >of Ta Prohm (it actually served as the "temple" backdrop in the new >movie "Tomb Raider" for those who may have seen this movie, and once >housed over 2,700 monks, as well as serving as the supply center for >all the region's hospitals). > >Ta Prohm is not only aesthetically beautiful by design. It has also >purposefully been left in its unrestored state--meaning that >throughout the crumbling stones of this impermanent temple grow >enormous fig trees (of the "ficus" genus--the same genus of tree we >know as the Bodhi tree under which Lord Buddha achieved his >unsurpassed and complete self-awakening), leaving to me, at least, a >clear reminder of both the impermanence of all composed phenomena, as >well as the fact that this fact of this impermanent nature of all >composed thing provides the only fertile soil for the growth and >flourishing and fruiting of the enlightened mind, just as the perfect >lotus arises from the muck and mud of samsara! > >And Ta Prohm is my favorite temple of all the temples for another >reason: its representation of the beautifully carved "devatas" >and "apsaras" (representations of the tantric Buddhist feminine >principle of enlightened mind also known by the Sanskrit >term "dakini" or the Tibetan word "khadro-ma"--who represent key >aspects of tantric sadhana ritual because they symbolize the empty >nature of the wisdom aspect of reality)--not to mention the fact that >my fiancée was born and raised and has lived her entire life at >this >very temple! > >The most significant reason for my love of this temple, though, is >that Jayavarman VII built and dedicated it specifically to >his "mother," as one can read in any of the innumerable guidebooks on >Angkor one may come across should one ever decide to visit this >holiest of holy places on this planet earth (it certainly has to rank >up there with the Four Great Sites of traditional Buddhist pilgrimage >in India, in my opinion--if for no other reason than its sheer >majestic scope and unparalleled execution and stunning architecture >representing the Buddhist cosmos in its entirety). > >What the authors of few of these guidebooks ever note, though, is >that while it is technically correct King Jayavarman VII dedicated Ta >Prohm to his mother, the "mother" in question was not the King's >birth-mother, but in actuality, to the "Mother of the Buddhas"-- >"Prajnaparamita" (Perfection of Wisdom), which also happens to be THE >central wisdom-teaching of ALL sects of "Mahayana" Buddhism, and is >recited in Chinese, Japanese, and Tibetan, by every sincere >practitioner--often daily--as a reminder of the truth that "form is >only emptiness; emptiness no other than form," thus underscoring >vividly the ultimate nature that all dhammas are empty of self- >nature, and all composed phenomena are impermanent and dependently >arisen, and the fact that it is only due to the grasping nature of >the defiled mind, that they appear to us as dukkha. > >Furthermore, the temple Ta Prohm's West entrance (where my fiancée >and I met last January in what can only be called a MOST auspicious >meeting, but nowhere near as auspicious as our meeting this time >around, especially when she placed the krama--the traditional Khmer >scarf--around the back of my neck after presenting her a small gift I >had brought along just to give to her this time around! :) :) :)) is >associated with the Buddha Amitabha of the Five Buddha Families as >taught in "Mahayana" Buddhism. > >From the little card given to me by a nun at Wat Mahatat, Section 5 >(from my visit there recently), with Amitabha's picture and his >prayer, which I find unbelievably inspiring. > >"I vow that when my life approaches its end; >All obstructions will be swept away; >I will see Amitabha Buddha, >And be born in his land of Ultimate Bliss and Peace. > >"When reborn in the Western land, >I will perfectly and completely fulfill >Without exception these Great Vows, >To the delight and benefit of all sentient beings." > >NAMO AMITABHA! > >Incidentally, the Buddha Amitabha's ("boundless light", whose primary >symbolic function is to transform the passions and craving into >discerning wisdom) main associated Bodhisattva is none other than >Avalokiteshvara, whose gently smiling face is graces the West >entrance of the gateway into the center of the mandala.of temple of >Ta Prohm. > >It should be noted that the Bodhisattva of Compassion, >Avalokiteshvara, In the "Mahayana" school's teachings, represents >specifically the compassion aspect (the active principle) of full >enlightenment. And it is taught that only through this compassionate >activity (that arises with no thought of giver or recipient--it >merely acts spontaneously to fulfill the ultimate needs of sentient >beings in the triple-realm, which is why images of Avalokiteshvara >are often depicted with eleven heads which look out in all directions >and into all the various realms of suffering beings, in addition to >his having a thousand arms, which serve the purpose of spontaneously >reaching out to suffering sentient beings to help remove their >suffering) conjoined with the feminine wisdom aspect realizing >emptiness (represented by the "Divine Mother," the dakini >Prajnaparamita, who represents the empty wisdom aspect of ultimate >reality), that all the steps to Buddhahood are fulfilled, which is >called the perfection of union of the method and wisdom. (By the way, >this is often graphically depicted in tantric imagery as the "yab- >yum" (lit. "father-mother") mudra of the two aspects inseparably >joined in sexual embrace, which in the Tibetan is also ultimately >symbolized by the "dorje" (or "vajra"), which means "diamond" and >also "thunderbolt"--as it represents the flash of intuitive wisdom >that arises instantaneously upon realizing the ultimate nature of >reality. > >OM GATE GATE PARAGATE PARASAMGATE BODHI SVAHA! > >It is said that only through the union of these two essential >aspects, the aspect of method (brought about by accumulating >wholesome karma) conjoined with wisdom (the wisdom that realizes >emptiness), that full and complete enlightenment is brought about. In >other words, what this specifically says is that the wisdom aspect >alone is insufficient, that we must in addition accumulate deeds of >great merit, just as Lord Buddha himself did over many kalpas, to >bring to fruition the unsurpassed and complete enlightenment enjoyed >by the Buddha. > >For example, there was one famous debate held on this very point--the >most famous and important debate in Tibet's history--as a means of >establishing the correct Dharma for all Tibetans to study and >practice which exists up to this very day in the Land of Snows, which >was held in Lhasa during the years 792-4, between the Chinese >monk "Hvashang Mohoyan," who made the claim that enlightenment >was "sudden" and there was no need to do anything. His main >challenger in this debate was the renowned Master Kamalasila, the >great Indian sage and disciple of Santarakshita (a contemporary of >the legendary Padmasambhava, a.k.a. Guru Rinpoche), who was >instrumental in helping bring the Buddhist Dharma into Tibet from >India during the first period of the Dharma's propagation in >the "rooftop of the world." > >The particular debate was overseen by the Tibetan King Trisong Detsen >(himself considered to be an emanation of Manjushri), and it was >through this long, epistolary debate, spanning two years, that it was >finally made clear and decisively indicated by King Trisong Detsen to >from then on reject the teachings of the Chinese monk Hvashan'g >interpretation of the Dharma--specifically that one need do "nothing >at all," that enlightenment just happens spontaneously, as a >corrupted version of the Dharma; and to instead take up >Santaraksita's (and Kamalasila's) linage teachings on gradual >cultivation (with the understanding that insight-wisdom yet arises in >a flash after much diligent effort at cultivation). > >This Great Debate led to the establishment of the Dharma we now know >by the name Tibetan Buddhism. (a scholarly essay on this critical >debate can be found here, for example: http://sino-sv3.sino.uni-/ >heidelberg.de/FULLTEXT/JR-JOCP/gregory.htm). > >By the way, it is Kamalasila's teachings on the nine stages of >meditation (Bhavana Krama) I was trained in by my lama, beginning >with following the breath, and it is Kamalasila's instructions on >meditation, based on the Buddha's exact teachings of the same, which >is taught as THE central form of cultivating Right Mindfulness and >Right Concentration in the Geluk lineage--the lineage of the Dalai >Lamas. > >Anyway, in keeping with the overall theme of this little missive, I >would like to formally offer my most heartfelt invitation to any >members of our little sangha here in the Dhamma Study Group, who >happen to be reading this message, and who might feel it beneficial >to make a Buddhist pilgrimage to this holiest of holy Buddhist sites-- >Angkor--to be present for this wedding--which, barring unforeseen >circumstances (anatta being non-controlling after all--and who knows >what vipaka this very next moment will bring, any one of us could die >this very next moment!), is presently planned to be held sometime >around the end of November. > >By the way, this is the very best time of year to visit SE Asia for >those not in this part of the world (and the time to see Angkor is >now, rather than later, as the number of tourists visiting has been >doubling each year since the surrender of the Khmer Rouge three years >ago), and it is now safe to travel (and very inexpensive by Western >standards) in and around Angkor. Plus, this would afford the >opportunity of having an incomparable Khmer-speaking (and fluent >English-speaking as well) tour-guide, my fiancée Aert, who, as I >mentioned, was born in and has lived her entire life among the >temples of Angkor! > >Angkor, is a way similar to the Four Great Sites in India, is truly >not a place to be missed by anyone who seriously considers himself or >herself a Buddhist, and who has both the leisure and fortune to visit >this holy place--as the entire complex of temples serves as nothing >if not a supreme opportunity to meditate on all the qualities so >heavily praised by Lord Buddha: those of the union of wisdom and >compassion (method). > > > > 7573 From: Herman Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 8:25pm Subject: Re: An Invitation to All Here Dear Ranil, I agree, but can take it further. How about just "Dhamma" or even " ". There is a saying "Don't shoot the messenger". There is a flipside "Don't venerate the messenger" . It is the message that is important, not the messenger. A discussion about truth (the message) tends to be a discussion about self, non-truth. Truth is just there, it doesn't require discussion or defense or understanding. That's why I suggested " ". Suffering ends when it is no longer imagined to be there. Herman --- "ranil gunawardena" wrote: > Dear Dhamma friends, > Therawada - Mahayana - I dont know the difference. What if simply "Buddha > Dhamma"? > ~mettha > Ranil > > > 7574 From: Erik Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 8:47pm Subject: Re: An Invitation to All Here --- "ranil gunawardena" wrote: > Dear Dhamma friends, > Therawada - Mahayana - I dont know the difference. What if simply "Buddha > Dhamma"? > ~mettha > Ranil Sadhu! Sadhu! Sadhu! My true friend in the Dhamma! :) :) :) Speaking of which, Anders had asked me to provide a citation from the Suttas where the Buddha didn't just say that "MY WAY is the ONLY way." My suggestion then was that (similar to what was discovered when the original Pali of the Satipatthana Sutta the revealed that some who had been dogmatically insisting that the Buddha had taught "this is the only way" had in fact been misrepresented the Buddha's meaning & intent, which is that "this way leads to only one place"!), that the Buddha didn't ever teach THIS ALONE IS TRUE, ALL OTHER WAYS ARE FALSE. In fact, for those who prefer the commentaries of the Abhidhamma tradition, even in the Abhidhammata-Sangaha this view is explictly categorized as one of the "Four Bonds," as I believe I mentioned elsewhere. This key principle (which generally relates to the Buddha's teaching that the Dhamma is "merely a raft for crossing over, not for getting aholsd of") of the Buddha's teaching is expressed directly in the Vacchagotta Sutta: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn072.html "Of course you're befuddled, Vaccha. Of course you're confused. Deep, Vaccha, is this phenomenon, hard to see, hard to realize, tranquil, refined, beyond the scope of conjecture, subtle, to-be-experienced by the wise. For those with other views, other practices, other satisfactions, other aims, other teachers, it is difficult to know." Note well the Buddha doesn't say "this alone is truth, all other ways are false"; the Buddha merely says that for "those with other views, other practices, other satisfactions, other aims, other teachers, it is difficult to know." Which means that for us to pass judgment on any other system, whether labelled Buddhist or not, would be a huge mistake. If we were to do that, we would no longer be "guardians of the truth," but partisans, sectarians, fools, befuddled, ensnared in a thicket of views, lost in a wildernesss of views, twisted into a contortion of views, agonizing by a writhing of views, bound by a fetter of views: Evam me suttam (MN.95), "There are five ideas that ripen here and now in two ways. What five? Conviction, preference, hearsay-learning, arguing upon evidence, and liking through pondering a view. Now something may have conviction well placed in it and yet be hollow, empty, and false; and again something may have no conviction placed in it and yet be factual, true, and no other than it seems; and so with preference and the rest. If a man has conviction, then he guards truth when he says, "My conviction is thus," but on that account draws no unreserved conclusion, "Only this is true, the other is false." In this way he guards the truth; but there is as yet no discovery of truth. And so with preference and the rest. "How is truth discovered? Here a bhikkhu lives near some village or town. Then a householder or his son goes to him in order to test him in three kinds of ideas, in ideas provocative of greed, of hate, and of delusion, wondering, "Are there in this venerable one any such ideas, whereby his mind being obsessed he might not knowing, say 'I know,' unseeing, say 'I see,' or to get others to do likewise, which would be long for their harm and suffering?" While thus testing him he comes to find that there are no such ideas in him, and he finds that, "The bodily and verbal behavior of that venerable one are not those of one affected by lust or hate or delusion. But the True Idea that this venerable one teaches is profound, hard to see and discover; yet it is the most peaceful and superior of all, out of reach of logical ratiocination, subtle, for the wise to experience; such a True Dhamma cannot be taught by one affected by lust or hate or delusion. "It is as soon as by testing him, he comes to see that he is purified from ideas provocative of lust, hate, and delusion, that he then plants his conviction in him. When he visits him he respects him, when he respects him he gives ear, one who gives ear hears the True Dhamma, he remembers it, he investigates the meaning of the ideas remembered. When he does that he acquires a preference by pondering the ideas. That produces interest. One interested is actively committed. So committed he makes a judgment. According to his judgment he exerts himself. When he exerts himself he comes to realize with the body the ultimate truth, and he sees it by the penetrating of it with understanding. That is how there is discovery of truth. But there is as yet no final arrival at truth. How is truth finally arrived at? Final arrival at truth is the repetition, the keeping in being, the development, of those same dhammas. That is how there is final arrival at truth." To add some some more enlightening commentary as regards abandoning views, from Professor Richard Hayes: "My study of [Nagarjuna's] texts (on which I wrote my honours thesis and to which I have returned many times) has led me to see an interesting parallel between Nagarjuna's radical skepticism and Richard Rorty's notion of philosophical irony. Rorty's view is that philosophy is a process of inquiry that ultimately leads an honest person to the recognition that no conclusion is free from circularity, for every conclusion rests upon premises that are either pure assumption or have their verification resting on a hidden assumption that the conclusion derived from them is true. This does not mean that one must abandon all philosophical systems. It means only that whenever one goes to a philosophical system for refuge, one must realize that the decision to come to this particular one for refuge was ultimately arbitrary. Whatever solace this particular set of dogmas, institutions and practices may provide could have been provided by countless other sets of dogmas, institutions and practices. Realizing this, one continues to do philosophy, but one can only do it ironically, playfully, humorously. Play is the only work possible for the enlightened mind. 7575 From: Sarah Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 9:18pm Subject: Re: Hi, my name is Frank, and I'm a dhammaholic. Re: MN vs. DN, another opinion Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: looking for good Pali translation Hi Frank, Just a quick line to thank you for your really great intro and choice of sutta;-))) Lots I'd like to say, but it'll have to be when I have time. Really glad to have you with us here;-) Many, many thanks Sarah --- frank kuan wrote: > The six sets of six is my favorite sutta of all time > (mn 148? one forty something anyways). Sometimes when > talking about 5 aggregates it can seem abstract and > disconnected from our normal moment to moment > experience, but when the Buddha goes through the six > sense organs, the sense objects, contact, craving > associated through each of the six doors, etc, and > show that they are impermanent, that if a abiding soul > were to exist they would also arise and pass away > continuously, which would be an untenable position, it > really seems so clear when explained this way. It's > just such a practical and clear way that outlines the > whole buddhist path. ........................ 7576 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 10:01pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drugs and the Dharma dear sarah > > Firstly, I don't read anywhere that the Buddha advocated vegitarianism and > there are examples in the Tipitaka to the contrary. yes, thats why I just observed it for the Fun of it. I wanted to know whether I can spend some years without eating the stuff I crave to eat. I will have to be ready for it when I finally get the chance to take robes. :o) >Personally, I eat very > little meat, Well, I a lot. >but that's a health choice rather than an act of sila..... When I > first travelled with Khun Sujin in Sri Lanka, I was strictly vegitarian at the > time and was being very fussy about what I could and couldn't eat....She'd say > to me: "Khun Sarah, have just a little of this and a little of that to please > the hostess...kusala cittas are more important" or something very similar...I > can still hear her saying it so sweetly more than 25yrs ago. (Nina probably > remembers too!) Yeah, I know what you mean. People sometimes(but more often than we think) get offended by these kind of stuff. I am thankful for that experience. I noted some people have hidden aversion towards other people's sila. > > With regard to the precepts and vows, we can see how these can be followed for > a very long time, but sooner or later when there are the right conditions they > will be broken if enough wisdom has not been accumulated. I've known monks > who've kept excellent vinaya for long periods, but when they disrobe, the same > accumulations and tendencies are there. Even if one remains a monk for the rest > of this life, what about next life? yeah, but my study of texts suggests that those periods of excellent vinaya are not useless at all. They are great foundation stones. And these sila will provide one with better surroundings and conditions to follow the path in future times. Without the right understanding the sila is less-powerful. Most of my sila is based on Saddha which I have for what Buddha says, for the moment what I can do is achieve what I can even though it is less-powerful rather than waiting for a 'better' time. > > > > And of course when the experience is finally realised , it lost its > > appeal, good old unsatisfactoriness came to me again. > > Good;-)) Let us know how it goes! > Well the tendencies are still very much there. Lot of booze and smoke and partying...full abuse of body and mind Sometimes the thoughtlines go as 'wow..this is life..blah,blah' but I internally laugh at such thoughts, I am aware of the internal mind cheating, (vancaka etc), but for the moment I will keep on investigating for me. > Thanks Gayan for sharing your experiences....I always enjoy hearing from you! I try to be careful and not to fall in to the pit where one brags about things , take delight in telling others what one has done, promoting it , marketing it, hiddenly boasting 'wow , what a Life I am having, hey...see my life, dont you think that what I have done is better than what you are doing., see how cool and advanced I am ...etc etc' :o) rgds gayan 7577 From: Num Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 6:36pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Undesirable objects - Betty Hi Sarah and Betty, Sarah: I just saw Rush Hours 2 on last Friday. Vow, Hong Kong from the movie looks like New York city, pretty packed and crowded. I have never been there. Jacky Chan is funny. Well at times I like light, funny and kind of no brainer movie. It's fun. Betty: I used this quote from Visudhimagga before, I like it : "As wind a massy rock doth never move, So neither praise nor dispraise moves the wise." Praise or dispraise cannot change kusula act to akusala act. Aprreciate and anumodhana in your deeds. Num 7578 From: Erik Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 11:20pm Subject: Mana --- "Gayan Karunaratne" wrote: > > Thanks Gayan for sharing your experiences....I always enjoy hearing from > you! > > I try to be careful and not to fall in to the pit where one brags about > things , take delight in telling others what one has done, promoting it , > marketing it, hiddenly boasting 'wow , what a Life I am having, hey...see my > life, dont you think that what I have done is better than what you are > doing., see how cool and advanced I am ...etc etc' > :o) Ooh, that one hit "me" right where it hurts, Gayan! :) Thanks for bringing this important point up! Your mention of this forced me to meditate on whether or not my sharing some of my "experiences" here, for example, would fall into this category. This is a really tough one. The mana problem, I mean, which is the root issue here. As I presently see it, the first thing to know is that mana, as an affliction, is going to be there, like it or not, until we're either arahats or Buddhas. Observed and noted. :) Once this is known, then as I see it, we need to become aware of the various flavors of mana that exist. This is a subtle affliction and comes in many guises, and it's important to be aware of the many ways it can manifest so we can note it when it arises and let it go. There are mane degrees of mana, from the subtlest "I am" terminated by arahts and Buddhas only, vs. the coarser forms of "vanity" and so on. There's one obvious form of mana behind "boasting" for example. Talking about one's experiences and/or exploits can be a form of this, for sure. That is obviuos to many people. Then there's also the sort that of mana that expresses itself in terms of desiring to appear virtuous by remaining quiet and controlled! That's a REALLY nasty form of mana, beacause there's nothing anyone can make any outward criticisms of, and this form of mana can go on undetected for a LONG time wreaking all kinds of havoc! The Visuddhimagga notes that many of "greedy temperament" express themselves outwardly as controlled, etc., while inwardly their minsd are beclouded by grasping. For example, before sharing any experiences with my Dhamma friends here, I always endeavour to reflect on whether or not what I am saying is motivated by coarse mana, or if there is perhaps a skillful reason to use this collection of khandas as one would a laboratory instrument--perhaps as a medical student might use a cadaver, for example. If I decide, to the best of my ability, that the body-as-labaratory is the motivation, then I feel confident enough to share experiences without feeling that sharing is partaking of TOO MUCH coarse mana (though this is a tough one to detect at all times, mind you). There may even be the decision that while there may be some akusala mixed in there, that the kusala and the potential benefit to others overrides it in these insatnces to the point I feel it beneficial to share an experience. I confess again it is DIFFICULT to note at all times when there's vanity creeping in there, and I know I make my lapses, for sure, which is why your comment hit so close to home for me. There is still the noting that no matter what, the subtlest form of mana "I am" exists until the last magga-citta of arahat or Buddha arises in a mental continuum), so I try to remind myself (heh heh heh) there's no reason to get upset about this fact either. I try my best to keep the labaratory analogy in mind and keep it at that, though again, mana is a sneaky bastard and catches me off-guard quite often still. In sum, it is NOT always easy to detect, for these khandas at least, whether there is merely the dispassionate use of this composed entity labeled "Erik" being used skillfully--as a medical cadaver or experimental laboratory subject--as a way of sharing my understanding of various aspects of the Dhamma as a Dhamma friend--with the right motivation of the wish to benefit of other sentient beings: that they may be able to benefit on some way from the experiences I've been through somehow (much as former alcoholocs tell their "drinkalogues" as a way of sharing how they overcame their addiction and as a means of helping others do the same); or if there is some sort of vanity behid it all. Even RIGHT THIS MOMENT! I honestly believe that sharing "personal" experiences can be of great benefit in many instances among those who have had a LOT of exposure to the Dhamma as we hacve here (not with just anyone--I see DSG a place where longer-term practitioners come to share their understanding of the Dhamma and not a place where rank beginners tend to gather). But I realize this ort of sharing also carries with it an enormous danger, one to be extremely mindful of at all times: that it can EASILY degenerate into a form of coarse vanity and pride. This is a VERY difficult problem for me indeed, particularly in a forum like this, where on one hand there is the knowledge that sharing experiences is of real benefit to some, in the same way dissecting corpses is helpful to medical students. This is taken along with the understanding that that there should not be any speech motivated by any of the Eight Worldly Concerns such as praise, etc. THIS IS TOUGH STUFF INDEED! And mana is such a nasty bugger it makes it all the more difficult to admit to oneself when when it IS mana, since mana often uses itself to hide behind itself, as it were! This very reply could be mana wishing to appear more virtuous than Gayan by so readily talking about my own mana! What a demon this mana can be! :) :) :) My present strategy is to simply be as aware as possible of this tendency, and to note it as carefully as possible (with of course the helpful reminders of those such as yourself), to try to be mindful that if I share experiences that they are not motivated by coarse pride or conceit and are really being used as a means of expressing some aspect of the Dharma motivated primarily by the concenrn for the welfare of other sentient beings; and not for the purposes of self- aggrandizement or the seeking or praise or material assistance, whatever. The bottom line is that I can't will this mana to go away, after all; it will go of its own accord once the last five fetters are terminated at the point of arahatship (or Buddhahood in this case). Anyway, thank you for the reminder to be mindful of mana, Gayan! :) :) :) 7579 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Mon Aug 20, 2001 11:52pm Subject: Re: The limits of awareness: Awareness Of Anger As Kusala Dear Herman How are you? You asked: "Would that mean that if I was aware of anger, that this would be a kusala moment?" Yes, if you are aware of anger in the sense of sati (recollection, mindfulness), that would be a kusala moment. The supporting Pali in the words of the Buddha is as follows. "sadosam va cittam `sadosam cittan'ti pajanati" "Monks, how does the monk live as an observer of the mind in the mind? .....Monks, here, the monk knows comprehensively the mind with anger as the mind with anger..." The above quotation comes from Section 114, Cittanupassana, Mahasatipatthana Suttam, Mulapannasa, Majjimanikaya. You also asked: "Is kusala/akusla considered absolute eg is all anger akusala, is all dana kusala?" Yes,each of them should be considered as such because kusala and akusala gives different results. But, awareness of akusala can bring about kusala as a result. Even if one's anger has transformed one into a kind individual later for various reasons such as regret,(even if anger served as the cause of kindness) anger at the moment of arising is akusala. Dana at the moment of arising is kusala even if motivation for it was based on calculated selfishness. With regards, Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org/ --- Herman wrote: > Dear Kom, > > --- "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > > Herman: > > > I realised the other day that I had driven all the way to work > > > without being aware of anything else except for thoughts about > your > > > post. I take this to suggest that the body sees, hears, feels a > > > multitude of things all the time, and that awareness is not > really an > > > essential component of the machinations of daily life. > > > > Kom: > > Yes, by the Buddha teachings, awareness or mindfullness only rises > with > > kusala mental states. Do you think our daily life's activities are > kusala or > > akusala? > > kom > > Would that mean that if I was aware of anger, that this would be a > kusala moment? > > I had come to understand that kusala meant "leading to wholesome > moments". And honestly, attempting to pick the causes of each moment > would be impossible to me. I have some doubts about the usefulness of > dividing all experience between wholesome and unwholesome. > > First of all because I can only guess at the consequences of anything > thought or done, whether in the next minute or millenium, and > secondly because wholesomeness is such a subjective concept (unless I > misunderstand it). There is the saying, one man's meat is another > man's poison. Is kusala/akusla considered absolute eg is all anger > akusala, is all dana kusala? > > Kind regards > > > Herman 7580 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 1:46am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Mana dear Erik, your post is so Great that I really do not feel like messing it up with comments here and there.( laying my personality 'eggs' here and there like a hen) :o$ Eventhough my reply is so short, I feel like we had a 2 hour long (meaningful)discussion about 'Mana' and what a 'nasty bugger' it is. :o) These akusalas are so Recursive indeed! :oD Regards gayan > Ooh, that one hit "me" right where it hurts, Gayan! :) Thanks for > bringing this important point up! Your mention of this forced me to > meditate on whether or not my sharing some of my "experiences" here, > for example, would fall into this category. > > This is a really tough one. The mana problem, I mean, which is the > root issue here. > > As I presently see it, the first thing to know is that mana, as an > affliction, is going to be there, like it or not, until we're either > arahats or Buddhas. Observed and noted. :) > > Once this is known, then as I see it, we need to become aware of the > various flavors of mana that exist. This is a subtle affliction and > comes in many guises, and it's important to be aware of the many ways > it can manifest so we can note it when it arises and let it go. > > There are mane degrees of mana, from the subtlest "I am" terminated > by arahts and Buddhas only, vs. the coarser forms of "vanity" and so > on. > > There's one obvious form of mana behind "boasting" for example. > Talking about one's experiences and/or exploits can be a form of > this, for sure. That is obviuos to many people. > > Then there's also the sort that of mana that expresses itself in > terms of desiring to appear virtuous by remaining quiet and > controlled! That's a REALLY nasty form of mana, beacause there's > nothing anyone can make any outward criticisms of, and this form of > mana can go on undetected for a LONG time wreaking all kinds of > havoc! The Visuddhimagga notes that many of "greedy temperament" > express themselves outwardly as controlled, etc., while inwardly > their minsd are beclouded by grasping. > > For example, before sharing any experiences with my Dhamma friends > here, I always endeavour to reflect on whether or not what I am > saying is motivated by coarse mana, or if there is perhaps a skillful > reason to use this collection of khandas as one would a laboratory > instrument--perhaps as a medical student might use a cadaver, for > example. > > If I decide, to the best of my ability, that the body-as-labaratory > is the motivation, then I feel confident enough to share > experiences without feeling that sharing is partaking of TOO MUCH > coarse mana (though this is a tough one to detect at all times, mind > you). There may even be the decision that while there may be some > akusala mixed in there, that the kusala and the potential benefit to > others overrides it in these insatnces to the point I feel it > beneficial to share an experience. > > I confess again it is DIFFICULT to note at all times when there's > vanity creeping in there, and I know I make my lapses, for sure, > which is why your comment hit so close to home for me. > > There is still the noting that no matter what, the subtlest form of > mana "I am" exists until the last magga-citta of arahat or Buddha > arises in a mental continuum), so I try to remind myself (heh heh heh) > there's no reason to get upset about this fact either. I try my best > to keep the labaratory analogy in mind and keep it at that, though > again, mana is a sneaky bastard and catches me off-guard quite often > still. > > In sum, it is NOT always easy to detect, for these khandas at least, > whether there is merely the dispassionate use of this composed entity > labeled "Erik" being used skillfully--as a medical cadaver or > experimental laboratory subject--as a way of sharing my understanding > of various aspects of the Dhamma as a Dhamma friend--with the right > motivation of the wish to benefit of other sentient beings: that they > may be able to benefit on some way from the experiences I've been > through somehow (much as former alcoholocs tell their "drinkalogues" > as a way of sharing how they overcame their addiction and as a means > of helping others do the same); or if there is some sort of vanity > behid it all. Even RIGHT THIS MOMENT! > > I honestly believe that sharing "personal" experiences can be of > great benefit in many instances among those who have had a LOT of > exposure to the Dhamma as we hacve here (not with just anyone--I see > DSG a place where longer-term practitioners come to share their > understanding of the Dhamma and not a place where rank beginners tend > to gather). But I realize this ort of sharing also carries with it an > enormous danger, one to be extremely mindful of at all times: that it > can EASILY degenerate into a form of coarse vanity and pride. > > This is a VERY difficult problem for me indeed, particularly in a > forum like this, where on one hand there is the knowledge that > sharing experiences is of real benefit to some, in the same way > dissecting corpses is helpful to medical students. This is taken > along with the understanding that that there should not be any speech > motivated by any of the Eight Worldly Concerns such as praise, etc. > THIS IS TOUGH STUFF INDEED! > > And mana is such a nasty bugger it makes it all the more difficult to > admit to oneself when when it IS mana, since mana often uses itself > to hide behind itself, as it were! This very reply could be mana > wishing to appear more virtuous than Gayan by so readily talking > about my own mana! What a demon this mana can be! :) :) :) > > My present strategy is to simply be as aware as possible of this > tendency, and to note it as carefully as possible (with of course the > helpful reminders of those such as yourself), to try to be mindful > that if I share experiences that they are not motivated by coarse > pride or conceit and are really being used as a means of expressing > some aspect of the Dharma motivated primarily by the concenrn for the > welfare of other sentient beings; and not for the purposes of self- > aggrandizement or the seeking or praise or material assistance, > whatever. > > The bottom line is that I can't will this mana to go away, after all; > it will go of its own accord once the last five fetters are > terminated at the point of arahatship (or Buddhahood in this case). > > Anyway, thank you for the reminder to be mindful of mana, > Gayan! :) :) :) 7581 From: Joshua Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 7:50am Subject: Re: Drugs and the Dharma > Haha, that's true. I am curious though. Does this sutta condole that > a Bikkhu should kill his own food (say, if he's caught in a polar > region with no vegetation, and this seel is hooping about)? "Condole" means sympathize. "Condone" means allow. According to what I've read, a Bhikkhu would probably starve to death before he would ever intentionally kill another being. 7582 From: Binh A Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 9:35am Subject: The Chinese Madhyama Agama .... (MN vs. DN, another opinion ) --- frank kuan wrote: > ... I would say that the > Majjhima is "better" than the Digha. Just my opinion > though. Majjhima tends to be concise and to the point, > and while I do value some of the longer detailed > explanations in the Digha, many of the suttas in the > Digha tend to focus (in great detail) on nonessential > (or less essential) elements of the dhamma, whereas > the MN seems to really hone in on the important core > teachings. ======================================================= BA: If you're interested in the MN, then it's also beneficial to read the Madhyama Agama. I'm not sure if the complete English translation (either in hard copy format or Internet format) is available. I only read the Vietnamese translation. However, as a starter, to get some appreciation on the value of the Madhyama Agama, Ven Thich Minh-Chau's Ph.D. thesis (written in English) is highly recommended. It can be purchased from Wisdom bookshop: ------------ http://www.wisdombooks.org/chinese.html "Chinese Madhyama Agama & the Pali Majjhima Nikaya", by Thich Minh Chau Bhikkhu Compares the ninety-eight Suttas held in common by the two texts, with their differences and similarities in structure, and analyses extensively the Agama, particularly its relation to the extinct Sarvastivada school. H/back, 388 pp, £12.95, order code 3803 ------------ Metta, Binh 7583 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 9:52am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Mana Dear Gayan Dear Erik Dear group Gayan: > > I try to be careful and not to fall in to the pit where one brags about >things , take delight in telling others what one has done, promoting it , >marketing it, hiddenly boasting 'wow , what a Life I am having, >hey...see my life, dont you think that what I have done is better than what >you are doing., see how cool and advanced I am ...etc etc' > > :o) Erik: >Ooh, that one hit "me" right where it hurts, Gayan! :) Thanks for bringing >this important point up! Your mention of this forced me to meditate on >whether or not my sharing some of my "experiences" here, for example, would >fall into this category. > >This is a really tough one. The mana problem, I mean, which is the root >issue here. Being a fiery temper I have been attentively considerating these mails about mana - conceit, pride. The equality-conceit (mana), the inferiority-conceit (omana) and the superiority-conceit (atimana): the threefold conceit that should be overcome. "Those ascetics and brahman priests who, relying on this impermanent, miserable and transitory nature of corporeality, feelings, perceptions, mental formations and consciousness, fancy: 'Better am I', or 'Equal am I', or 'Worse am I', all these imagine thus through not understand reality." (S. xxii, 49) Indeed in reality no ego-entity is to be found - anatta. I was analyzing my interactions mostly off list than here because I believe that despite my blunt honesty in a public list we tend to be much more refrained to keep a sort of acceptable image and also because in a private correspondance there is much more confidence what not always is matched by the due respect for one another. We are very much prone to defend strenuously not only our thoughts and feelings but a SELF IMAGE so dear to us. Difficult to cope with the fact that mostly this self image is an idealization and however a mental strategy to boost our self esteem. The fundamental delusion of self. I have observed that what most stings me to reaction are authoritative tones and self assurance, I feel immediately winded up and challenged. This is a very rooted conditioning quite persistent and is the origin of antagonism, belligerant confrontation. It is born from a extremely hurtful and conflictual relationship with a very demanding, thwarthing and arrogant mother so far it concerns my present incarnation; I don't know about past accumulations but I add them to the cocktail for sure. I have a very fiery temper indeed and I am extremely proud of my 'achievements', meaning not so much what I have realized but my steadiness and vigour in seeking in the midst of often adverse conditions. If this is discussed or mistrusted it hurts me very much, I have a sense of loyalty regarding this seeking and if not 'untouchable' is something I highly value. Yes I am conceited about it. It's a protection and a weapon, defensiveness and attack. How often I observe this attitude in other people and how scarcely I succeed myself in refraining from it. I think that we can talk resolutely about anatta but actually is very scary to absorb inside this basic principle that founds all buddhist philosophy. It's frightening renounce to self-view, self-image, self esteem: we feel naked, vulnerable, exposed. And we refuse with obstination to acknowledge it because of mana, pride. I AM this, I AM that, how you dare to refer to me like this, how can you dismiss me like that, why are you humiliating me in this way. And we perceive the unfairness and the despise when we feel aggression but we are forgetful of our own mana and the fact that if there is no abiding entity, why am I fussing so much around? Yes there is an inherent dignity also in nama rupa but how the perspective changes when there is not ME being 'hurt'. I was thinking of the importance of mana, how our pride, our conceit are the origin of separation and antagonism. How much we grasp to our beliefs and how we feel displaced if somebody do not 'respect' them. I suppose all of us can easily relate to this considerations. The Great Way is not difficult for those who have no preferences. When love and hate are both absent everything becomes clear and undisguised. Make the smallest distinction however and heaven and earth are set infinitely apart. Seng-T'San Love Cybele 7584 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 10:42am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: An Invitation to All Here Dear Erik [Which means that for us to pass judgment on any other system, whether labelled Buddhist or not, would be a huge mistake. If we were to do that, we would no longer be "guardians of the truth," but partisans, sectarians, fools, befuddled, ensnared in a thicket of views, lost in a wildernesss of views, twisted into a contortion of views, agonizing by a writhing of views, bound by a fetter of views...] I totally agree with this vision of Dhamma and Dhamma schools and personally I have no prejudices and all this attachment to 'so-called' original teachings is just a question of preference actually. Indeed I decided for Theravada tradition after having practiced Zen for some years because it resounded much more inside me, question of affinities but I could disclaim this any moment. What doesn't make me less loyal to Dhamma in my opinion. But following the thread regarding conceit what about 'passing judgements on people' what we very frequently do, drawing lines not to be surpassed and creating antagonisms? It is not the very same mechanism after all? Metta Cybele 7585 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 11:10am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drugs and the Dharma Dear Sarah Dear Gayan >When I first travelled with Khun Sujin in Sri Lanka, I was strictly >vegitarian at >the time and was being very fussy about what I could and couldn't >eat....She'd >say to me: "Khun Sarah, have just a little of this and a little of that to >please the hostess...kusala cittas are more important" or something very >similar...I can still hear her saying it so sweetly more than 25yrs ago. >Yeah, I know what you mean. People sometimes(but more often than we think) >get offended by these kind of stuff. >I am thankful for that experience. >I noted some people have hidden aversion towards other people's sila. I feel sympathetic with these sharings, I have been practicing vegetarianism and macrobiotic based on health and philosophycal principles for years long ago but travelling around I realized that I was creating lots of embarrasement to my hosts and I was also renouncing to taste the gastronomical culture of many places because of my dietetic convictions and I gave up. I noticed this fact recently observing buddhists friends of mine who came to visit me in Penang and I was accompanying them around and above all in the Visuddhacara's meditation center frequentation it was really a trouble because they were so strict about vegetarianism and naturally in chinese-malay cuisine they use animal fat to cook, therefore even in vegetables and cereals there was an hindrance for them. And how they would create disappointment and frustration refusing all the excellent food the devotees in the center would prepare for them as a welcome gesture and would provoke a sort of subtle ill will all these continuous dilemmas even for the very kind monk always trying to be conciliatory and satisfy eveybody. At a certain point I really took them apart with my habitual blunt honesty and warned them to don't fuss so much creating all that 'mortification' to both laypeople and the monk with their rigidity and I made the same reasoning Sujin has done with you Sarah. Well they relaxed a bit and a climate of mutual tolerance was encouraged. But sometimes people don't realize the importance of kindness above all principles. The monk was so concerned because of them that he asked me to accompany my friends in a good Indian restaurant with vegetarian food and that he wanted to offer the meal. Well first they did not want to accept because for them it was like 'exploiting the monk', good grief! I convinced them of the importance of accepting the gift and they agreed. After the monk was supposed to refund me for this dinner and it was my turn to refuse telling him it was my dana and he pointed out to me; No Cybele it was my choice and intention offer this meal, therefore it is my dana and as I accept yours, you should accept mine this time. And I have been refunded by a monk; after I compensate using that money to help the pubblication of dhamma books that in eastern countries are gifts and not sold. But I realized the importance of dana and sila. and being flexible more and more. Metta Cybele 7586 From: Erik Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 11:15am Subject: Re: Mana --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > Being a fiery temper I have been attentively considerating these mails about > mana - conceit, pride. > The equality-conceit (mana), the inferiority-conceit (omana) and the > superiority-conceit (atimana): the threefold conceit that should be > overcome. Thanks for adding these three by their official names, Cybele! I was poking around the Suttas last night for them but couldn't find the references then, as you quote: > "Those ascetics and brahman priests who, relying on this impermanent, > miserable and transitory nature of corporeality, feelings, perceptions, > mental formations and consciousness, fancy: > 'Better am I', or 'Equal am I', or 'Worse am I', all these imagine thus > through not understand reality." > (S. xxii, 49) > We are very much prone to defend strenuously not only our thoughts and > feelings but a SELF IMAGE so dear to us. > Difficult to cope with the fact that mostly this self image is an > idealization and however a mental strategy to boost our self esteem. > The fundamental delusion of self. I agree, there is always this notion there "I am right," etc. For me, I have a tendency to speak in very authoritative-sounding ways at times, and to always belieev whatever I say is right. There are of course times when that is the case (and times when I am likewise mistaken). Regardless, thanks to my Dhamma-friends, I have learned to become far more mindful of this habitual tendency to speak this way. Perhaps it comes from accumulations of not being used to being challenged, to be able to overpower others for example. On one hand this is why I find the practice of playing "defender" in debate so helpful, because I do get my views challenged and my assumptions shaken. At the same time this can also serve to get "me" to dig in to a "position," so it's a double-edged sword, and at these times I always try to remind myself that as master nagarjuna said: "emptiness is beyond taking any positions," a well as Master Chandrakirti's advice that "any position generates a counter-position, and both are invalid." And yet we Tibetans rely on these great masters and debate the hell out of them and the issues they raise all the same! :) > I have observed that what most stings me to reaction are authoritative tones > and self assurance, I feel immediately winded up and challenged. I am much like you in this regard. I have a deeply-ingrained tendency of contempt for authority (feeling oppressed in one way or another by a rigid Mormon upbringing certainly hasn't helped in this regard!). In some cases when I express myself authoritatively, it's perhaps a subconscious way of "pushing back" at those years of feeling stepped on and ordered around, feeling fettered by others' seemingly arbitrary rules and expectations, which combined with my warrior tendency leads me to be a sometimes ferocious fighter. This has expressed itself in my life in manifold ways, such as in my strong rebellious streak and willingness to take risks that would scare the shit out of others, which has in so many cases been the fuel for accumulating true wisdom! So there is nothing inherently good or bad in anything, we enatta teaches, and even these negative tendencies can be transmuted through prajna, into supremem wisdom, from fatal liabilities into the very vehicle for the attainment of Buddhahood! This is one reason I find the Tibetan spin on the Dharma most helpful for these accumulations, in that it directly addresses these tendencies and uses prajna to trasnmute the vilest poisons into the most sublime nectar of immortality. For example, by meditating on the inseparabale nature of the peaceful and wrathful deities--the "wrathful" deities being merely divine aspects of the Buddha appearing in wrathful form to terminate our grasping and delusions, for example the peaceful prajna-sword- weilding Majushri and his fierce, wrathful aspect, Yamantaka: "Yamantaka is the wrathful form of Manjushri, the embodiment of all of the Buddha's wisdom. He took the form of a fierce bull headed deity in order to subdue the Lord of Death. Wrathful deities wear bone and skull ornaments and often have a terrifying and demonic appearance. But their "anger" is directed against our own negative emotions and ego grasping which prevent our attainment of Buddhahood. The Wheel of Sharp Weapons calls on Yamantaka to "trample him, trample him, dance on the head of this treacherous demon of selfish concern." It is the wisdom realizing emptiness that is Yamantaka's actual weapon of destruction and it is the self-grasping ego that is destroyed." I have given this isseue much careful consideration, but still, this mana business is TOUGH! It appears in so many guises. It's a real shape-shifter, appearing at one moment as the conceited "king" issuing his edicts; the next as the "humble" beggar playing oh-so lowly, the next as comparing my progess with others; the next as the conceit of appearing so open and honest about my mana! Ack! Which is why I also, in addition to using the Tibetan techings of transmuting these poisons, apply the more common method taught and edeavour to note this affliction as it arises--when I am midful enough to catch it of course. In any case I endeavour not to get upset about it when it comes. "There is mana maiefsting in the form of vanity, okay, now let it go and move on." > This is a very rooted conditioning quite persistent and is the origin of > antagonism, belligerant confrontation. > It is born from a extremely hurtful and conflictual relationship with a very > demanding, thwarthing and arrogant mother so far it concerns my present > incarnation; I don't know about past accumulations but I add them to the > cocktail for sure. We all have our unique brand of afflictions to deal with. I can say for sure that the practice of the Buddhadharma has helped me SIGNIFICANTLY reduce the VERY antagonistic bent I used to have toward all sentient beings--especially the training in lovingkindness, compassion, and sympathetic joy. I used to argue like crazy with people! Always asserting "my rightness." I am sure many here haev seen that tendency in these khandas STILL. yet, I can say, it is nevertheless VASSTLY reduced from what it was jsut a few years ago. So the practice of the Dhamma DOES REALLY WORK! Again, one of the msot helpful teachings for me in this regard has been, and still is, Geshe Langri Tangpa's "Mind Training in Eight Verses." > I have a very fiery temper indeed and I am extremely proud of my > 'achievements', meaning not so much what I have realized but my steadiness > and vigour in seeking in the midst of often adverse conditions. > If this is discussed or mistrusted it hurts me very much, I have a sense of > loyalty regarding this seeking and if not 'untouchable' is something I > highly value. > Yes I am conceited about it. > It's a protection and a weapon, defensiveness and attack. > How often I observe this attitude in other people and how scarcely I succeed > myself in refraining from it. Like all of us, Cybele. Like all of us. We are, after all, all suffering sentient beings here (excepting of course the fully- enlightened emananations of the Buddhas who are reading this smiling serenely at the wholesomeness of these exchanges). > I think that we can talk resolutely about anatta but actually is very scary > to absorb inside this basic principle that founds all buddhist philosophy. > It's frightening renounce to self-view, self-image, self esteem: we feel > naked, vulnerable, exposed. Indeed. It takes a very ruthless sort of honesty as regards to what is arising in the mind RIGHT NOW, and an unflinching fearlessness to confront our afflictions at the most fundamental level, and mana is definitely one of those that lies at the very deepset layers of our own ignorance. > And we refuse with obstination to acknowledge it because of mana, pride. > I AM this, I AM that, how you dare to refer to me like this, how can you > dismiss me like that, why are you humiliating me in this way. > And we perceive the unfairness and the despise when we feel aggression but > we are forgetful of our own mana and the fact that if there is no abiding > entity, why am I fussing so much around? You are truly wise, Cybele! :) > The Great Way is not difficult > for those who have no preferences. > When love and hate are both absent > everything becomes clear and > undisguised. > Make the smallest distinction > however > and heaven and earth are set infinitely apart. > > Seng-T'San Sadhu! Sadhu! Sadhu! 7587 From: Erik Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 11:19am Subject: Re: Drugs and the Dharma --- Erik wrote: > > > Haha, that's true. I am curious though. Does this sutta condole that > > a Bikkhu should kill his own food (say, if he's caught in a polar > > region with no vegetation, and this seel is hooping about)? > > "Condole" means sympathize. "Condone" means allow. > > According to what I've read, a Bhikkhu would probably starve to death before he would ever intentionally kill another being. Really, just how helpful are these total speculations regarding hypothetical situations that have absolutely no bearing to what's going on right here and now, in terms of overcoming our own suffering? 7588 From: Purnomo . Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 11:23am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello, everyone Hello, I'm from Indonesia too. metta, Purnomo >From: "Fenny" >>Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello, everyone >Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 17:04:32 +0800 > >Clear Day Dear Sarah and everyone in the list, > Hello. Yeah, Sarah, you're right. That was the first time I posted on >the list. Indeed I've been monitoring the activities of the list for some >time (about a week) before I started posted. > I'm 21 years old, a female (I've more than once be mistaken as being a >male), originated from Medan, Indonesia, and currently undergoing my >tertiary study in Singapore. I've been in the path of Buddhism for 3 years, >starting in July 1998, and have been praticing on and off since then. My >line of practice inclines more towards the Theravada tradition, but I'm an >admirer of Thich Nhat Hanh(Zen) and Bhante Abhinnaya(Mahayana). > I do find this dsg useful. Thank you. > > > >Gassho, >Fen > > >> 7589 From: Erik Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 11:43am Subject: Re: Mana --- "Gayan Karunaratne" wrote: > dear Erik, > > your post is so Great that I really do not feel like messing it up with > comments here and there Gayana, you are INDEED a true friend in the Dhamma! Your compliment "Great" served as a condition the arising of yet MORE mana in this mindstream--of the very coarsest variety! The sort that led this set of five khandas to feel all inflated and "wise" for a a few moments, until I recalled the nature of this entire discussion, and noted that this is indeed a very coarse form of conceit arising. So many bows to you once again for helping me spot this tendency and giving me an opportunity to note its arising and passing away! :) :) :) > Eventhough my reply is so short, I feel like we had a 2 hour long > (meaningful)discussion about 'Mana' and what a 'nasty bugger' it is. > :o) > These akusalas are so Recursive indeed! I am so happy to hear that this exchange has benefitted you in some way (that is NOT mana speaking by the way :)). 7590 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 11:56am Subject: Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation - Robert E Dear Robert E, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > I would say that what we think of as Kom or Robert E. does not exist as an actual > 'thing'. Instead it is an accumulated impression of various characteristics, > actions, etc. You exist for me as certain impressions that I have of you. Put > together, they form a mind-image which I call "Kom". The fact that I experience > you through the internet or by having coffee with you every day for 20 years is > probably inconsequential to the result. Except in the case of knowing you for a > long time, I would have an even stronger presumption that I knew who and what > *you* were. Thank you for putting a close on this thread. Your explanation is clear and helpful, and I am appreciative of your explanation that regardless of how we meet, our impressions of each other are just concepts which are only possible because of sense impressions. kom 7591 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 0:34pm Subject: Sanna Is Okay With Imageless Nibbana: Full Message Re: Nibbana Annihilation? ! Dear Robert E, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > The idea that the consciousness and mental factors can cognize the true > characteristics of the object, yet *not necessarily penetrate deeply* as you put > it, is particularly interesting. Yes, only when the wisdom (panna) arises at the moment of cognition (of realities) that the consciousness and its mental factors can begin to cognize, remember, penetrate, concentrate on, know thoroughly the true characteristics of the dhamma. Without panna, there is no way that the characteristics of impermanence (anicca), dukkha, and non-self (anatta) can be truly known (beyond the concept). > This helps me to understand how the advanced cittas could cognize the true > characteristics of Nibbana, but *not penetrate them deeply* as one would *in* > Nibbana, if I am hearing you correctly. I think we are still not in full agreement on this point. My view on this is only limited to the explanations of others who are more learned about the scriptures and hence, I only have one more offer beyond what were discussed in the previous posts. If we understand, conceptually and experientially, what the characterstics, functions, manifestations, and proximate causes of panna, we may understand more how conditioned consciousness, with panna co-arising, can thoroughly penetrate the characteristics of other realities, including the unconditioned one. > I can accept the idea that the higher consciousness could 'understand' the true > characteristics of Nibbana, to the extent one understands them without having > realized Nibbana. As far as I know, the actual characteristics of nibbana cannot be experienced by the consciousness and its mental factors in any manner (unlike the conditioned realities) until the supramundane path consciousness arises (with panna!) to cognize the characteristic of nibbana. Nibbana cannot be imagined accurately as its characteristics are not anything like conditioned realities that the consciousness is familiar with (but not thoroughly penetrates). The mundane consciousness, of course, can cognize the concept of nibbana. > I think you would agree that there must be some measure of > understanding that is reserved for the experience of Nibbana itself, and that > cannot be accessible to any prior state, however highly developed. Yes, only one who have attained successive degrees of vipassana wisdom can eventually truly know nibbana. > So the question is in what way and to what extent Nibbana is apprehended prior to > being realized. As *concept* only, as far as I know. > The danger is that someone [probably a lot more developed than me!] will think > they 'know' Nibbana prior to realizing it. Another danger is in turning Nibbana > into an object of mind, thus blocking its realization. > > Are either of these dangers mentioned in the Suttas? The Buddha spoke of micha 8 factors (opposite of the noble 8-fold path), wrong knowledge, and wrong release. I haven't seen the explicit details of this, but there must be such dangers. > This is just to have clarity of the path, but I know that to really answer these > questions I need to go to the trouble of getting there myself! Then I can really > worry about what is and isn't apprehended in a 'higher state'. Yes... There is no other way. Thank you for all the reminders. kom 7592 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 0:46pm Subject: Re: Regarding Parinibbana and annihilation Dear Robert E, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > It would be Annihilationist to think that the Tathagata existed and ceases to be > with the onset of Parinibbana. But is it Nihilistic to say that the Tathagata > never existed as an entity in the first place, and that when the kandhas dissolve > having no more tendency to rebirth in his case, they merely do not arise again? I am just re-reading this post again. I am pretty thrilled (I think beyond the point of being appreciative---must be attachment in this case!) that you understood both opposing arguments. Now, understanding both arguments and the rationals for the arguments, you will have a chance for yourself to find out (perhaps through reading the tipitakas and commentaries?) what Buddha's explanation was. kom 7593 From: Joshua Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 0:52pm Subject: Re: Drugs and the Dharma > Really, just how helpful are these total speculations regarding > hypothetical situations that have absolutely no bearing to what's > going on right here and now, in terms of overcoming our own suffering? Anders lives in Denmark. It's not so "hypothetical" to him. 7594 From: Sarah Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 1:57pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Mana Dear Gayan, Erik and Cybele, many thanks for all your excellent examples and quotes on mana.....very helpful indeed. So easy to justify whenever we find ourselves important and not so easy to be aware of as 'a form of lunacy': '....Herein conceit is fancying (deeming, vain imagining). It has haughtiness as characteristic, self-praise as function, desire to (advertise self like) a banner as manifestation, greed disociated from opinionativeness as proximate cause, and should be regarded as (a form of lunacy.' Atth (11, Part 1X, ch 111, 256) This is quoted along with many other good quotes and examples by Nina in 'Cetasikas' which can be found on: http://www.abhidhamma.org/ Thanks again.....I could add a lot of first-hand examples from just yesterday and today, but more kids arriving! Sarah 7595 From: Erik Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 1:57pm Subject: Re: Drugs and the Dharma --- Erik wrote: > > Really, just how helpful are these total speculations regarding > > hypothetical situations that have absolutely no bearing to what's > > going on right here and now, in terms of overcoming our own suffering? > > Anders lives in Denmark. It's not so "hypothetical" to him. As far as I know (having lived there & all :), Denmark is designated in dependence of a collection of various land-areas (dependent on their various conditions for arising, etc.). Denmark is designated on the basis of a peninsula (Jylland--whence many of my ancestors come from--its West coast, to be precise) that borders on a place designated Germany. Along with this flat peninsula Denmark is also designated in dependence on a few scattered islands in the Baltic, including Sjaeland, Samsø, and the outlying (and very beautiful) island of Bornholm, as well as the island of Fyn--the birthplace of my most recent ancestors such as my mother, grandmother, and grandfather, who come from Fyn's largest "city," Odense. Odense, for those who know anything about it at all (and there are few apart from Danes who do) is perhaps best known as the birthplace of the storyteller Hans Christian Andersen, who in my opinion, spun some the most beautiful tales ever told, which I grew up hearing from my mother and also recall reading many, many times as a youngster-- such as the fairy-tale of the "Little Mermaid," "The Princess and the Pea," "The Ugly Duckling," and one many here may familiar with (or of not, they mey wish to become so), the "Emperor's New Clothes." I find many of Hans Christian Andersen's stories delightful to reflect on even as an adult today, as many serve to illustrate deep truths, yet in such simple language even a child can understand them. For example, one story I particularly enjoyed hearing my mother tell me in my childhood is the fairy-tale of the "Princess and the Pea": http://www.geocities.com/WallStreet/2575/princess.html Indeed, only a true Princess could be so sensitive to something as subtle as this tiny pea, hidden beneath layers and layers of matress- bedding as it was. Another favorite of mine is the story of "The Little Mermaid": http://hca.gilead.org.il/li_merma.html Another yet another one my favorites is the tale of "The Ugly Duckling", which on re-reading just now caused streams of tears to come which are still coming as I write this: http://hca.gilead.org.il/ugly_duc.html But perhaps my favorite tale of all of Hans Christian Andersen's tales is "The Emperor's new Clothes": http://www.geocities.com/Athens/2424/clothes.html Anyway, sorry for this long digression into fairy-tales and so on, when there was another point under discussion, namely, that of speculation and its importance or unimportance in terms of whether we can get rid of all our beliefs, views, and suppositions, and, like the little child in the tale of "The Emperor's new Clothes" who "could only see things as his eyes showed them to him," come to see the nakedness of the Emperor right before us. 7596 From: Herman Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 1:58pm Subject: Re: Drugs and the Dharma Hi 12345, I hope this finds you well. Starting a post with a greeting, and ending it with a pleasantry, helps create the feeling that you are participating in a friendly exchange of views. Regards Herman > > Anders lives in Denmark. It's not so "hypothetical" to him. 7597 From: Cybele Chiodi Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 2:50pm Subject: Re: Mana/Lunacy Dear Sarah > Dear Gayan, Erik and Cybele, > > many thanks for all your excellent examples and quotes on mana.....very helpful indeed. So easy to justify whenever we find ourselves important and not so easy to be aware of as 'a form of lunacy': > > '....Herein conceit is fancying (deeming, vain imagining). It has haughtiness as characteristic, self-praise as function, desire to (advertise self like) a banner as manifestation, greed disociated from opinionativeness as proximate cause, and should be regarded as (a form of lunacy.' Atth (11, Part 1X, ch 111, 256) I really liked very much the definition of a form of 'lunacy' for conceit. It's very pertinent! Indeed I am prone to declare that when we are so self assured it's a kind of MANIC phase. Lunacy IS another word for mania actually. Lunacy is delirium, dementia, derangement, frenzy, hysteria, illogicality, insanity, madness, mania, psychosis, unreason. It kind of illustrates perfectly that mental state of pride and conceit when we become so vain and arrogant, we are sort of nuts indeed! ;-) Oh Sarah, you led me to a deep insight promise! We are like crackpots, lunatics when we are 'self-possessed' by mana. We should continue this discussion, I think is very much valuable and regards everybody. Great Sarah, you made my day! Fundamentally we all suffer of 'mania'!!! Oh my goodness, now apart my recurrent depression I am also 'manic' and my doctor told me absolutely I did not suffer from mania but I was only exuberant, see! Never rely on doctors; don't beat me up Num, I am joking! ;-) Love and hugs Cybele 7598 From: Joshua Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 3:18pm Subject: Re: Drugs and the Dharma Dear Rikpa How are you this fine day? You know, I agree with you that speculating is not something Buddha encouraged, but what did you learn from those fairy tales if not that a) animals are always trying to get you, b) they are very, very clever, and c) they are not afraid to swim thousands of miles to get you? Half-jokingly, Joshua 2001 7599 From: Joshua Date: Tue Aug 21, 2001 3:27pm Subject: Re: Drugs and the Dharma --- Herman wrote: > Hi 12345, > > I hope this finds you well. > > Starting a post with a greeting, and ending it with a pleasantry, > helps create the feeling that you are participating in a friendly > exchange of views. > > > Regards > > > Herman Dear Herman, Ditto. I was unaware this was so. In the future I shall try to correct it. Thankfully, Joshua 2001 P.S. by the way, do you know what 'Thitibhutam' means in Pali?